TOKYO DEANIE
Let me start by saying that I come from a family well-stocked with conservative and moderate Republicans; I'm married to a moderate Republican; and I live in an area that I like to affectionately call the "buckle of the Bush Bible Belt."
We live, in fact, only a hundred miles or so from where George W. Bush likes to claim he grew up--although in more than half a lifetime of living in west Texas, I have never yet met another soul who attended Andover prep school.
But I digress.
For years I've liked to say that I was the only pro-choice feminist for a hundred miles, but I sometimes suspect I might have to travel even further to track one down. Once, in 2004, I drove the hundred miles in another direction to drop in at the Lubbock, Texas Democratic Party headquarters to offer my services as a writer to help with the upcoming campaign. I drove up and down the city streets for hours and could never find it. I learned later that the office was located within another office, and didn't even have so much as a cardboard sign or a bumper sticker stuck in a window to identify it as such.
I hope Howard Dean can change all that by reaching into all the states, but again I digress.
The point is that I am accustomed to biting my tongue for the sake of peace. I can't count the number of dinner parties and other social gatherings where I have sat mute--especially during the nineties--listening to blistering Clinton-hating rhetoric from people who assumed that just because I was present, it meant I agreed. Most of the time I chose not to speak up because it was not the time and place to get into a political rounder, but if I was asked directly, I would answer honestly. (And then deal with the fall-out as I watched people's faces change from friendliness to out and out horror that anybody, anywhere, could possibly feel the way I did.)
But I found such social engagements to be so exhausting that, a few years ago, I withdrew into virtual social isolation, becoming a self-imposed hermit, living in my rural home and communicating with the outside world, for the most part, via the Internet and by phone calls. A writer by trade, anyway, I'm used to solitude and working from a home office.
I just got tired of being the only progressive voice in the room, you know? And I got tired of being mocked for beliefs that I hold dear, and tired of having to explain them to people.
I just got tired, period. And lonesome.
The point is that through the years, I have grown accustomed to being surrounded by people who disagree with me by varying degrees. I've been honest with my family and friends about my beliefs, but I have not been in-your-face or obnoxious with them in any way. I understand, very well, why they feel the way they do, and I completely and utterly respect their beliefs and opinions.
I love my family, dearly. And I love my conservative friends, and I would never, ever do anything to deliberately disrespect them or provoke them or otherwise strain our relationship over something as shallow as politics.
I do wish, sometimes, that they felt the same way in return.
When this war first started, for instance, my e-mail box would be bombarded with forward after forward after forwarded e-mails full of a sort of righteous superiority on the question of Iraq, and equally full of vitriol toward anyone who dared question this president's policies on the war.
Most of the time I did not respond, and when I did, I kept the tone civil, but eventually, I learned to just delete stuff that I knew was going to upset me.
But as the war dragged on…and on…and my son and other family members deployed and deployed again…a change began to occur. As events on the ground bore out--again and again--what I had been predicting all along, and as they grew increasingly frustrated with the horrendous mistakes made by the people they had entrusted to run our government, they started paying a little more attention to me when I commented about the war--especially when our own warriors began to return from Iraq voicing the same frustrations.
Even so, with some of my conservative friends, we have a "deal," that we just don't forward stuff to each other that we KNOW is inflammatory. I don't send them hate-Bush stuff and they don't send me quotes from Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh, and we get along great.
One conservative friend has been a true class act in this respect. Lord knows we've had some heated discussions, but always with respect and love. Recently, when Molly Ivins died, it was this friend, bless his dear heart, who called to tell me how sorry he was, that he knew I'd miss her. And to prove what a gentleman he truly is, he even told funny stories about times she'd made fun of the NRA.
That touched my heart more than he will ever know, God bless him.
But recently, I received a forward from another friend who is what you might call the bad kind of conservative, and that e-mail hit, I guess you'd say, my tipping point.
I simply could not remain silent.
It didn't look like a forward, and said simply, "From a Vet" in the subject area--my friend is a vet--so of course, I opened it. It was a forward that had, supposedly, been written by a Naval vet of WWII, in which he described having been on ships that had been destroyed by the Japanese, and so on, and then went on to say that, through it all, there was one voice that never wavered:
TOKYO ROSE.
