Tue 16 Feb 2010
Wolfie Blackheart and the problem with majoritarian reality.
Posted by Magpie under Random
[21] Comments
So… there’s this goth woman named Wolfie Blackheart who identifies as a wolf and likes to taxidermy roadkill. She found a roadkill dog (pictured above) and decapitated it to do something with its skull. And now everyone is freaking out about it. The people who’s dog it was found the photo and are trying to press charges, but what’s particularly fascinating and sad is the media freaking out about it because she doesn’t fit in with the majoritarian view of what consists of reality. (since she’s goth, wears a tail, and considers herself a half-werewolf or something.) The smartest thing I’ve seen said about it was a comment on the Boing Boing post about it:
She should know that the only acceptable garb for a taxidermist (even an amateur taxidermist) is camo and a baseball cap.
People should grow the hell up, understand that what floats their boats don’t float other people’s boats, and leave this person alone. (That said, I can understand why the people who looked after the dog when it was alive were kinda freaked out.)
21 Responses to “ Wolfie Blackheart and the problem with majoritarian reality. ”
Comments:
Leave a Reply
Trackbacks & Pingbacks:
-
Pingback from teen werewolves,una nueva tribu?
June 4th, 2010 at 12:20 pm[...] en este tema,otra nota sobre nuestra amiga "wolfie" con un "perro sin cuerpo": Wolfie Blackheart and the problem with majoritarian reality. y para colmo de males la muy friki es fan de naruto Responder Con Cita [...]
May 23rd, 2010 at 6:55 pm
She didn’t have the right to use the body of someone else’s pet. She must have known it was her neighbours dog, and she did it anyway. Fuck her, its not about her being a goth. Its about her being a cunt that decapitates her neighbours dog.
May 24th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
The problem with majoritarian reality? Really? You can come off looking like the non-comforming, outside view that I’m guessing you pride yourself on being. But you need to realize that this “Majoritarian Reality” are the guidelines of our humanity. Severing a dogs skull without permission of the owner, as I can only guess the tag was still intact is completely inappropriate. People are allowed to follow their passions without tribulation, but only when fitting into the guidelines and rules of society. This disrespectful showing of decapitation without remorse is borderline anarchy when trying to fit it into a social convention. This is disgusting, demoralizing and just fucking stupid. I can’t wait to see this Wolfie Blackheart character in the near future. The only adjective that would suffice is, “loser”.
May 25th, 2010 at 2:09 am
hey, commenters… where’d you run across my site? i’m genuinely curious.
ligorian: you say that this is borderline anarchy. have you read the tag-line of this site? i believe it says “anarchism” right up there. the vernacular i use, such as the word “majoritarian”, is probably mostly aimed at other anarchists, but the basic idea is this: “majoritarian” voting is when the majority decides. majority rules. and yes, this is the basis of our society. a society that i, and many others in the minority position, find essentially fascist. to get back to our wolfie blackheart, let’s just say that majoritarian democracy is best represented by three wolves and two sheep deciding what to have for dinner.
May 26th, 2010 at 9:49 am
If a person wants to be a taxidermist, fine. If they want to use road kill, fine. If the dead animal is a domestic, borderline. If Sarah Rodriguez just wanted to turn the dog into a piece of art, what’s up with the picture of her and the newly severed head?
I’m all for people doing what they want. I’m alright with people dissecting dead animals, especially if it’s for educational purposes. I’m not okay with people doing it in a sociopathic manner like that. It’s well known that one of the main traits of sociopaths and/or murderers have is that they kill and torture animals and sometimes keep their bones.
In my opinion, the dog in the picture above was alive a very short time before that picture was taken. They eyes are not sunken in at all. Not even a bit.
May 26th, 2010 at 1:48 pm
Well she didn’t know it was her neighbor’s dog :( sadly she was tricked by her friends saying they found the dog dead when they had actually taken it from a neighbor’s yard.
So why do people trip so much on this knowing that she didn’t NOT KNOW whose dog it was? Sometimes people let themselves be driven by what media says and misunderstand the situation. She should be left alone- that said.
May 27th, 2010 at 12:40 am
Ligorian Snap, I came here on a whim from a google search, read the article, and your comment. You are an idiot if you look to the group norms for your so-called humanity. Just look up the Milgram Experiments, the Sanford Prison Experiments for a look into a psychology of those who determine your humanity.
May 27th, 2010 at 5:06 am
Cement: you said “If Sarah Rodriguez just wanted to turn the dog into a piece of art, what’s up with the picture of her and the newly severed head?”
First of all, I take issue with your assumption that since Wolfie isn’t her “real” name, that she should be referred to by her legal name. Yet famous people get away with this all the time: who calls Lady Gaga anything but Lady Gaga? Isn’t she just playing “pretend” as well? I think that assumptions about who gets to call themselves what they like to be entirely classist.
