Do you like this story?
Do Americans love pets too much?
By Gina Spadafori
June 6, 2007
Whenever I see this question asked, I always want to pencil “some” in between “Do” and “Americans.” That’s because every day a simple news search turns up numerous examples of people who have animals they clearly don’t care much about — or for — at all. Another reality-check: Take a look at Petfinder and count the throwaways looking for new homes. Do we love animals too much? Hmmmm.
Anyway … for those of us who do truly value the companionship of our pets, Gary Bauer wonders about our priorities in an article in the Christian Science Monitor:
So, what’s behind the increased affinity for animals?
It’s partly due to the growing share of people choosing pets over children.
Census Bureau data reveal that the proportion of childless women 15 to 44 years old reached an all-time high of 45 percent in 2004. Moreover, he National Center of Health Statistics confirms that the percentage of women who choose to be “child-free” has swelled 160 percent in a generation.
Both singles and couples without children are more likely to own pets and are significantly more likely to develop strong, even parental bonds with them. In San Francisco, pet owners – “pet guardians” according to city ordinance – outnumber children nearly 2 to 1.
[...]
But valuing pets over people discounts one fact: While animals make great companions, offer health benefits, and can be a source of endearing affection (as Aldous Huxley said, “To his dog, every man is Napoleon; hence the constant popularity of dogs.”), they live in a different moral universe than man.
Human beings are created in the image and likeness of God. And though capable of monstrous acts, human beings also have the ability – unique in creation – to demonstrate heroic forgiveness and compassion. Witness Holocaust survivor and professor Liviu Librescu, who heroically gave his life during the Virginia Tech shootings. Witness, too, the tremendous outpouring of sympathy for the loved ones of those killed.
Some of those most deeply affected by the shootings even extended the hand of forgiveness to the killer. Clearly, even in the face of brutality, man – when he appeals, as Lincoln admonished, to the better angels of his nature – is capable of exhibiting a humanity toward his fellow man that should make countless thousands rejoice.
Here’s the entire piece, emphasis mine. With all due respect to the writer (who, like me, has a retriever named McKenzie!), I don’t see it as an either-or proposition, although gosh I get a constant barrage of e-mail from people who assume I (and others of what the e-mailers call “pet freaks”) do. I don’t think animals are people, and I value them not over people, but in a different way than I do people.
Why is this so hard to understand? There’s no rule that you have to choose! You can care about both animals and people! Really!
Besides, a lot of the “pet love” that gets pointed to as excessive — especially the spending on accessories and such — isn’t about love at all. It’s about consumerism. We love to buy things, and pets are just one more reason to do so. Honestly, a cat doesn’t care how expensive his dish is, and a dog is just as happy with an old cushion instead of a bed costing hundreds. Many people who love their pets don’t spend much on them, and many people who do spend a lot will dump the animals when trends change or they get bored.
But back to the point: Pet-owners are people, too, and we don’t choose animals over people when we adopt a pet. We can still love and care for both. Any suggestion that such a thing isn’t possible is nonsense.
Share & Enjoy
|
Facebook
|
Twitter
|
Google Buzz
|
Digg
|
|
Technorati
|
StumbleUpon
|
Delicious
|
Email
|
Home
My own take on this: it’s just so wonderful to give and receive love. Caring for animals is another way to give and receive love - and one simply can never love too much. So, no to the questions - Americans don’t love their animals too much - and we simply can’t love each other too much either.
Comment by Linda — June 6, 2007 @ 10:56 am
Yes! As my mom says, “Love cannot be divided. And it’s not a finite resource.”
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 6, 2007 @ 10:58 am
I’m not answering this question; it doesn’t deserve answering. Besides, how do you love something too much?
They are alive. We are alive. Life is unique in the universe. The only life in the whole cosmos that we know of is right here.
Roaches, an occasional pesky fly and all the mosquitoes and fleas notwithstanding, all life is special and precious and deserves all the respect and assistance that we can find. I know I’m a little extreme. This is the way I see things. I’m not a vegetarian, btw. I do try to be a good Zen Buddhist.
