Inexcusabull Behavior

Snide Remarks #550

"Inexcusabull Behavior"

by Eric D. Snider

Published in EricDSnider.com on July 30, 2007

So this guy in Spain had his 10-year-old son with him for the weekend, and he thought a good father-son activity would be to participate in Pamplona's Running of the Bulls. His ex-wife found out about it, and now a judge has revoked the guy's visitation rights. So we see that the United States is not the only country plagued by activist judges.

Where does this guy get off telling a man he can't be with his own son just because he let a bunch of a giant angry animals chase him down a narrow street? Oh sure, judge. I guess YOU'VE never intentionally endangered the lives of YOUR children! I guess YOU'RE a perfect father! Judge not lest ye be judged, Judge.

But I am being facetious, like the twinkly-eyed pixie I am. Of course the judge was right to penalize the man for his outrageous lapse in judgment. But it brings up a serious issue, namely: Pamplona's Running of the Bulls; or, more specifically, what's the deal with Pamplona's Running of the Bulls?

Note to bad fathers: If you endanger your child's life in public, there's a chance a picture of it will appear in the newspapers, thus bringing your shenanigans to your ex-wife's attention. Consequently, you should only endanger your children's lives in private.

Now, I am very sensitive to people's feelings. I would never dismiss another culture's traditions as being "stupid" or "hilarious," no matter how stupid or hilarious they were. But I must make an exception for the Running of the Bulls, which I want to go on record as saying is stupid and hilarious.

They've been doing it for 500 years? Don't care. It's part of their heritage? Don't care. It involves setting deadly animals loose down a narrow corridor and then trying to outrun them? That's all I need to know. It doesn't matter how long it's been going on, or how big a deal it is, or how much of a fan Ernest Hemingway was, if the point is to voluntarily put yourself in front of aggravated, horned beasts, then the event is idiotic, period. And practicing it makes you, by definition, an idiot.

People are always so worried about criticizing other people's cultures. We're afraid of being called racist or insensitive or whatever. I guarantee you there are people in this world who would say, "The Running of the Bulls is a part of Spain's rich cultural heritage, and while it may not be my cup of tea, it means something to the people of Spain, and far be it from me to dismiss it out of hand" ... yet who would also say that Johnny Knoxville's "Jackass" is moronic, even though they're exactly the same thing.

I'm not afraid to say it, though! AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I AM SO AWESOME.

My understanding is that for many Spanish men -- you'll notice it's always men who do this -- running with the bulls is something of a rite of passage. It's a way to prove that you're macho and manly and rugged. The man in the news story, Luis Miguel Gomez, told city officials that he wanted to take his son to other bull runs in other cities, too, presumably to make a man out of him, although possibly just to kill him. It's a great example of how screwed-up men's thinking can be. "How can we demonstrate to ourselves and the world that we are courageous and brave? I know! By putting ourselves in danger ... and then running away from it!" Yes, there's no better way to establish your manliness than by fleeing in terror from something. What's the matter, cowards? If you really want to be brave, stay and fight the thing!

Oh, wait. I guess they have that, too. Bullfighting.

Bullfighting is also stupid, now that I think of it. It's barbaric and cruel, too. It's amazing that a developed, educated nation like Spain still allows it. I mean, Mexico, sure. They didn't even have electricity in Mexico until 2003. But Spain? Aren't they embarrassed by now? I would think bullfighting in Spain would be like Alabama in America: Yeah, it's part of who we are, but let's try not to dwell on it.

Nonetheless, I can't really get on a "high horse" about these things, except of course during the annual running of the high horses. America may not have bullfighting, but we do have dogfighting, which has recently been in the news because of Michael Vick.

Michael Vick is, apparently, a professional football player of some renown, acting in the capacity of what's called a "quarterback" for an organization known as the Atlanta Falcons. Two weeks ago he and three other men were charged with arranging dogfights, gambling on the events, and cruelly killing dogs that failed to fight viciously enough. Some of the underperforming dogs were electrocuted or drowned. Vick is alleged to have had hands-on involvement in every aspect of the operation. He has pleaded not guilty on all charges, but no one believes him.