The e-mail went on to spell out the kinds of things Tokyo Rose would say.
They were numbered:
1. Put down the president.
2. Find fault with the war strategies and claim they won't work.
3. Urge Americans to bring home the troops.
Then, the e-mail, not content with having made its point thus far, went on to add a list of names: Tokyo Hillary, Tokyo John, Tokyo Nancy…
It was at this point that I hit the "delete" button.
And that's when I lost it. I felt my cheeks go hot and my whole body tingled. My friend, I thought, had gone too far this time. Although he hadn't said it, the implications in the e-mail were clear to me, since he knows that I speak out against the Iraq war wherever and whenever I can.
I knew that it would be best to simply ignore the e-mail, but I was so angry that I just could not go silent any more. I started a new e-mail to my friend, and in the subject title, I put, "Tokyo Deanie."
I said, You know, (friend's name), my husband, brother-in-law, brother, and father are all Vietnam vets. I have five family members currently in active-duty military service, including three who have made a total of SIX combat deployments to Iraq, (the other two have served in Afghanistan.)
They all know how I feel about this war, and I don't think a single one of them would refer to me as "Tokyo Deanie" because I speak out about it.
To protest the shameful manner in which this war has been managed is NOT the same thing as war propaganda designed to demoralize the enemy.
When my son fought in the Battle of Fallujah, he did not have proper body armor, up-armored vehicles, or even a decent scope for his rifle. He had all of those things when he deployed the second time--THREE YEARS AFTER THE WAR BEGAN. There is no telling how many good men they lost because of that during the first deployment.
If I say that I want troops to be brought home, it could be because many of them are being deployed for the FIFTH AND SIXTH TIMES. They are being deployed months ahead of schedule and forced to remain past their due-home dates--these are not "fresh troops" as the media claims.
This is criminal.
There are many ways, I said, to "support the troops."
When Vietnam combat vet Republican Chuck Hagel spoke out against this president's war policies in the Senate, he said, "These are real people."
He meant, real people, as opposed to pawns on a political chess board. In his way, he was supporting the troops.
When Reagan Republican James Webb, a decorated Vietnam vet with a Marine son in Iraq, ran for the Senate on the Democratic ticket, wearing his son's combat boots so that he could get himself into a position of power to help change the course of this war--he was supporting the troops.
I told my friend that if he wanted to preserve our friendship, he would not send me any more inflammatory e-mails of that kind. I knew I had lost it and I knew I had possibly lost a friend over this, but one point of friendship is respecting boundaries. I feel so passionately about this war because, when it comes to war and a military family--POLITICS IS PERSONAL.
In a recent Army Times survey, a full SIXTY-SIX PERCENT of ACTIVE-DUTY MILITARY disagree with the way this war has been managed and more than half of them now doubt the wisdom of even going into Iraq.
To assume that "the troops" somehow march in lock-step and all agree with some kind of company line is an insult to the amazing variety of individuals that make up our armed services.
There are many conservatives in the military and there are just as many progressives. I've even read forwarded e-mails that claim that "most" of the military is conservative, as if somehow only conservatives love their country enough to enlist, and this is patent bullshit.
This may come as a shock to some of my conservative friends, but just because a mess hall full of soldiers is trooped in and draped as a backdrop to yet another presidential photo op does not mean that every single soldier or Marine in that room even wants to BE there. And you can bet they've been threatened within an inch of their lives if they dare boo or show any disrespect.
My cries of outrage about this war never--EVER--call into question that incredible courage, duty, and superb job our fighting men and women do each and every day.
I have, in fact, called for a national civil service draft, because I think everyone should serve their country for at least a year or two out of high school, even if only helping clean up, say, New Orleans. Or working in support capacities back home.
And, yes, for some of the more adventurous sort, stepping up to help fight this war and take the burden off the weary shoulders of troops with multiple deployments.