Comment by Peggy (AKA: Big Fat Momma Cat) — June 6, 2007 @ 11:06 am
“It’s partly due to the growing share of people choosing pets over children.”
I wonder where he got that piece of information. Does it exclude those who are unable to have children or are they all counted in the same group.
“While animals make great companions, offer health benefits, and can be a source of endearing affection …. they live in a different moral universe than man.
I can’t help but wonder who is greater at forgiveness, loyalty and love.
Comment by Donna — June 6, 2007 @ 11:10 am
How many pet parents whith children( especially teenage ones) get accused by their children that they love the pets more than them(NOT). Especially when such a teenager wants something total unnecessary horrible expensive trinket and blames your refusal due to pet food/vet costs etc.
Comment by Serijna — June 6, 2007 @ 11:27 am
We did not love them enough to protect them from an ugly death by poison.
We did not love them enough to protect them from the pet industry that values money over life.
We did not love them enough.
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 6, 2007 @ 11:36 am
This guy, Gary Bauer is unbalanced. He obviously forgets the fact that man was also created with the ability to reason. Like Gina said, why the one or the other? after all God created us with much more capability than just to pick just one thing. He’s unbalanced, he talks about God in one sentence and then talks about imaginary limitations of people on the other. He is unknownly discrediting the very humanity he seems to think so high of.
Comment by Gary — June 6, 2007 @ 11:37 am
Gary Bauer just doesn’t get it.
‘Nuff said.
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 6, 2007 @ 11:40 am
E., we did — and do — love them enough. We just were denied the information we needed to protect them. I am so sorry for your heartbreaking losses.
Comment by Ticocats — June 6, 2007 @ 12:15 pm
Comment by Ticocats — June 6, 2007 @ 12:15 pm
I made the call today , in just a few days I will no longer be a pet parent.
I used to worry that my pets would outlive me, silly of me considering how efficient the pet food industry is in killing them.
Just a few months ago I had a happy home, now I have a rather pathetic collection of cremation certificates. The certificates are just not as much fun, somehow, as the living pets were.
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 6, 2007 @ 12:30 pm
Gary Bauer, the author, is one of those guests that appear on some tv network “news” shows. He would be invited to represent the right wing side of an issue by a host that wants a sensational take on an issue rather than reasoned, sophisticated discussion.
A little bit from Wikipedia: Gary Bauer is a conservative American politician notable for his ties to several evangelical Christian groups and campaigns…Bauer describes himself as pro-life, and while he opposes abortion, he supports the death penalty. Bauer supports a Constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, and prefers abstinence programs to current sex education programs.
I wish Mark Twain were around to make a pithy comment about Bauer’s take on dogs, who as he implies “aren’t made in God’s image”! (And I love it that he implies that lots of dogs live in San Francisco!! All those nasty homosexuals have dogs…
Comment by Maureen — June 6, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
NO!!!!!
Comment by Maureen (Lilly and Lucy's mom) — June 6, 2007 @ 12:43 pm
dammit
Comment by Peggy (AKA: Big Fat Momma Cat) — June 6, 2007 @ 12:47 pm
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 6, 2007 @ 11:36 am
E., I think I can relate to your sorrow and pain, but I want to scream: Stop It!
You, and I, and thousands of other people were as much victims as were our pets.
Neither you nor I nor anyone else *chose* to poison their pets.
We fed them what we thought was healthy, ‘nutritionally balanced’ food.
Did you love them when you fed them? Of course you did!
If you had known that it is poisonous, would you have fed them this stuff? Of course you would NOT have.
Direct your pain and anger towards those (beeeeep!) who are responsible for the deaths of your pets, not towards you.
There are animals out there that need you, need your strength and your compassion, desperately need the changes that you help initiating right now.
And, by gosh, they need your love.
You are as innocent as your animals.
I cry with you.
Comment by MaKo — June 6, 2007 @ 12:50 pm
Well, didn’t that article make those of us who can’t have children feel special. What a butt. Like it was the dog’s fault or something. Like if I were able to have kids somehow I wouldn’t have dogs and cats.
