Jim Kershner: Rats don’t deserve such a bad rap
When the animated movie “Ratatouille” came out a few weeks ago, commentators kept saying, “A movie starring a rat? That’s a tough sell. Nobody likes rats.”
What a classic display of blatant rat-bigotry. Rats are not perfect – the Black Death is a black mark – but rats are certainly no worse than some critters I could mention. A certain skunk in my neighborhood contributes far less to society. So I am hereby, for one column only, taking on the role of Defender of the Rat. I am, in essence, opening up my own Spokane chapter of the Rat Anti-Defamation League.
First, let me point out that those “Ratatouille” comments were perfect examples of a centuries-old rodent double-standard. A mouse named Mickey can star in his own movie – can have his own theme park – and nobody twitches a whisker. But when a rat, even a charming, discerning one like Remy, tries to star in his own movie? Eek. Ewww. You’d think somebody had found a, well, you know, shrew in their soup.
Really, what is, in essence, a rat? A rat is just an extra-large mouse. Are we going to discriminate against the rat just because it’s heftier than the average mouse by a few ounces? Or, in the case of certain New York sewer rats, by a few pounds? That would be not only rat-ist, but size-ist.
Many people seem to hold a rat’s essential rodentness against it. They are repulsed by its little rodent overbite. Yet a rat is fundamentally not much different from the other members of the Order Rodentia, which includes such cute critters as beavers, gerbils and chipmunks. Why do chipmunks get a pass – and their own hit song titled “Alvin’s Harmonica” – and rats get nothing but disdain?
Rat racism. Pure and simple.
And for that matter, why do people go out and feed the squirrels, a plainly more obnoxious rodent, yet then go out and poison the rats?
Prejudice. It’s a destructive force.
Sure, squirrels have cute, fuzzy tails and rats have naked, pink ones, but that distinction is strictly superficial. Deep down inside, a squirrel is a rat that lives in a tree.
While we’re on the subject of rodents even more obnoxious than rats, let’s take the case of the porcupine. It’s a rodent that strips bark, kills trees, fills your dog’s muzzle with quills and sticks you with a $150 vet bill. Give me a rat any day.
Many other living things are far more disgusting than rats. Here’s just a partial list:
“ Ferrets.
“ Dung beetles.
“ Slime mold.
“ Pit vipers.
“ Kid Rock.
We used to have a pet rat at our house, and he was an affable charmer. Many were the hours we spent teaching him little rat tricks, carrying him on our shoulders and confiding in him our innermost hopes and fears. Mr. Rat was an excellent listener.
This will come as no surprise to people in the pet industry, who have known for years that a pet rat is easily superior to a pet hamster, gerbil, guinea pig or mouse. Yet people still buy hamsters because they’re “cute.”
Bigotry can be cruel.
Rats in the wild do pose a few health issues, and not just the bubonic plague. They can actually carry about 30 diseases to humans, including typhus. However, these are usually a problem only in overcrowded cities, so the humans may be the ones making the rats sick. And even with the plague, the disease is actually carried by fleas, meaning the rats are victims, too.
Meanwhile, look at all the good that rats do in health research. If it weren’t for lab rats we would have fewer life-saving pharmaceuticals, not to mention fewer stunning varieties of eyelash-extender.
Thankfully, over the last few weeks, I have regained my faith in humanity. “Ratatouille,” far from repelling audiences with its rattiness, has proven to be a box office hit and an all-around critical success. People have overcome their rat-aversion and discovered the sheer joy in a pair of whiskers and a naked pink tail.
Thank you, Remy. You have done more for rat equality than anyone since the late, great Ratty in “Wind in the Willows.” He was actually a European water vole, but still, he had that name to overcome.