Alright Pet?

Animals are cute, right? With their ickle fluffy faces, and the funniest things they do. Especially the ones we keep as pets – cats, dogs, rabbits, hamsters, that sort of thing. Dogs and cats in particular can be of great benefit to those with physical or mental health problems – they can literally save lives in some cases – and any pet is great for teaching kids about caring for animals. Practically everyone thinks that keeping pets is a good idea, even if they don't have one or don't even like animals much themselves. But whenever something is agreed upon by almost everyone, it's likely that we've stopped thinking about whether it's actually alright or not, so it's a thing worth having a good think about.

So why do we keep pets? For the most part, it seems to be all about a desire to have something to look after. There's a couple of interesting things about that. One is the having part, the other is the looking after. Let's start with having. A pet is something you own. It's another living creature that's very probably weaker and less intelligent than you. And you own it: decide what it does, what it eats, where it lives, and ultimately if it lives. Sounds like a certain desire for control is involved here. Why would you want that? It's hard to say for sure, and of course everyone is different, but often when somebody tries to seize control of something external, it's because they've lost control of something more internal (or they think they have). Like when your to-do list spirals out of control, so you spend all day putting your DVDs in alphabetical order. (I'm not the only one who does things like that, right?) If you felt you had more control of your own life, would you need to own another's?

Now, what about the looking after? Nurturing is nice, right? Makes you a good person? Well maybe, up to a point. But how much of the desire to nurture is just the desire to be needed? Because as long as something or someone needs you, you have a role to fulfil. This is often said about children, and the same seems to be true of pets; their needing you to do things for them gets you out of bed in the morning, and gives you ways to occupy your day. But do you want to measure your value against the needs of others? You may do, but it's worth at least asking yourself the question, in case you have other things in mind. Like valuing yourself for who you are on your own terms, not something or somebody else's, just for example.

The other thing about nurturing, besides the desire to be needed, is that it projects an image of you as a nurturing kind of person. One Who Nurtures. A Nice Caring Person. And as a society, we are a bit suspicious of those who aren't interested in animals, and we think “animal-lover” is a good label to have. Its connotations are decidedly cuddly and rose-tinted. But perhaps respecting animals is more important than wanting to cuddle them. Wild species benefit from minimal human intervention, and we've bred that desire to be left alone out of our domestic species. That's partly tied up with using them for work, but it also sounds a little like a desperate and needy cry, echoing down the centuries: “Be my friend! If you won’t be my friend now, I'll reshape your children and your children's children until they love me”. The wolf and the tiger would roar in defiance, and maybe they have a point. Perhaps respect means just letting them be.

So is it wrong to keep pets? I'm really not sure on this one. There's something profoundly distasteful about the desire to own a living creature, and getting a kick out of its dependence on you. On the other hand, we have bred domestic species to the point where the desire for this relationship is mutual, so usually no-one seems to be suffering. And proximity to animals can bring huge benefits for our well-being, as I mentioned at the beginning. So perhaps the conclusion is not that we shouldn't keep pets, but that examining our reasons for doing so can tell us a lot about ourselves, both as a society and as individuals. Whether what you learn makes you want to change is, to a large extent, up to you.

Naked Ambition

Female nudity is a display of vulnerability, while male nudity is a display of aggression. Or at least that's how things are often seen.

Of course this is not the case in every context, but it is a symbolism so deeply ingrained in our culture, that we have to work pretty hard to get away from it. But get away from it we must. This restrictive symbolism is ruining nudity for us all. And that really is a shame.

Don’t believe me? Consider this: It's a hot summer’s day – hot enough to comfortably walk around naked if it was legal and socially acceptable to do so, so quite a few people are doing the next best thing, and covering their modesty but not much more. You are approached by someone wearing very little, asking you for directions. How do you feel? In particular, does it depend on the gender of the person doing the asking?

Let's say it's a man. Let's make him a large, very stereotypically-masculine-looking man, just to emphasize the point. Do you feel at least a bit intimidated? If he's rude, then that's aggressive; if he's polite, then that could easily be creepily over-friendly. You don’t want either of those things from a half-naked male stranger. And am I alone in being much more on the look-out for either of those things than if he was fully clothed? Interestingly, I'm fairly confident that even if I found him sexually attractive, it's a situation I would want to get out of pretty quickly.

Now let's say the person asking for directions is a woman. Let's make her a small, stereotypically-feminine-looking woman, again for emphasis. This time I would feel like a voyeur who’s just been caught out (I imagine. Obviously I don't know for sure how that feels…) Like I shouldn't be looking at that bit of her, or that bit, or…oops, am I accidentally staring? What will she think? I would feel like this regardless of whether or not I was sexually attracted to her. Wouldn't you? (And if not, is that because you’re actually staring inappropriately? Be honest now…)

In these kinds of public situations, it feels a lot like the woman is giving something of herself away by being (partially) naked, while the man is forcing something on those around him. Flashers are perhaps another case in point. Men exposing themselves can often be an intimidating and aggressive gesture. If a woman does it, in most situations it just isn't the same (unless for example the victim is a child, but let’s set that aside). Our culturally entrenched ideas about the roles the genders should occupy somehow gives rise to this phenomenon, and it's a problem.

It's a problem because both genders often want to be naked without giving off these signals, for a whole variety of reasons. Here's a few of them:

• Women are less safe the more of their bodies are exposed in public. The link between revealing clothing and victim-blaming is well-known; our culture thinks that bare skin means a woman is “asking for it”. If she is attacked, either physically or verbally, she loses her defence with the law, with the general public, and most importantly with herself, because victim-blaming perpetuates shame and self-blame. She has given something away.
• Often women don't want to be vulnerable in sexual situations. Sometimes they want to dominate; sometimes they want a mutual and equal experience with a partner. This is difficult to achieve if, in her partner's eyes and her own, she becomes more vulnerable with each item of clothing that she sheds. She is giving something away.
• A man does not usually want to be perceived as threatening just because some of his body is exposed in public. On a hot day, or at the gym or the swimming pool, he does not want to be the object of suspicion because there are women and children nearby who can see his body. But without wanting to, he is forcing something on them.
• Often men don't want to be aggressive in sexual situations. (They may on occasion with a consenting partner, but that's another story). They may want to be submissive, or they may want a mutual and equal experience with a partner. This is difficult to achieve if, in his partner's eyes and his own, he becomes more overbearing and dominant with each item of clothing that he sheds. Although he is not forcing himself on them, there is something that he is forcing on them.

How do we overcome this? Well it's not like we have this problem every time we are in one of the above situations. So when we don't, how do we avoid it? Figure this out, and maybe we can learn to stop the problem altogether, and portray our naked selves as we choose, rather than as stereotypes dictate. When we do succeed in this, it seems the context has been carefully constructed to make it possible. The greatest problems arise with strangers, or in random unplanned situations like the example of someone asking for directions in the street. Around people we know well, or in highly structured contexts, we can do better. So we need more of these contexts. We need to see both men and women getting their kit off in contexts in which they can portray themselves as they choose. So I think we need more burlesque, more life drawing classes, and more nudist beaches and events, but these things need to be set up and run with care. We need to be more relaxed about nudity – (we're all basically naked after all, it’s just that sometimes we have clothes over the top). But we also need to treat nudity with care and respect because it can be immensely powerful.

Naked bodies are wonderful. They are as wonderful as people (and there's a good reason for that, when you think about it). We want to be able to enjoy and make use of them in all sorts of ways, and we don't want our restrictive cultural stereotypes about gender to stand in the way. So let's get ambitious about changing those cultural stereotypes.