“Human beings were created in the image and likeness of God.” It would have to be a pretty paltry god to create humans incapable of mustering up love enough for both pets and kids, and I don’t believe it for a second.
Comment by Carol PW — June 6, 2007 @ 12:53 pm
It would have been hard for me to hate Gary Bauer more than I already did. Imagine that. Now I do.
Comment by Christie Keith — June 6, 2007 @ 1:44 pm
This blog post and many of its commenters seem to be of the Bauer mindset: http://mom-101.blogspot.com/20.....sions.html
Comment by kabbage — June 6, 2007 @ 1:45 pm
Well guess what - dogs and cats love in the same way and image of God - love is love is love and love by any other name is love.
Comment by Linda — June 6, 2007 @ 1:56 pm
Christie and I went to the BlogHer convention last year. The place was full of “Mommy Bloggers” who pretty much thought their children were beyond perfect and every drop of snot they sneezed needed to be documented as special beyond belief.
Christie pitched a fit in one of the seminars. I’m sure you will all find that surprising. :)
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 6, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
I don’t mean to comment on everything, but honestly just can’t resist going “Ditto” regarding Gina’s 2:02 comment - I see those types of Moms all over the place or so it seems and I’m a Mom.
Comment by Linda — June 6, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
Comment by kabbage — June 6, 2007 @ 1:45 pm
OY! I’d be afraid to have kids and turn into a couple of them! I’ll stick to the cats that may puke on occassion and the dog that happily cleans it up, TYVM! lol!~
and I’d like to thank my mom for NOT giving the kitty who would bite me on occassion as a child a swift ‘goodbye’. we were both young and I’m sure a bit wild, but we were close for 15yrs.
Comment by straybaby — June 6, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
Hi Christie - thanks for the link even if it did entirely mischaracterize my post.
I love my dog. She gets the expensive dogfood and sleeps is our bed when she wants to, and has playdates with other dogs, and stays with the freaking overpriced dog groomers across the street—in their home—when I have to travel for work because I know she is better cared for than anywhere else.
But the reality is, she doesn’t feel like “my child” any more since having a child myself. That is all my post was about.
I thought we had made peace at blogher last year. Apologies if I was mistaken.
Comment by Mom101 — June 6, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
Sorry - previous comment directed to Kabbage.
Christie clearly has other unrelated issues.
Comment by Mom101 — June 6, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
Comment by MaKo — June 6, 2007 @ 12:50 pm
Those who did this have my anger, oh boy do they have it.
No, I will not be getting any more pets.
I refuse to support the pet industry with a single penny, ever again.
I would have to take a new pet to the vet, and no vet deserves a dime from me if they are not screaming with outrage on TV and in the newspapers. And every damned one of them has Hills poison in the waiting room, so no, I will be as the pet food industry and the lying FDA and the useless mainstream media have made me, a *former* pet parent.
Friends have offered to pay adoption fees, I will not accept it, or the kittens and puppies they bring, because I will be a better warrior with fewer hostages.
The fact that I did not know does not lessen the fact that I did feed the pets I loved poison and then torture them by force feeding more poison, on Vet orders.
And I paid good money for the poison, the vet care, to end their suffering, to cremate them so their poor bodies do not end up in a cat food can as rendered pet digest.
I will do nothing, not a thing,not a dime, to help this horrid situation continue.
If I have the urge to commit an act of compassion, I force myself to stop and think that compassion is a sign of weakness to the pet industry and I cannot afford it.
If the pet industry can look upon this suffering and do nothing, I can be harder.
A hard heart against a hard sorrow.
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 6, 2007 @ 2:29 pm
Love it that he claims people (meaning women) have pets INSTEAD of children. Too many children already get thrown into a pathetic foster care system. Not everyone is meant to be a pet or human mother/father. Children and pets are a responsibility that should be fulfilled lovingly or don’t have them.