Secondly, who is to say that the picture of her with the dog’s head isn’t art? A brief study of art history would probably lead one to believe that actually, this photo, in how shocking it is, is probably one of the more valuable examples of the photographic art in recent years.
Thirdly, you’re all for people cutting up animals, except when it’s sociopathic? Then you’re barking up the wrong tree here. Check out the vivisection industry and then come back and complain about Wolfie.
I also hate this idea that “OMG someone was mean to a cat, now they’re going to kill the neighbor’s kids.” I hate animal cruelty. It’s one reason I eat vegan and dress freegan. But this isn’t a logical conclusion to reach. It’s well known that most people who beat their spouses drink to excess: therefore all people who drink to excess will beat their spouse. This is a logical fallacy, one easily addressed by an Algebra 1 class.
May 27th, 2010 at 6:08 am
You have me there. Art is in the eye of the beholder.
As far as her name, I can call her whatever I want. I choose to call “Wolfie” by her legal name because I know it and I don’t feel like calling her Wolfie. If I knew celebrities real names, I might refer to them as such. Maybe not. Which ever comes to my mind and out my mouth first. If people start referring to me as Shit Brain, there’s not a thing I can do about. My tough luck.
I never claimed she was a sociopath. I said mutilating and killing animals are traits of a sociopath. I did not use an equation to reach a conclusion. I was merely speculating.
I recognize that vivisection as a legitimate science. There are laws though. Such as the animal having to be under anesthesia, during the vivisection, etc. I’m making another assumption, but I have a feeling this girl doesn’t have the credentials to be performing vivisection.
May 27th, 2010 at 6:32 pm
ok, I heard that the dog had been in possesion of her friend for weeks before it was killed by a car. The friend called the dog shadow and she asked Wolfie (she actually legally changed her name to Wolfie Blackheart) to taxidermy it’s head for her. Wolfie claims that she didn’t know it was the woman’s dog, she had never seen or met the woman. Neighbor doesn’t just mean next door neighbor it can be anyone in your local area. Wolfie wasn’t aware a dog was missing. She was once arrested for robbery but was proven innocent, she also once brought a knife on a school campus by accident. Wolfie says that her friend is paranoid and neurotic and she keeps changing the story, not Wolfie. Personally, ya I think the chick is kinda weird, and it’s strange to taxidermy animals and think you’re a werewolf, but I do think the media is trying to make a big deal out of her because she is abnormal and she’s getting a lot of crap for it. I feel bad for the poor girl, I mean it seems like she really loves animals and she seems nice enough not like a pyschopath or something. It’s just everyone making a big deal out of it
May 28th, 2010 at 8:25 am
Yes, I agree, it’s being portrayed by the media as a horrible, tragic crime. But that’s what the media does; focus on issues that will frighten and enrage people.
As far as how long the dog was dead before it’s head was severed, it can be easily proven that the dog was alive shortly before decapitation. Decomposition of an animal’s (or human’s)body begins immediately after death. The eyes sinking in to the skull is one of the first things to happen.
If this girl is truly innocent, I hope the truth is proven. If not, karma will take care of it.
May 28th, 2010 at 10:48 pm
She’s not even a Goth! Gothic people are more humaine then that! wtf! and because she claims to be a Goth, she puts everyone’s (including myself) reputations at risk! That is not fair! There are Goth’s that are Vegans!!!! VEGANS!!!! DO NOT EAT, HARM OR ANYTHING CRUEL TO ANIAMLS!!!! She knew that was her neighbours dog and she should’ve reported it instead of beheading it…
May 29th, 2010 at 4:57 am
Lia: I’m a goth and a vegan myself. The two (being gothic and being vegan) don’t really have anything to do with one another. Goths are not “more humane” than other people, nor are we more evil. But I’m not going to play the “you did something bad so we disown you” game with goths, the same as I won’t do it with anarchists. There are goths who have done pretty horrendous stuff, like school shootings, or being corporate lawyers.
Further, a lot of people (like myself) are vegan out of response to the horrors of animal agriculture, not out of a “don’t hurt the cute fluffy puppy” mentality. Wolfie and what she did, presuming the animal to have already been dead, is outside of this. Now, granted, this would be more of a “freegan” attitude, which I admit I have (my diet is vegan, but I’ve got dumpstered leather laces in my vegan boots).
June 7th, 2010 at 5:20 pm
ok, magpie is right, people are just freaking out because wolfie’s different to them, but it doesn’t take a freaking rocket scientist to look at both sides of the damn story. think about it, why in the world would wolfie harm a canine when she claims to be one and has a wolf hybrid as a pet and friend? and there’s a reason why it’s called a neighborhood, your neighbor can be 3 blocks down from you and you might not even know they had a dog or that they even existed so lay off, her friend brought the dog, already dead, to her and said it’s name was shadow and that it had gotten hit by a car. why don’t the vegans and other people that claim to have humanity on this site worry about the massive amount of carbon emmissions in the atmosphere or the oil in the ocean now because of the shell company’s stupidity since you’re all so interested in saving animals.