The weird thing about all this is that professional football players are usually really, really smart. How did Michael Vick get wrapped up in something so dumb? He's losing his endorsement deals, and the NFL has suspended him while it conducts an investigation. He could wind up losing millions of dollars. You know you've really screwed up when football fans -- the most red-blooded, meat-eating group of people on the planet -- are on the same side of an issue as PETA. In fact, anytime you've got normal people agreeing with PETA, you must have done something spectacular. Well done, Michael Vick.

At least that Spanish guy's son actually wanted to run "with" (by which I mean "from") the bulls. Michael Vick's poor dogs never had a choice in the matter. Dogs usually have no interest in fighting unless you present them with an enemy, such as a cat, or a sock. Jerks like Vick and his buddies train them to be vicious and doom them to a life of pain and suffering -- which would be fine if they were sharks, because sharks are mean anyway, and watching them fight would be awesome. But not dogs! You shouldn't mess with dogs that way.

In an ideal world, Vick would go to prison and learn for himself what it's like to be compelled to fight for survival. Unfortunately, he's rich and famous, so any real prison time is out of the question. We'll just have to hope that someday he takes a wrong turn and ends up in the middle of the annual Running of the Angry Dogs. That would be hilarious, and not at all stupid.

Comments & Reaction:

One of the interesting side effects of not following sports is that you can see the name "Michael Vick" repeated dozens of times as you glance at news stories before it finally sinks in that he's done something that even you, a non-sports-follower, might care about. How long had this story been going on before I paid any attention? It could have been years.

This item has 22 comments

Eric Herman says:
July 30, 2007 at 12:50 am
Very funny, and remarkably brilliant, too. I love this: "How can we demonstrate to ourselves and the world that we are courageous and brave? I know! By putting ourselves in danger ... and then running away from it!"
Kaydria says:
July 30, 2007 at 2:27 am
This is maybe the greatest thing I've ever read.
junk says:
July 30, 2007 at 5:45 am
"In an ideal world, Vick would go to prison,", not, "In an ideal world, Vick would have a fair trial and go to prison if found guilty." I guess that's right, I mean people who are accused of crimes are always guilty of them. Just ask the Duke lacrosse team.
Markk says:
July 30, 2007 at 7:49 am
Ah, but they are! Which is why we have trial by media.
Jim says:
July 30, 2007 at 8:20 am
Eric, Eric, Eric--I did not expect you to be so narrow-minded about bullfighting. We've grown up with men smashing themselves together and some becoming paralyzed and even dying from it. Spaniards have grown up with bullfighting. As for "the most red-blooded, meat-eating group of people on the planet," I would have to give that to soccer fans. I have heard of FAR more stories of riots during and after soccer games than ever in the NFL.
Zimm says:
July 30, 2007 at 8:40 am
Participation in football or soccer is 100% voluntary. Participation in bullfighting is 50% voluntary. Therein lies the difference.
Linda says:
July 30, 2007 at 10:10 am
Great article Eric. But you must be careful about admitting you don't follow sports. A large percentage of society will immediately dismiss everything you say as unimportant and meaningless.
robcan2 says:
July 30, 2007 at 10:58 am
Here's a segment from a CNN article on the Vick case that I found amusing:

The president the Atlanta chapter of the NAACP criticized the prosecution of Vick at a news conference Monday morning. Dr. R.L. White, Jr., accused the government of "piling on."

"There's a penalty in football for piling on," White told reporters. "After a player has been tackled and somebody piles on, they're penalized for unnecessary roughness. Today, the NAACP blows the whistle and warns the powers that be that you are piling on."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/07/30/vick.dogfighting/index.html?iref=topnews

Wouldn't it be awesome if all our laws paralleled the rules of football?
Momma Snider says:
July 30, 2007 at 2:18 pm
Every time I see boxing on TV, I think it's a stupid sport. But then I remember the running of the bulls. I agree with Zimm. If people want to voluntarily hurt each other so other people can watch, I guess I just don't have to watch, but when animals are forced to participate, it bothers me a lot. And OF COURSE Michael Vick said he's not guilty. That's what you say when you're accused of a crime, isn't it?