Comment by Carol — June 6, 2007 @ 2:32 pm
“Besides, a lot of the “pet love” that gets pointed to as excessive — especially the spending on accessories and such — isn’t about love at all. It’s about consumerism. We love to buy things, and pets are just one more reason to do so.”
So, Gina, you’ve met my wife. She buy our dogs lots of outfits. She doesn’t buy them because she love our dog (which she does), but because it is an excuse to buy outfits. Our dog obviously hates wearing them; but she buys more anyway.
Comment by Mike — June 6, 2007 @ 2:34 pm
Caring for and loving things. What a terrible concept.
Comment by Steve — June 6, 2007 @ 2:43 pm
It’s difficult when our pets die, regardless of the reason, and it is a very sad state when we close our hearts, shut down, and withhold love. You will love again E. just not today or maybe not tomorrow but it will happen and your heart will soften because you are a kind person and a very loving one too.
Comment by Pet Psychic — June 6, 2007 @ 2:45 pm
I had to go look at the article to see if it was the same Gary Bauer I had in mind. Yep it is. He’s nothing but a kook and a big loser, that’s with a large “L”. This is probably the most attention he’s gotten in a long time and he doesn’t deserve any, so just consider the source…
Comment by Aunt Granny — June 6, 2007 @ 2:48 pm
“human beings also have the ability – unique in creation – to demonstrate heroic forgiveness and compassion.”
Animals that are abused and neglected still give love to their owners - now that’s pretty heroic forgiveness and compassion….
need I say more?
Comment by Linda — June 6, 2007 @ 2:51 pm
Oh E!
Sending lots and lots and lots of {{{{hugs!}}}}}
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 6, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
Hey, leave Christie’s issues out of this.
I don’t think my pets are children. I think they’re animals, and I don’t mean by that to say they’re lesser beings. They’re different. I love them for what they are, even as I love the people in my life for who they are, no matter what.
But … Mom101 … you ought to read your own comments on that post, including those from people who are thinking about putting the cats they once “loved” out for the coyotes to eat now that they have “real children” instead.
I worry about the lessons of compassion such people are teaching their children.
My motto: “Teaching a child not to step on a caterpillar is as important to the child as it is to the caterpillar.”
Kudos to people who don’t think of pets as “child accessories” but as members of the family and a wonderful opportunity to teach the lessons of non-judgmental love and acceptance.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 6, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
Comment by Mike — June 6, 2007 @ 2:34 pm
bought a sewing machine to make curtains, pillows and such. made a doggie jacket that actually fit my dog. ended up buying a surger and industrial machine and designing her a complete winter jacket wardrobe, leashes, collars . . we won’t talk about the amount of fabric and other needed items i now have . . . and no new curtains, pillows and such. .
be happy your wife is sticking to outfits from the store, lol!~
i will say one thing for the expensive beds and bowls, saves the eyesore in the livingroom from what we used to have available!
Comment by straybaby — June 6, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
“human beings also have the ability – unique in creation – to demonstrate heroic forgiveness and compassion.”
I completely disagree with that statement. Overwhelming compassion can be shown by even fairly unintelligent animals, such as koi, evidenced by their holding up a companion fish that is ill,and the depressive state they display when another dies. Forgiveness is shown by abused animals. They can be more forgiving than people sometimes.
Comment by ango — June 6, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
Humans need to be taught to show love and compassion - it is not an innate quality - not like animals.
Walking one early morning in McKinley Park with my son, then 7 years old, we saw a homeless family ignoring their small child and watched from afar as the child threw a bottle at a large goose - and hit its neck - the poor goose bent its neck in obvious dismay.
This was pre-cell phone and I must admit I was leary of approaching this homeless family, but I did go over to their child and tell him how sad it was that the goose was hurt, and showed remorse for its pain, and the boy too looked sorrowful and said he was sorry and acted like it too.
Man’s inhumanity to man? Well we all know our history don’t we.
Comment by Linda — June 6, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
“”Man is the only animal that blushes. Or needs to.”