As I've said many times, if this country wants to wave the flag and slap yellow ribbons on their cars and pump up their war-glamour news coverage and sell patriotic country and western songs urging us to go to war, then by God, EVERY family ought to take part in it.
In family gatherings, I've had lengthy conversations with my active-duty family members, and gotten a broad perspective on this conflict, from men who know what they're talking about. They know that I respect them and their service, and that I am interested in knowing what THEY think needs to be done.
Sometimes, they've been surprised at the depth of my own knowledge, at how I have educated myself on this war--most of the women in my family choose "not to know"--and they respect that my questions are informed and that I'm not just running around slapping peace sign bumper stickers on things.
As one Iraq vet put it, "There's a difference between being anti-war, and anti-THIS war."
You might be surprised, at some of their answers. I don't usually share them here, because this is a public forum, and they are still active-duty. I would never want anything I do or say to cause them any trouble in their careers. There are also security concerns that I must consider.
But as this war has progressed, I have found that we all agree on far more than we disagree on, and that, above all else, they know that all I want for them is for their service and sacrifice to be used with honor--not abused for political gain.
I have never asked that our troops be yanked out all of a piece and very very few Democrats in power today have asked for that, either. None of us wants to see the bloody savagery of an Iraq uncorked to spill over, but we do want to see this war fought with more brains and less muscle.
But the truth is that our troops are exhausted--their divorce rate has gone up to EIGHTY PERCENT. Our military equipment has been stretched to the breaking point through overuse and abuse; fighting men and women are being asked to take over the responsibilities of State Dept. staffers--doing things they are not trained to do--because the government can't get anybody to volunteer to go to Iraq; and the all-volunteer military has created a situation where ONLY ONE PERCENT OF THE POPULATION OF THIS COUNTRY HAS TO MAKE ANY WAR SACRIFICE AT ALL.
Bush says the American people's "souls have been sapped" by this war.
No, it's not the war. It's this kind of with-us-or-against-us bullshit that has sapped the country's soul, this ripping open of the old wounds left over from Vietnam--that if you oppose a mismanaged war, it then follows that you must hate the troops.
This administration started that kind of insidious sniping when they decided to start a war and use it as a weapon for political purposes. "With us" equals a vote for us, "against us" equals a vote for--not our opponent, but our ENEMY.
Bush even said, just a week before the November elections, that if you voted for a Democrat, you were "siding with the terrorists."
This is disgraceful rhetoric from a sitting President of the United States.
As I told my friend in my e-mail, I am sick and tired of being accused of hurting the troops because I am angry with the way they have been used in this war.
Recently, Republican Senator John McCain has begun making that sinister, mean little point that, if you do not support this president's troop escalation for the war, that you are saying, in effect, that you don't think the troops who are serving or have served have done a very good job, that they have failed in their job and that you are not supporting them.
He knows better than that, and I was disappointed and outraged to hear him start that old tired drumbeat yet again. Just in time for presidential politics, of course.
Other Republican politicians are following White House talking points on talk shows and in interviews--all they care about is crucifying Democrats in upcoming elections.
They like to wave the flag and pose and preen, but when it gets down to the nitty-gritty, do THEY really care about the troops?
Among those of us who have been voices crying out in the wilderness about this war--whose number has grown to a deafening chorus--Not one of us has ever said that our troops are not doing the best damn job they could possibly do under impossible circumstances.
All we're saying is that they deserve a far better commander in chief, and something better than civilian leaders and cowardly career-driven top-down generals who have KNOWINGLY sent them into battle underequipped, undermanned, and underplanned because they didn't have the balls to speak up until they thought it was safe to do so and still keep their fat post-retirement defense-contracting jobs.
I'd say that the men and women on the ground have done a magnificent job under those circumstances.
I'm sick of this whole argument. Sick of the name-calling. Sick of the accusations and innuendoes and outright smears against anybody who does not echo White House talking points about this godforsaken war.
If it costs me a friend, well, then so be it. And if it helps in any way to bring these kids home on the date they were promised they'd get to come home, then it will have been worth it.
(previously posted at http://www.blueinkblots.blogspot.com on February 8, 2007)
Deanie,
A few random thoughts:
1. When ignoramuses get in power they use every propaganda trick in the book to try to cover up the fact that they don't know their butts from first base.
