Crystal Hughes <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
>I'm new to the list and, I guess I should say now, let the flaming begin.
>I'm an adult and more than capable of handling it.
 
I don't mean to sound patronizing but to appear to be asking for flames
just because you feel that you are "adult" enough to handle it may not be
the most positive attitude with which to start a post to the FML.  There
are plenty of folks here with strong opinions and a willingness to express
them and you may get exactly what you appear to be asking for.  Personally,
I think we are all much better off trying to keep this forum as civil and
flame-free as possible.  If the mood should strike --as sometimes it may--
for a good old-fashioned scrap on ferret related issues, one can always
drop by an unmoderated forum like alt.pet.ferrets.
 
You probably didn't mean it this way, but I'm typing this merely to let you
know how it might have come across.
 
>But, everyone has their opinion.  If someone is that much against Kista,
>they must have good reason.
 
Must they now?  For somebody who has seen so much and owns to being as
sick of shelter politics as you do below, this seems somewhat naive.  In
a perfect world, in an enchanted forest where everyone involved in the
ferret community were so mature as to truly put the interest of the fuzzies
above their own petty emotional needs, that might be true.  But as is
richly implied even in your post, this is scarcely the case.
 
There are plenty of admirable folk in the ferret community who do exactly
this (I once was told that true ferret lovers often end up spending all of
their discretionary income on their fuzzies rather than themselves).  But
as we unfortunately see time and again, here as everywhere else there is a
Ying and a Yang, a light and a dark side.  Along with the countless folks
who are capable of giving unqualified love and of trying to do their
humanly (and sometimes fallible) best to consistently do what is right for
the fuzzies, there are also plenty of the "ultimately it is all about my
emotional needs and insecurities" types.  They talk plenty of the big talk,
and many even consciously believe it themselves, but if one ultimately
judges from actions rather than talk, the flaw (or sometimes the plethora
thereof) eventually shows.
 
So I will agree with you that there must be a reason why somebody is that
much against Kista, but it seems naive at best --and scarcely very informed
or credible an opinion-- to categorically state that it MUST be a good one.
In my somewhat limited experience with her so far throughout the years,
Kim's actions have shown her to be a knowledgeable, concerned, responsible
and highly dedicated member of the ferret community.  But even if I knew
nothing of this and I'd heard some criticism, I'd try to keep enough
perspective to remember that many folks criticise rather freely within the
ferret community and not always for reasons beyond reproach; I'd also try
to keep in mind the sanity of treating anybody as not-guilty until proving
otherwise (and particularly somebody like Kim, whose actions over the years
have earned a heaping measure of credibility and a solid reputation as a
very valuable member of the ferret community).
 
I'm not saying that criticism of her or of her shelter need necessarily be
wrong.  But to assume that it is necessarily right just because somebody
has seen fit to profer it seems about as responsible or fair as would be
for me to assume that you have a personal agenda against Kim or her shelter
merely because your post seems clearly slanted towards implying that the
criticism against her is well founded.
 
I will also note Kim's reply to you.  She INVITES scrutiny and concerns
and is nothing if not upfront and open about both her shelter and her
circumstances.  I see no such candidness or courage in whoever is behind
the attacks against her (contacting her fundraisers behind her back, FI),
who much prefers to work from the shadows.  This to my mind says plenty.
 
>People that feel they should call their lawyer about every bad word said
>against them aren't worth the time of day.
 
Isn't this a little too judgemental?  In any event, if you are referring to
Kim, I don't see how it applies.  This are not just a few bad words said
about her blowing in the wind, but a somewhat concerted effort to undermine
her credibility and to sabotage her shelter behind her back, without even
the decency to try to contact her with a real intent to solve the alleged
issues instead of trying to pull the rug from under her and from under the
ferrets in her shelter.  In this country, she has the right to defend both
herself and the ferrets she has undertaken to care for by any legitimate
means necessary including legal action, notwithstanding the unfortunate
fact that her decision to do so apparently offends you.
 
>I have heard my fair share of bad gossip about every shelter/rescue out
>there, including shelters in question.  Although not all should be taken
>to heart, some should.
 
OK, so what portion of the hearsay should be taken to heart and which
portion should not, and according to which yardstick?  Personally, I'd
be inclined to take to heart any evidence which was proferred (so far in
this particular issue I haven't seen any from the "concerned" side, though
there has been some rethoric, innuendo and arm waiwing), and disregard the
hearsay.  If however you spouse a better way, I'm open to suggestions.
 
>Maybe this person knows something we don't and maybe they don't know what
>they're talking about.  But shouldn't we hear their side of the story
>before we judge?
 
I think we should hear the actual *evidence* which both sides have to offer
before we all judge.  So far, it seems Kim is the only one willing to
provide any (she is opening her shelter and herself for scrutiny).  I've
seen nothing particularly credible presented by the detracting camp to
date.
 
>I personally would like to hear their side of the story before things are
>turned over to "a legal matter"
 
So would Kim as you'll note from her reply, but apparently nobody has had
the decency to bring their side or alleged concerns to her face before they
decided to start acting behind her back to try to undermine her shelter.
 
>and I hope that the money for a lawyer is not being taken from ferret
>related donations since this seems to somewhat be a personal matter.
 
Your wording confuses me.  Before you were suggesting that there simply
MUST be legitimate grounds for the criticism against the Kista shelter.
Now you are saying this is merely a personal conflict?
 
As to your concern, Kim --although she is scarcely accountable to either
you, me or the rest of the hopes of the peanut gallery-- has addressed it
in her reply to you.  To your satisfaction, I would think.
 
>Since I have been involved with ferrets it seems that I have heard more
>about politics between states and shelters than the well being of ferrets
>and I'm just about sick of it.
 
Amen!
 
>What about these ferrets that are out there?  They get pushed aside
>because of personal differences and I'm fed up.  Personalities aren't
>what's important here.  That's not why shelters get started.  Everyone
>should help everyone else because it helps the ferrets in the end.
 
They should, shouldn't they?  Perhaps in a very distant, more enlightened
and spiritual future we will have trained and certified empaths adhering
to a strict code of professional ethics who will be employed to sense how
animals without the means to express their needs truly feel about the
possibilities open to them, and perhaps such empaths will be employed as
part of mediation teams to determine what would truly be in the animals'
best interest (but in such a future, we would not require shelters and
such arbitration would probably be quite unnecessary).
 
But after centuries and millenia plenty folks are not even capable of being
decent to their own human neighbours and kin in any given community, leave
alone helpless pet companions.  For the foreseeable future, ferrets and
other companion animals won't have much of a say in whatever may befall
them.  They must trust blindly and faithfully in their innocence on their
human caretakers to look after what is best for them.  While many of the
latter will continue to do their best to meet this awesome responsibility
as selflessly as can be, some will continue to indulge their own pettiness
and needs and to prove woefully inadequate.
 
>Who cares what other people think of you if you are making a positive
>difference.
 
A lot of people --including fundraisers and supporters-- may care.  Any big
lie, unchallenged and repeated often enough, eventually gets mistaken for a
truth.  Character assassination, whether blatant or subtly disguised, does
work.  I'd also note that your advice rolls very easily off the tongue when
proferred from where you stand.  It'd be a bit harder to take if you had
been walking in Kim's moccasins for as many years as she has.
 
>But, if others think badly of you because of legitimate reasons, then open
>your eyes, realize your faults, and move to improve yourself.  Don't fall
>behind the whiny "I'm going to call my lawyer" crap.
 
Again, I don't see how any of the above applies to Kim, particularly as she
has been asking, nay, practically beging, to have any LEGITIMATE concerns
to be brought to her attention.
 
>That's such an American cliche, there's no meaning behind it anymore.
 
Some might argue that your own post was chokeful with cliches.  Perspective
rocks :)
 
>And, once again, let the flaming begin.  I've already prepared for it
>before this email had ever been written.
 
As noted earlier, if this is all that you are looking for, then this may
possibly be all that you can recognise here.  But if so I'd encourage you
to go seeking in the apf for better, more suitable hunting.  This answer of
mine to your post is NOT meant as a flame, but I certainly can't and would
not wish to stop you from perceiving it as one if you so choose.  I can
only hope you'll see it for what it is meant to be.
 
Beyond that, if you doubt in good faith, visit her shelter yourself and
make up your own mind.  Only then will you truly know which of the gossip
is founded (if any) and which is the fateful result of emotional
constipation.
 
Cheers,
Jaime
[Posted in FML issue 3306]