— Mark Twain
Comment by Ticocats — June 6, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
http://mom-101.blogspot.com/20.....sions.html
I couldn’t make it through more than about half the comments. If having a child inevitably causes a person to automatically become so cold and unfeeling towards the animals they once loved (I know that’s not true for everyone, but there sure are a crowd of them over in that Comments section! It’s DISCOURAGING!) then I’m GLAD I never had kids (or WANTED to!)
It’s possible to love them all. For those who let go of that love so readily when the child comes, I have to wonder how sincere the love was in the first place.
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 6, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
How does one know if an animal blushes? Hard to see past the fur or feathers….or thick hide.
Comment by Linda — June 6, 2007 @ 3:45 pm
Dog spelled backwards is God.
Comment by VJ — June 6, 2007 @ 4:39 pm
Have always said I would rather have 10 dogs than one brat kid. There are too many kids who do not have any training or upbringing whereas you tell a dog to sit or lay down and it will.
Comment by VJ — June 6, 2007 @ 4:40 pm
Comment by Mom101 — June 6, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
Those who lost their beloved cats and dogs, and those of us who are trying to escape the bullet so that ours remain healthy, express human feelings of sadness and grief, compassion to one another, share pet food recipes and much more in this community formed by Gina and Christie. They even tell us to mind our manners when appropriate.
Your posting is the first truly nasty one I’ve seen here. We are a community that have extended families and busy lives. Everyone here has had both the good fortune of sharing their lives with a unique cat or dog or koi or ferret or bird — and we share the knowledge of the overwhelming sadness that each feels when that companion sickens or dies. Especially needlessly, as we have learned, and at the cold hands of corporate executives we don’t know. So be part of the spirit of this site, please, if you are going to come here.
Comment by Maureen — June 6, 2007 @ 5:54 pm
I love animals and children both. I think they should both be loved and protected. I think they both should be taught how to behave.
I myself don’t have any children, but I do have two cats. If I ever have any children, the cats will still be my kids. Why can’t we have human and fur kids at the same time?
As for spending money buying things for my cats, well giving them new toys make them happy, and it makes me happy to see them happy. It makes me happy to spend money buying toys and other things for my fur kids, my kitties that I LOVE. Though they probably think I’m nuts for some of the things I buy, but I still love to watch their reactions no matter what they are.
Really what’s wrong with that? It’s my money, and as long as I’m not spending it on anything illegal, I have the right to spend it any way I want.
Do we love animals too much? NO! We can’t love any living creature too much. We need more love than hate in this world to begin with.
Comment by Mandy — June 6, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
@ Mom101
Wow, you’re a serious jerk, ma’am. I’m just glad you finally had kids. Maybe now you’ll stop using (and ignoring) loving animals as surrogates.
Pets are not kids. But they aren’t “less than,” either, if you ever really loved them in the first place. You can love them all, if your heart is big enough.
Somehow, I doubt your cat Desdemona’s hopes for your next life exceed your hopes for hers. I think we all know which of you has earned a karmic demotion to cockroach. Hint: it ain’t the cat.
Comment by Laura — June 6, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
I think in many ways that pets are like children and I’m sorry to offend anyone here that disagrees.
Pets and Children: Both need to be guided and taught how to behave correctly.
Both are totally dependent about the “Good will and intentions” of their caretakers.
Both need good health check-ups and regular dental care and socialization.
Both need proper living arrangements, although these arrangement may differ, some are the same - inside, bed, blanket etc.
Both thrive on routine.
Both require good sound nutrition, need love, play, and pats on the head telling them they have done a “good job.”
It would be nice if both were born of love - only of the heart and soul, but sadly neglect thrives in each group.
One big difference: Children are meant to move out and live on there own, our pets never do - until death do us part.
We have strong moral obligations to these tender beings - so in a very important way - my pets are very much my children. We will all be together one day god-willing in heaven side by side.
Comment by Linda — June 6, 2007 @ 7:07 pm
My cats are part of my family. I know they are animals. But they give so much love, kindess, consideration. To me, they are proof of God.