2. Samuel Johnson said that "Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels."
3. You, unfortunately, seem to be surrounded by people who have not been taught critical thinking skills.
4. Remember, the vast majority of the people in the world agree with your views on Iraq. They have since before Bush's invasion in March 2003. That's why so many millions (including me) marched worldwide on 2/15/2003. The internet is helping you to break out of the box your stuck in. Don't give up. That's what that little weasel in the White House wants.
Take care,
Tom
June 1, 2007 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I read your post, Deanie, I thought about how decently most of us, who strongly oppose the way this administration has handled the Iraq war, act in the face of blatant accusations about our patriotism. I, too, have listened politely and responded respectfully to people in my community who vehemently state that anyone who criticizes the tactics of Bush et al is "un-American". I can't remember a more divisive time in my country- and I've been around a good long while- except during the Viet Nam protest days. How appalling that so little was learned from that gut-wrenching experience, and that friendships are on the line because of the "if you aren't for the war, you must be for the terrorists" mentality. You have a lot of courage living where you do. When Molly Ivins died, I thought, "there's no good reason to visit Texas. Ann Richardson and Molly aren't there anymore." I hope your computer never crashes and that you know you have readers who agree with every word you write because they, too, want our military men and women safely home again.
June 1, 2007 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
You could reply (to the email hater) that the woman that was charged with being Tokyo Rose was exonerated, and was in fact helping the allies.
There are lot of us that are not anti-war, merely anti-stupid-war, not to mention anti-stupidity.
June 1, 2007 9:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tom, it's funny, but I googled myself one day out of curiosity as to where my blog posts were showing up--it's pretty cool, actually--and one of the places where one of my posts was linked was a site called: criticalthinking.com.
I had to laugh when I read what you said.
mtscribe1--thank you for your kind words and yes, I do miss Ann Richards and Molly Ivins, and even though Gov. Goodhair presides over a moronic red state house in a red state--it's not ALL red. Austin is a very cool city indeed (and I say that even coming from an Aggie family.) Lots of good music and plenty of anti-Bush subversives around there. Unfortunately, it's a five-hour drive from me.
It has been interesting, though, watching the devolution of die-hard conservatives over the course of the Bush admin. If anything, many of them are becoming more moderate, I guess you could say, because he has screwed up everything he's touched. My own conservative sister said the other day, "We've got a tyrant in the White House."
The war has come to horrify them, and it is true that I've seen many of them come around to accepting what I've been saying all along about this war. It's bittersweet, that.
My combat-vet Rep. husband relayed two hopeful comments, I thought. He was in a conversation with a conservative man, about the war, and I noticed (though I didn't say it) that my husband was making many of MY arguments. (I smiled inwardly.) And the guy made the usual tired statement that "we have to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here," and Kent said, "Okay. Which one of your kids do YOU want to send over to fight?"
The man, dumbstruck, stumbled and said, "Well, neither one."
And my husband said, "I rest my case."
Then, another thing he relayed. He was sitting in a country diner, the kind frequented by farmers, and overheard two old-timers talking politics. One said, "Well, it looks like we're gonna have either a black or a woman for president."
And the other one said, "Maybe it's time."
June 1, 2007 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another 'homerun' blog. Hang in there, Deanie. You already know how discouraged I've been ... but I'll get my second wind. I always do when my heart is in the fight ... and he's sitting in Iraq at this very moment.
I can't stop until all our troops are home.
Debra Morgan Pardee
"The people who get on in this world are the people who get up and look for the circumstances they want, and, if they can't find them, make them." -- George Bernard Shaw
June 2, 2007 12:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Brilliant blog, Deanie! As always! Hang in there! "We The People" will overcome "The Decider!"
It's been my pet peeve for a long time how "Conservatives" say that "WE" don't support the troops or "WE" are not patriotic. There is no one who thinks more of our troops than I do. I just don't like our arrogant, incompetent "Idiot In Chief!"
