A woman on a flight from Syracuse, New York to Atlanta, Georgia is allegedly in trouble for a very odd reason…she was caught breastfeeding her cat mid-flight.
Once she was busted, the woman refused to stop, according to those who were on the plane.
She had the hairless cat swaddled in a blanket like a baby: https://t.co/fiHyBfexuZ
— TooFab (@TooFab) December 3, 2021
The alleged incident occurred mid-flight on Delta 1360 when someone apparently noticed the bizarre incident. When the flight crew became aware, they went to address the passenger in 13A and tell her to stop what she was doing and to put the cat in a carrier.
However, the woman allegedly refused to do so and continued breastfeeding the cat. Images of the alleged incident and a picture circulated through social media by a text message that sent using the Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System.
This system is used to transmit short text type messages from pilots to the ground.
The message described what was allegedly seen from the passenger in 13A:
“[Passenger] is breastfeeding a cat and will not put cat back in carrier.”
The message that was sent came along with a request that Delta address the incident utilizing the “Red Coat” team once the plane had reached its destination. The Red Coat team is described as a group of “elite airport customer service experts” who are “specially trained to handle on-the-spot customer issues.”
WHAT?! A woman on a Delta Airlines plane was reportedly caught breastfeeding her pet cat mid-flight and refused to stop. https://t.co/N7uFJikUVV
— FOX 35 Orlando (@fox35orlando) December 3, 2021
While we still do not know if this incident actually occurred, there is a TikTok account that is associated with a flight attendant which appears to be mentioning the situation.
The attendant, Ainsley Elizabeth, posted a video on November 2nd and followed up with an update on November 13th in which she said:
“This woman had one of those, like, hairless cats swaddled up in a blanket, so it looked like a baby. Her shirt was up, and she was trying to get the cat to latch, and she wouldn’t put the cat back in the carrier.
And the cat was screaming for its life…What does she do at home if she’s doing that in public…And then security met the flight just to tell her that she couldn’t do that again, ‘cause it was weird and gross.”
The TikTok video has since been deleted and there has been no independent reporting on the issue to verify the claims. However, according to Snopes, the incident is plausible and would not be the first time something similar has been reported.
According to Snopes, if you check YouTube to see if people breastfeed animals, you will find several of them.
Videos range from breastfeeding cats, goats, and even baby kangaroos. According to Snopes research, a paper written in 1982, put some of this into perspective. In the paper, “Breast-feeding of Animals by Women: It’s Socio-Cultural Context and Geographic Occurrence”, it states:
“In many cases, the practice is an expression of affection for pets (among Polynesians, among forest peoples of tropical South America, and especially among aboriginal hunters and gatherers in Southeast Asia, Australia, and Tasmania).
In other cases, affection is supplemented or supplanted by economic concerns…In a few cases, animals are breast-fed with the welfare of the human mother or child being of greatest concern.
The conclusion drawn that animal nursing may indeed have contributed to the domestication of such animals as the pig and dog, and that some places, particularly lowland New Guinea, the practice can play an important role in human ecology.”
Some people took to Twitter to speculate…and have some fun with the thought of something like this happening. Like Michael Harriot who commented:
“Cancel culture strikes again.”
Cancel culture strikes again.https://t.co/IXfIvsU4ho
— Michael Harriot (@michaelharriot) November 27, 2021
The Whisky Riff also commented, tweeting:
“Just when you thought 2021 couldn’t get any weirder…”
Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters? Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you. Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories. Click to check it out.
Thanksgiving could look completely different if the Nonhuman Rights Project Inc., an animal rights group, gets its way in a case pending before the New York’s Court of Appeals in 2022.
The animal rights group is suing – again – to extend human rights to animals. In this case, it is for Happy, an Asian elephant that’s been in the care of the Bronx Zoo. The case, though, could have far-reaching implications for hunting and conservation.
The Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) is appealing a case that was dismissed by Bronx Supreme Court Judge Alison Tuitt in February 2020. NhRP alleges the Bronx Zoo is illegally detained Happy and the animal, as an “extraordinarily complex” creature, should have human rights.
That was the fifth time the group has lost a fight to claim legal personhood for animals. While elephants are said to have extraordinary memory capabilities, NhRP doesn’t. They are appealing a habeas corpus petition, a legal protection for imprisoned persons, arguing Happy the elephant has the same rights in the court as a person.
The case seems absurd, but it is one worth watching, especially by America’s original conservationists. That’s the men and women who hunt and are literally invested in perpetuating wildlife not just in North America, but around the globe.
The case could have far-reaching effects if courts rule that animals are “persons” and are endowed with the same rights as humans. It might sound far-fetched, but to these extremist groups, it is a stepping stone to making a case to ban hunting altogether.
After all, if courts rule elephants are “persons” endowed with rights under the law, anti-hunting groups have the open door to stake a legal claim that hunting is tantamount to murder. Next year’s Thanksgiving Day turkey dinner could be termed a homicide.
The case centers on Happy, the 51-year-old elephant that has been cared for at the Bronx Zoo. Happy was originally paired with another elephant, Grumpy.
That elephant was killed by two other elephants and since then Happy has been kept separate for her safety following a failed attempt to pair her with another elephant. Happy, however, is able to maintain physical contact through fencing with another elephant.
NhPR wants the court to grant its request to move Happy from the zoo to a sanctuary in Tennessee or California.
The notion of assigning “personhood” rights to an elephant being cared for by professional biologists and zoologists at an accredited zoo might seem absurd but must be taken seriously by hunters and conservationists. NhRP’s founder and lead attorney Steven Wise teaches at Harvard University and previously argued that chimpanzees were “persons” too.
Wise told a judge in a prior attempt that dogs have “personhood” too, as well as “bodily rights” and breeding them would be illegal. Under that theory, using hunting dogs would constitute animal slavery. Harvesting game would be tantamount to murder.
This is important to watch this case because extremist groups like NhRP ignore the contributions hunters and the firearm industry make to conservation.
Don’t expect them to acknowledge that firearm and ammunition manufacturers have contributed over $14 billion to the conservation of wildlife and habitats since the Pittman-Robertson excise tax was implemented in 1937. That’s led to the recovery of game and non-game species at today’s healthy and sustainable levels.
None of that matters to NhRP or their extremist allies. They’re focused on a court win that would upend conservation – and hunting – forever.
If that happens, Thanksgiving next year might be a whole lot different.
Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.