Comment by Jennyg — June 6, 2007 @ 7:10 pm
Well lets suppose Americans love pets too much.
What do we do, undertake psychotherapy to reduce our love of pets and by how much? I guess we would have to first define a “love of pets scale” and devise tests to determine if we suffer from this affliction. We would probably have to be tested, perhaps randomly, to be sure we don’t start loving too much. Would our “love of our pets” medical records be confidential? Would excess pet love be grounds for denial of employment, credit, or liability insurance? Is pet excessive love acquired or hereditary? Should two people with excessive pet love be allowed to marry?
I’m sure glad I now have a new condition to worry about. First the book, then the movie? Do Americans watch too many reality shows?
Comment by MFEMFEM — June 6, 2007 @ 7:16 pm
Comment by Linda — June 6, 2007 @ 7:07 pm
very nicely said. especially like what you said here:
“We have strong moral obligations to these tender beings – so in a very important way – my pets are very much my children. We will all be together one day god-willing in heaven side by side.”
I can only hope i give them what they give me.
Comment by straybaby — June 6, 2007 @ 7:19 pm
Mom101: You really shouldn’t be calling yourself a “mom” after all.
Mom=short for mother.
Mother=The term mother refers to a person with stereotypical traits of a mother such as nurturing and other-centeredness.
You just don’t fit the bill on this one.
Comment by Nabiya — June 6, 2007 @ 7:30 pm
Wow. After reading the comments here, I had to look up this mom101. What a sick bunch of “mothers” all of them. Kept getting angrier the more I read. None of them should have pets, ever.
“Can’t wait for cats to die”. Geez, I can’t wait for “her” to die. Not soon enough. Good riddance.
Comment by VJ — June 6, 2007 @ 8:07 pm
Christie clearly has other unrelated issues.
Okay, I kind of am lost at this point… obviously I didn’t link to you, that was someone else, which you appeared to figure out later on.
My issues with Gary Bauer are political.
Comment by Christie Keith — June 6, 2007 @ 8:21 pm
Linda,
Thank you for putting into words how I feel too. Truer words have never been said.
Katie
Comment by Katie — June 6, 2007 @ 8:43 pm
I find most of the comments on that blog deeply disturbing, and I’m shocked. I kinda thought I was done being shocked after the past 2 1/2 months, but turns out I’m not.
I just don’t get it.
Comment by Kim — June 6, 2007 @ 8:47 pm
Kim: I was shocked, too, but I found this on her site: “Mild depression coupled with the standard hormonal dementia etc.”.
Sounds like she’s still sick and doesn’t realize it.
Comment by Nabiya — June 6, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
I do what I do and don’t care what others think. Some people say “it’s just a dog…” I don’t feel that way. I feel the human/animal bond is a strong one and good for both of us. My dog has taught me to be more patient, more loving, less selfish, among other things.
I spend lots of quality time with my dog and spend lots of money on him but that’s my business! I don’t find him trendy at all and would never abandon him in a time of crisis. I believe that it is important for my dog to be happy, healthy and well behaved!
I am a career woman and have no desire for children at this time in my life. I prefer my 4 legged fur kid instead.
Just my 2 cents! I love you pet parents!!
Eileen & Tater Tot
Comment by Eileen — June 6, 2007 @ 11:09 pm
There can never be too much love for our pets! They are family. I adopted my little one from the local shelter—he was going to be euthanized. I saved a life and got so much more in return. Love all animals large and small!
Comment by Eileen — June 6, 2007 @ 11:13 pm
Humm I really must be an odd creature. I’ve had cats and dogs (and other pets) since I was a child.
I’ve had children and I’ve adopted children and I still have animal children. I worry about them just as I worry about my human children.
I’ve never loved one of the animals less because of the children. My oldest is out on his own and he has two cats and a dog. I must have taught him something right or wrong. He’s worried about his cat that needed sub q fluids for weeks because of a liver problem and he learned to give the sub q fluids too.
