but i have two shoes!
and i am currently reading a book about bonobos. i didn't know what they were until i started this book (pathetic ignorance on my part- geez there is a lot of stuff to learn about in this funny old world of ours) but now they are almost my new favourite animal. almost, cos i still love dugongs the best (they are soooooo beautiful. look up dugongs on youtube. if watching them swim about doesn't make you smile and get all excited about one day swimming with them then you are a cold, heartless WENCH. or perhaps just someone not overly fond of funny lookin sea cows. either way, look them up cos they might just surprise you...)
the book is called bonobo handshake by vanessa woods and i love reading about the bonobos, they are so clever and funny and strange. and they are also very sexual critters.
i don't really like reading about anything else woods talks about. she gives me the irrits actually. upon arriving at a bonobo sanctuary she promptly asks some of the mamas (surrogate mums to the orphaned bonobos) if they were around during the war. when the mamas look at her strangely and basically ignore her, she hops off to ask another relative stranger about his traumatising experiences, all so that she can get some understanding into why her vietnam vet daddy was a bit of an asshole. far out, can't she just see a shrink like everyone else?
she also explains the situations in the war torn areas of africa with a tone that oftentimes quite frankly pisses me off. i can't even entirely put my finger on why she pisses me off, but it's like she is being flippant? (and yes i do realise this statement is coming from the queen of flippancy) or deliberately sensationalistic? is that even a word? either way i don't like it.
and that is enough out of me. goodnight mon amis.