June 2, 2007 6:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
This country was founded on the ability of dissenting views to meet and reach a compromise. That ability has been muted and at times, suppressed as unpatriotic.
The point is lost on these people that differing views are healthy to society, Rove's one party dominance should be seen for the danger that it presents. A Democratic Party dominance would be no less dangerous.
The forces of corporate America through ownership of the media have caused that sentiment to be sacrificed in persuit of ratings and sensationalism. "Compromise is for wimps" is the conventional wisdom, and tht would have Jefferson rolling in his grave, the winner takes all has long been the guiding principle of the Bush Administration.
We are in danger of losing our republic, something your conservative friend is, and which the remaining supporters of the Bush Administration are, blissfully ignorant of.
Meanwhile, a significant portion of the electorate have been successfully brainwashed into thinking that their vote doesn't count, that they are all crooks, so why should they vote?
June 2, 2007 7:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you completely, Bugboy, and it is one of the reasons I find Barack Obama so inspiring. I've read both his books, and his writing and his thoughts make me cry--and laugh.
There's a blog post by Taylor Marsh over at http://www.huffingtonpost.com, in which she talks about how he gives uncomfortable truths to the paragons of interest groups, but holds out compromise solutions. He has a serious ability to listen to all points of view on an issue and cut through to the essentials. In general-election polls, he kicks ass on all the Rep candidates.
It's the Clinton juggarnaut that scares me more where his campaign is concerned. Not that I don't think she would make a very good president, and I'd support her if she got the nomination, but I do think that this country is just HUNGRY for inspiration, but also, for a meeting in the middle and finding common ground.
I think even the American Idol and video-game junkies have an uncomfortable sense of what you say. Those of us who are well informed have an acute, even panicky, sense of it.
This election is crucial to the republic, in my view. And it CAN'T be politics as usual again. The Bush admin. has done horrific damage not just to our democratic institutions but to this country and to the world at large, and if we elect the wrong person, we will reach a tipping point on more than just global warming.
June 2, 2007 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's interesting you mention video-games, one sector of video games is online gaming and persistent virtual worlds created for them.
I'm currently Mayor of a rather large town in one game, Star Wars Galaxies, and after hearing of an Interior official whom shall not be named engaging in the People's business with her fellow players in another game, World of Warcraft, I felt that I needed to start exploiting that venue myself.
I'm trying to make an effort to bring a more informed leadership to the player base, many of who are something of a fan club for the television series "Heroes".
I sent out an email to the city talking about the disconnect between people watching that show, which has much to do with evolution, and the possibility that many of those viewers would insist that evolution doesn't exist. And how the country deserves better than to have GOP candidates asked a nonsense question about "belief" in evolution.
I had one player go bat-shit on me, but he revealed to me the level of error in his preconceived notions about evolution, ie., claiming the Scopes trial was one of the guideposts of evolutionary scientists.
I would like to think my conversation at least got him on the right track that evolution was not a rejection of God, as he had been taught. But that is probably wishful thinking
My point is, virtual worlds can and will continue to be forums where conversations can take place to enlighten people. Yes, it is an escape, but it is only as much of an escape as we allow it to be.
Now, as for calling the men in the white coats, you'll never find me!
June 2, 2007 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I for one would just as soon see you stop writing. Every time I read something of yours I have to stop and think for a while. You have a lot of important things to say and I have recognized that. And you write about these things in a way that drives them into the immediate consciousness. I think the word is compelling. At least I feel compelled now to read anything under the name Deanie Mills. It is always worthwhile to take the time to think about your commentary so I really shouldn’t complain.
I wanted to say something complimentary and encouraging but we are so awash in superlatives, both bright and dark, and pithy remarks and expletives not deleted that I thought I would just say plainly that you think well and you write well. And yours is an honorable ambition. Maybe it will have some good effect or maybe virtue is its own reward.
June 2, 2007 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Larry, I believe that is one of the nicest--if not THE nicest--compliments I've ever received, and I thank you for it, because I do get discouraged in the fight from time to time and think, "Hell, nobody's reading this stuff anyway."