My other two children still live at home and help with the animals and love them and cry when they are sick just like I do. I must be teaching them something too right or wrong.
we’ve given Sub q fluids to ferrets and cats and the two at home (teenagers) can give the fluids and do when needed.
Mom 101 its sad what you are teaching your children.
OH and someone on Mom 101 commented how their dogs use to be on the Christmas cards but now its the Children. Guess I messed up again since this year my cards contained a photo of the two teenagers and the three dogs. It took me tons of pictures before everyone was looking at the camera :)
Comment by Maureen (Lilly and Lucy's mom) — June 6, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
you know, i must come from another planet or something because in my world, pets and children always went together. we always had at least one pet in the house while growing up, and we took in many a distressed stray over the years… people as well as animals. did my folks love the pets more than the children? of course not! in many cases they adopted an animal because one of the kids brought it home! my parents felt, and so do i, that having a pet teaches a child to have respect for other living beings. as children, none of us was inclined to be in the least bit abusive, but if we had been, we’d have gotten a serious lickin’. feeding, grooming and exercising the pets taught us responsibility, looking after a sick or injured pet taught us compassion, the loss of a pet taught us about mortality. breeding our pets and watching them bear children taught us about sex. as adults, the cycle began anew when we had children and animals both. our pets were always considered part of the family… it’s not a new phemonenon at all. today there is indeed more expense involved, and certainly more research. in my day, you didn’t need a degree in toxicology to figure out what was in the pet’s food dish. a trip to the vet was a pretty rare event because in general the animals were extremely healthy. they really didn’t need toys because there was always a willing child to play with. .they didn’t need their own furniture (and still don’t in our house, although we’re looking at pet stairs for our oldest) because they were totally welcome to share ours. as to love, well i’d be surprised if mr bauer loved anything unconditionally, so it’s not surprising that he doesn’t understand why anyone would love an animal.
Comment by explodinghed — June 7, 2007 @ 4:58 am
“… they {pets} live in a different moral universe than man.”
….Ok, so I took a week off to address house problems (my toilet is a bucket now, the city is harassing me), try to clean up the accumulated detritus of my life…then finally felt able to once again look at the immense failure of government and the immorality of companies and start reading blogs again…..to return to news of acetaminophin in pet food…..and now this article….
Well, I can only tell you that dogs and cats certainly do live in a different moral universe than people. They daily forgive beatings, abuse, neglect and continue to stand by their people. Why is it ***h*les like this always are DIVIDING the universe up into US and THEM? I’d say it’s to uphold the erroneous ideation of their own moral superiority. Which, in my estimation, is what got us into the kind of moral quagmires we face today to begin with…..the “I’m better than you because……” Bah…..may he dine on melachicken, E. coli beef and brush his teeth with antifreeze.
Comment by CathyA — June 7, 2007 @ 5:02 am
I am elated that you brought up the topic of consumerism in the context of pet ownership. You are exactly right. It is foolish to equate the giving of materialistic gifts with loving your pet. Pets want your time and attention.
The boom in pet accessories (not to mention pets as accessories) is hurting our earth. How many plastic toys can one dog have? As pet owners we need to be mindful of the pet products we are purchasing. We are 71.1 million strong and growing. My latest blog entry is devoted to this topic. http://thisgreenlife.wordpress.....on-strong/
Comment by GreenChick — June 7, 2007 @ 6:44 am
OH GOOD LORD PEOPLE
I am not truly waiting for my cat to die. It was a facetious comment made in the spirit of a running theme on my blog of how difficult she is. Do I need to take you through the essay line by line and explain it to you? Or are you all just so riled up before you get there that you’re already ready to convict and hang me?
I will be generous here and say that you are all hurting after the horrible pet food incident, you are angry, and a post like mine out of context was a good target for your emotions. I am trying not to assume that you are just nasty people who go on blogs and generally post venomous, hurtful anonymous comments, despite the fact that that is what some of the members here have done.
The funny thing is, I’d be the first person to come out and agree with the spirit of this post - it’s not possible to love animals too much. When I first came here I was nodding vigorously in agreement—to say nothing of my complete disdain for Gary Bauer.