And that puppy is about the cutest thing ever, Eric.
RedPenGirl says:
July 31, 2007 at 11:52 am
From Eric's blog:

"I can block specific ads if I know about them. Otherwise, Google chooses them automatically based on the text in the article."

Did you see the ads with this article? It just increases the hilarity of the whole thing.

(Gasp, sniff. I gotta go find a tissue. . . . )
Cat says:
July 31, 2007 at 3:12 pm
"I would think bullfighting in Spain would be like Alabama in America: Yeah, it's part of who we are, but let's try not to dwell on it." This was the funniest line in the whole article. As far as the whole Vick thing, when one of your codefendants pleads guilty, it's time to come forward. Otherwise, you end up shooting yourself in the foot.
Lulu says:
August 2, 2007 at 7:32 am
Twinkly-eyed pixie? Who are you trying to kid?
Raul says:
August 2, 2007 at 8:29 pm
This is almost as good as your letter to the editor.
Rob D. says:
August 2, 2007 at 9:41 pm
I agree that Vick is scum and should probably go to jail. I think because it's animals, he has a chance to do time. If O.J. stabbed some dogs with his knife, rather than 2 people, he might not have been aquitted. I actually have to thank Vick for allowing me to agree with those crazy PETA people for once. The ones that give the interviews on tv are usually really pretty, and I want to agree with them........... now I finally can!
Casey says:
August 5, 2007 at 12:19 am
This one's a little too preachy for my tastes, and seems to largely stray from the goal of being funny for the goal of imparting to me what a monster I am for thinking a bullfight or dogfight would be entertaining to watch.
carolynpepsi says:
August 5, 2007 at 9:21 pm
the poor dogs. i hate the bastards who are mean to animals - and also the ones who feel that it is okay to be rude and disruptive in a movie theater - which obviously has nothing to do with this, but i went and saw sunshine last night and had to deal with it, so i figured i would kill two pet-peeve birds with one stone. of course i am more upset about the dogs.
sara says:
August 6, 2007 at 1:25 am
Although dogfighting is obviously abusive and wrong, I don't have a lot against running with the bulls, or bull fighting, or any situation in which a person dumb enough to actually do something that dumb is risking their lives... evolution is alive! A few less idiots on this earth can't be that bad, can it?
Rob B says:
August 7, 2007 at 5:29 pm
The difference between bull fighting and dog fighting is this: after they kill the bull, it can be eaten. Who wants to eat a dog, especially after another dog has ripped it to shreds?

Now, in no way do I want my post to be taken as supporting or condoning bull fighting. But I feel there is a definite difference in the brutality of the two "sports."

BTW, long time reader, but hardly ever post. I've enjoyed Snide Remarks since the BYU days. I've especially enjoyed the columns where Eric begins on one topic, but ends on something completely (or not so completely) different, like this one.
Karen Stout says:
August 9, 2007 at 6:04 pm
#15 Casey--I guess people have the right to find censure wherever they wish to, but I totally disagree with just about everything you said in your post.

But that's okay, too. It's a humor column. I laughed my dollar signs off at it.
Kaydria says:
August 13, 2007 at 1:17 am
hahaha oh man, I just listened to the podcast for the first time. Are the Eagles aware that Hotel California has been recreated in such a magical way?
Sharifa says:
August 16, 2007 at 12:14 pm
Speaking of piling on, now a crazy prisoner has brought a lawsuit seeking "$63,000,000,000.00 billion dollars" from Michael Vick.

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/riches_jonathan_file.pdf

Turns out that in addition to arranging dogfights, Michael Vick has also committed identity theft, tax fraud, and copyright infringement, not to mention purchasing missiles from Iran, pledging allegiance to Al Qaeda, and hurting the plaintiff's feelings.
ED says:
September 18, 2007 at 11:54 am
QUOTE:Casey says:
August 5th at 12:19 am
This one's a little too preachy for my tastes, and seems to largely stray from the goal of being funny for the goal of imparting to me what a monster I am for thinking a bullfight or dogfight would be entertaining to watch.QUOTE

Killing animals for entertainment is monstrous!

This work may not be transmitted via the Internet, nor reproduced in any other way, without written consent from Eric D. Snider.

Eric D. Snider