Back when I was writing thrillers, my favorite compliment was when people would stop me on the street or go online or whatever, and say, "DAMN YOU! I knew good and damn well I had to get up early and go to work but did I stop reading your stupid book? Noooooo. I sat up reading until two a.m. and I hate you for it!"
That used to always make me smile.
But that was entertainment. And this is sooo much more important, on every level. If I can't make people stop and think NOW, then we truly are lost.
(WAit a minute. That didn't sound right, did it?)
Let me rephrase!!!
If people, as a general rule, aren't willing to stop and think when they read something that should provoke thought--by me or anyone else--then we truly are lost.
And I worry, I really do, that people just don't seem to THINK anymore. I find that especially true of young people, because it seems that they are so wired up all the time. They've got their ipods and their text-messaging and their e-mail phones and it just seems that they are always DOING something, always listening to something, always talking, pushing buttons--they just don't seem to sit still and THINK anymore.
Even my country kids, who live out of state now; as much as they love it out here, when they come home for a visit, say--my son goes for a run. He never goes without his ipod in his ears.
Who listens to birdsong anymore? Did you know that if you sit very still, you can hear a breath of wind coming across the tops of the trees before it gets to you, and then you hear the leaves over your head, and you feel the caress of the breeze on your cheek, and you have just heard the earth sigh?
Don't we need this now and then, so we can think?
June 2, 2007 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
See! You’re doing it again. Even your comments are well thought and well crafted.
I’m not surprised at the reaction to your fiction writing. Those skills are effectively applied to this sober subject but would be of marginal consequence if it weren’t for the quality of your thoughts. Ah yes thinking. By disposition I am given to reading old stuff. I mean really old like Greek plays and medieval writers like Cervantes and Rojas. I’m afraid that the dearth of thoughtful people is an ancient complaint and merited by the reality of people and their conceits. In my youth I remember being labeled a Communist and a traitor for objecting to the Vietnam policy on merely factual and historical grounds. Like you I was driven to silence and solitude for which I am actually very grateful. I learn a lot more when I am listening than when I am talking. And solitude revealed that inside I had a kind of unpainted canvas that awaited only my own brush strokes and imagery. My brother, an educator, likes to say that the most important reason for getting an education is that you actually spend most of your life alone, in between encounters with others, and if you don’t want to be bored all that time then learn something and be interesting to yourself. Works for me.
And as for the quiet beauty of nature, nothing I have ever experienced is as exciting as the peace of just being.
June 2, 2007 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
"And I worry, I really do, that people just don't seem to THINK anymore. I find that especially true of young people, because it seems that they are so wired up all the time."
This is right out of Brave New World. Of course, this is just the way Cheny/Bush want it so that they can wage their imperialist oil wars.
Tom
June 2, 2007 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Larry, that was absolutely beautiful, and what your brother said was brilliant. Unfortunately, people don't ALLOW themselves to be bored--they fill up every gap in their thinking with games and diversions.
Which reminds me of a hilarious Ellen DeGeneres skit. I saw it on a sitcom she had that didn't last long, after "Ellen" but before her terrific talk show.
Anyway, she was sitting by the side of a pond, trying to just be quiet and think. And the voice-over went something like:
"Ahhh. This is nice. I really should do this more often. Hmmm. I wonder if Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston are going to get a divorce? I can't believe it. They always seemed so happy together. Stop it! You're supposed to be thinking. Ouch. Stupid ant. I wonder what ants are thinking. DO ants think? I wonder what that ant would think about Brad and Jennifer..."
And so it went--this hilarious monologue of all these empty thoughts she had in her head when she was supposed to be meditating.
Ya gotta laugh.
June 2, 2007 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I’ve seen that skit. It is funny and it makes the point. Most people are uncomfortable with solitude because they are afraid to be alone, unloved as it were, and fear that if they were alone they would find a void. They never imagine that there is a whole world inside of them, maybe even the only real world. So they are wrong about themselves and wrong about love.
I hold this to be the highest task of a bond between two people: that each
should stand guard over the solitude of the other.
Rainer M. Rilke
June 2, 2007 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is nothing more defining of humanity than conversation, unless it is stories, the technique we first used for remembering.