Moving on.
Comment by Mom101 — June 7, 2007 @ 6:52 am
mom101,
please re-read. yes some comments were addressed to you, but many were directed at the post and comments as a whole. you didn’t just say you were waiting for your cat to die, you had many comments from people that were less than generous in their views/treatments of pets. as a whole, the entry/comments is a very sad reflection . . . imo.
Comment by straybaby — June 7, 2007 @ 8:15 am
curiosity got the better of me, and i looked at that blog entry about how pets were “demoted” after children became part of the family. it certainly was interesting, but not surprising, really… a lot people are all about what pleases themselves, aren’t they? i sometimes wonder what motivates people to acquire pets. i can’t remember at any point in my life thinking, “i want a pet”. it was always an animal in distress that needed a home who became a new member of the household. maybe that’s why nobody’s ever been “demoted”. we never got a pet to fill a void… we made room for a fellow creature that desperately needed a home. of course, we developed relationships, some very affectionate and some not so much, depending on the personality of the animal. when children arrived, the pets, who incidentally never forgot about how and why they came to be with us, seemed to know instinctively that the caterwauling bundle of pink, hairless flesh had to be accommodated. for the most part, they were very gracious about it. i certainly didn’t find them annoying. obviously they had needs to be met: feeding, brushing, exercise, a kind pat on the head, a few soft words. what’s the big deal? i was never so self-involved, or so totally in “mommy mode” that it was much of an inconvenience to give the pet a few brisk strokes or a treat of some kind. did they get less attention when a new baby was around? of course!. so did the husband, the older children, other family members, friends… babies take up a *lot* of space! did i love my pets or my husband or my family or my friends any less? heck no! it’s not a contest, it’s *family*, pets included!
Comment by explodinghed — June 7, 2007 @ 11:54 am
Oh, another reason dog are like children: they both need potty training. Guess which is the easiest?????
Comment by Linda — June 7, 2007 @ 2:43 pm
Comment by explodinghed — June 7, 2007 @ 11:54 am
“i was never so self-involved, or so totally in ‘mommy mode’ that it was much of an inconvenience to give the pet a few brisk strokes or a treat of some kind.”
This is actually a key point. I wonder if it ever occurred to any of these new parents who suddenly found their pets to be an “obnoxious annoyance” that the reason might be the sudden withdrawal of time and attention. Heck - ANYONE who’s been getting rgular attention one day, and NO attention the next - starts to get a little miffed about it - *people* included!
If these new parents had put a plan in place to make sure the pets were still getting some attention on a regular basis after the baby came, I bet they would have found out that the pets they “formerly loved” weren’t actually so “suddenly obnoxious” after all!
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 7, 2007 @ 4:10 pm
For E., who’s justifiably angry about the pet food industry:
Obviously the pet food industry is not waking up - therefore, my approach is proactive, rather than reactive. I’ve lost one pet to cancer, I’m determined to not lose any more to anything that is preventable.
My solution has been to become educated in pet nutrition - equal to or greater knowledge base on nutrition than that of my own vet. This education has given me the knowledge to stay one step ahead of the pet food poison problems, and NOT be one more client with a food-related cause of sick pets.
My vet knows I’ll argue with him about what is and is not good for my pets, AND I can - and will - provide data that they can’t argue with to back up my views on what is and is not healthy for my pets.
There is a rough period when when you start this process, particularly with a new vet…but being able to go toe-to-toe with them and back up my statements - and getting them to understand - makes it worthwhile, and reduces the chance that someone else will suffer for lack of knowledge.
I *highly* recommend self-education in medical topics, veterinary care especially, but for your own human care as well. (Yes, that does mean buying real medical books that vets and doctors would be buying in their educational process.)
The more that people understand, then the more pressure that can be brought to bear by KNOWLEDGABLE consumers - AND vets - even if simply “voting with your wallet” and making different purchases.
Comment by stonecoldsober — June 7, 2007 @ 8:41 pm