June 19th, 2010 at 10:45 am
Anyone who thinks that snapshot is art is an idiot. Snapshots like the one above is so far from art, it’s insane that it’s brought up as consideration for art in the first place. That’s a sick photo from a sick person.
Amateur taxidermist…Give me a break.
June 20th, 2010 at 3:24 am
Para, you make this too easy: Anyone who thinks that snapshots can’t be art has no understanding of the photographic art world, the history of art photography, or any formal training at all. This is, of course, ironic, to say that only “proper” photos are art, when those who study photographic art “properly” are taught and are well aware that snapshots can indeed be art.
June 20th, 2010 at 4:15 pm
Why do you judge people by what they do, and not who they are?
Tell me this, If a man goes hunting and kills a deer, then goes home and plasters it on his wall as a trophie, humanity excepts it and congragulates them. But when this teen finds an ALREADY dead dog and decides she would think it to be cool to have a scary looking wolf-like skull, you say that they are a waist of life and etc.?
I’m not asking this to make anyone mad, I just want to no what the differense is, so what if some people prefer a pritty deer head over a scary dog skull, is it not the same concept?
Yes, it wasn’t her dog, and yes, she should have asked for the dead body of the dog before she chopped off the head if she did infact know it belonged to her neighbors, but the dog was already dead! I mean seriacly, what were the owners going to do with it, stuff it and keep it dead skin for reminders(it’s happened)!
I say whats done is done, and if you actually stop and think about it without the imput of anyone else, she really did nothing wrong, it’s not like she hurt anyone and hunted the dog down and killed it herself just for the heck of it. So you tell us, whats your TRUE oppinion on the matter?
June 20th, 2010 at 8:39 pm
I taxidermy animals AND am semi-goth [wearing black] and wear a tail, but am a fox not a wolf.
She’s innocent in my opinion, she did not know anything about the dog and she had every right to dispose of or use as desired a peice of roadkill. [or what she knew of as roadkill] her friend’s a fuck up- who kills a dog? However, merely boiling an unknown head is no reason for the huge internet uprising against wolfie.
June 26th, 2010 at 12:49 pm
While there are a lot of different opinions about this topic, since it’s a difficult one, I get the distinct impression that while all of you are somehow missing the point.
If her friend really came to her with the corpse of her dog she named shadow and asked her to behead it etc, then I really see no problem.
However if this was not the case and she found some dead dog lying somewhere with probably its tags still attached to its collar, then I serioulsly doubt her social skills.
First of all, she has a dog-wolf which she clearly loves. Did she even for a second concider how the owners of that poor dog might have felt like? And did she seriously believe it could be a stray, with a wel kept coat like that?
Isn’t it normal that upon finding a corpse of a dead dog you first try to contact its worried owners, instead of dragging it back home and decapitating it. And of course the owners have all the right to be completely outraged because of this. How would she feel if a picture of the severed head of her beloved pet proved to be the only lead to the whereabouts of her dog if it was lost?
I don’t care what she looks like, what her religion is etc, but this child obviously lacks some very important people skills.
I will not go as far as to say that she might even be apathetic, (of course if her story checks out and the body of the dog was given to her by her friend, than this does not apply to her) since if we look at it from her standpoint, she just got the green light from her friend to add another skull to her collection.
However from looking at the freshness of that head, she must have decapitated it very soon after it’s death. And let’s just be honest people, for those who believe she decapitated a live dog, just reasonable think of how difficult that must be.
1. Kidnap said dog.
2. Get him to trust you enough so you don’t get bitten.
3. Make sure he does not make too much noise as you what, slice his head of with a katana in one swift motion?
Seems a bit unreasonable if you look at it that way. However where the hell were the parents at? Seriously perhaps you should think about that for a change.
July 6th, 2010 at 6:15 pm
none of you know who wolfie is. she beleives what she wanna believes. it is kinda creepy that she would decapitate a dog, but she did it after it was dead,the only reason she did it was for practice, so stop tellin her to fuck off
July 24th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
okay, im my opinion wolfie ios completely and entirely innocent, her friend on the other hand, if said friend had any part in the killing is thouroughly guilty. This is nothing more than a classic case of “dont shoot the messenger” she is merely the person who ended up with the head. not the one who hit it with a car, not the one who delivered it to her house. she merely decapitated a peice of already dead road kill for taxidermal practice. the fact that shes getting all the media shit for this is entirely ludacris. if anything they should find the person who hit the dog with thier car, and charge them with murder, hit and run, and being just plain inhumane as to leave the dying dog there. and yes maybe it was a little unreasonable for wolfie to take a picture holding the still bloody dogs head, and post it on the interned, but regardless, then every artist who has ever taken a gory photo, or drew/painted/or molded anything related to a dead animal should be in jail. the media has practically put her on death row by he community, and classmates when she has done absolutely nothing wrong.