BTW, this time of year in Chicago the air is cluttered with teenage drivers, that is, newly-fledged birds crashing around. Those irresponsible youngsters can be heard twittering in their immature squeaky voices. It's hilarious to see what looks like a full-grown robin playing baby to momma for a handout.
I have no trouble hearing the birds singing when they wake me in the predawn. Maybe I'll hire a peregrine to keep them quiet--we get those, too, but they don't stick around.
June 2, 2007 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know what you mean about those teenaged birds! They really are a riot. You don't think about it, really. You think of babes in the nest with their giant mouths wide open for their exhausted parents, and you think full-grown. But it doesn't happen that way in nature any more than it does with humans. There's this stage after they learn to fly but before they learn control, and it's funny.
Once, a young bird fell to our concrete porch, and I think the fall actually killed it--not the cat, because I found it intact. And the mama bird perched next to the nest with her head tucked into her wing for the entire rest of the day.
They mourn. They laugh and play. They learn. Not too different from us, really.
June 2, 2007 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Deanie, earlier this week I lost one of my peachicks and the others didn't even seem to notice. The litter this year consisted of a single blonde chick and a pair of twins.
The peahen was heside herself because she KNEW one was gone. There was no raccoon or possum act, which would resulted in visible carnage. The chick just looked sickly, since it had reached an age of 12 weeks, his lose was unexpected.
I named three chicks, which was something I said that I would never do,...The twins were Ashley and Mary-Kate, while the first born blonde was called Anna Nicole.
Mary-Kate stopped eating and eventually just stopped being around.
Tonight when the family came to the porch for 6pm snacks Anna Nichole wasn't eating and just
wandered off when we were all doing something else.
When bedtime came the hen was franticly hunting and honking for Anna Nichole. Ashley came up to me and started eating out of my hand, which she had never done before.
I think she sensed by dispair.
I hope that they're all around in the morning
Lee
June 3, 2007 12:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Deanie, earlier this week I lost one of my peachicks and the others didn't even seem to notice. The litter this year consisted of a single blonde chick and a pair of twins.
The peahen was heside herself because she KNEW one was gone. There was no raccoon or possomm act, that resulted in carnage. The chick just looked sickly, since it had reached an age of 12 weeks, and his lose was unexpected.
I named three chicks, which was something I said that I would never do,...The twins were Ashley and Mary-Kate, while the first born blonde was called Anna Nicole.
Mary-Kate stopped eating and eventually just stopped being around.
Tonight when the family came to the porch for 6pm snacks Anna Nichole wasn't eating and just
wandered off when we were all doing something else.
When bedtime came the hen was franticly hunting and honking for Anna Nichole. Ashley came up to me and started eating out of my hand, which she had never done before.
I think she sensed by dispair.
I hope that they're all around in the morning
Lee
June 3, 2007 12:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh Lee! This sucks. I wonder what ails them. We get attached to our outdoor creatures, the wild ones and otherwise. It's so sad when they don't make it.
We used to have barn cats who would spend time on the front porch eating the dry dog food we leave out for the dogs. Mamas would bring their kittens up and it was so fun to sit by the window and watch them romp and play.
Then, during the direst months of a ten-year drought, every single one disappeared--coyotes, I'm told. The last were a pair of toms that we used to giggle about being gay because they were devoted to one another and very tame, very sweet. One disappeared and the other roamed around and around the house every night for three days, crying. And then he, too, disappeared.
Now that it's raining again and we have a more protective dog in the front, Kent urges me to get more barn cats because they ward off rattlesnakes and kill field rats, but I refuse. It just hurts too much. And I NEVER leave my house cats out after dark.
I'll e-mail you about your baby chicks.
June 3, 2007 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
My front porch is the province of the alpha male peacock, who also takes care of snakes.
In India, they took care of cobras but here he prefers our local varieties. I've watched him at work and he's quite heartless.
We don't have coyotes but the local raccoon has devastated my chicken population. In just the last month, they've exterminated 12. They only eat one but love to kill as many as possible.
NYPD was less exciting.
June 4, 2007 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink