Couple Books

Hani and Ishu’s Guide to Fake Dating by Adiba Jaigirdar is a "fake dating" book, which those who are knowledgeable about the lingo is a category of romance novels.*  

The book actually takes place in Ireland, which doesn't really change things much though there is some lingo (like "head girl") that is specific to the setting.  More importantly, "Hani" is Muslim, and the characters are Bengali.  So, we have a lot of cultural references, which could have been more easily understood with a glossary.  There are also a few foreign language bits. Again, not translated for the rest of us.  This sort of thing is annoying.  The book is surely not just for a narrow audience who is familiar with these things.  

Okay. What about the book?  I liked the book as a whole.  From the book jacket and such, I got the idea Hani (the two names are nicknames; names are one good subject referenced; the book also has a lot of family stuff) alone was hiding that she actually liked Ishu (to be clear, both are girls).  

But it turns out -- earlier than I thought it would be -- both really like each other. And, after a while, it was like -- okay. Come on.  You like each other.  It's damn obvious!  So, I think that dragged out too long.  Other than that, I think the book balanced a lot of stuff pretty well.  I speak of family, culture, religion, same-sex relationships, and more.  

The two leads are good characters, and their relationship is very cute.  It's an example of how young adult books can be appreciated by adults.  Again, I think it was drawn out too long, so that bothered me somewhat.  Still, I read the whole thing, which is harder for me these days in general.  So, that's a plus on that side.  I do wish she included a glossary.

==

Like the menstruation book, but more so, Wildlife as Property Owners: A New Conception of Animal Rights by Karen Bradshaw is worthwhile without being something great for reading straight thru unless you are a bit of a specialist about such things.  It is not long -- around one hundred and fifty pages -- so it isn't that hard to actually basically read the whole thing. 

The book argues that we should give wildlife, and long term probably nature as a whole, property rights. She quite convincingly argues that wildlife always had a form of property rights, both as a matter of natural law, custom, and in various ways written law.  

(She cites a law article about giving trees standing, but for some reason doesn't reference Sierra Club v. Morton, where Justice Douglas famously talked about it too.)

Property ownership, she notes, involves various things: acquisition, exclusion, boundary marking, dispute resolution, and property transfers are all done in various ways by non-human animals.  Two things not done by non-human animals would be third-party enforcement and alienation (giving up control).  A key part of the book is the first: trustees for wildlife.

The nature of animals here shows a "natural right" to animal property can be cited. This right is also recognized by custom, including Native Americans, which also is reflected in some of their own constitutions.  

Law over the centuries also recognized some rights for animals, including being able to travel over private lands and protecting their rights in various cases.  Environmental protection laws exist. Finally, protection of federal land (one reference is that the feds control about a 1/3 of the land) in practice includes protecting property rights for animals.  

The book goes into the details here and the weeds started to make my eyes glaze over a bit.  Still, skimming through the material, it was good stuff.  I can see the basics being able to summarize in a relatively short law review-type article.  

(The natural property rights of animals chapter was the most interesting to me.)

Finally, the book does not focus on animal rights vs. welfare on an individual level like someone like Peter Singer.  She argues that property rights can be a useful approach since the law already is in place and can be adapted.  This makes it more likely that it can be put in place.  

The concept of the book turns out not to be that revolutionary at all.  It requires some new policies, including setting up trusteeships.  It would require tweaking standing rules, which would be within the parameters allowed. We need to determine how to best address the needs of animals (and nature), which can conflict. Okay. So, we take a complete "ecosystem" approach.  Still requires some subjective policy decisions. 

The end conclusion I have is that her approach still is quite possible. It is again working off what is taking place in various ways already.  That is usually a common way to bring forth change.  

---

* I arbitrarily, though my editor removed referencing that, picked the top ten romantic comedy novels and somewhat arbitrarily included this one, since I saw it at a local library. It also allowed me to toss in a young adult book.