xcheopis Or my posts, which clearly state (repeatedly) that some people are not cut out for the responsibility for either pet or child care.
And how does the fact that child neglect and abuse exists a rationale for referring to and treating dogs and cats like children? If anything, it is sicker that Fluffy never has a day’s worry, when so many kids lack proper parenting. In an ideal world, all kids and pets would be loved and nurtured.
Nope, my pets are my kids. I was actually impregnated with Border Collie sperm and pushed out a litter shortly thereafter. I then breast fed them, weaned them and sent them off to board(er)ing school.
I know my pets aren’t actually my kids, but they are metaphorically kids, substitute kids, analogous to kids, pretend kids, or kids-in-a-box. I do not actually believe they will at some point evolve in front of my eyes, rise up on two paws, and ask for beer money.
I know my dogs aren’t children. However, my dogs are wonderful companions, (no eleanor I’m not lonely), and I just like having dogs. They make me get out every day. They give me a warm body to hug if I need one, when my husband is too squirmy. They are my running friends, and skiing buddies. They ask for so little and they give me so much. I know you can’t possibly understand this; but I know they’re not children, but they aren’t really dogs. They’re not like the dogs I had when I was a kid. My dogs are integral members of my family.
I know there are people out there who honestly believe that their dogs are indeed “people” I think that’s unhealthy. However, I also think it’s unhealthy for people who think they can reason with a four year old, or who think they should be “pals” with their children. I’m happy when both pets and children are treated well, disturbed when either are treated badly, and annoyed when either are spoiled.
And yeah it pisses me off when my SIL doesn’t want me to bring my dogs for Christmas. They will do nothing but sit quietly at my feet. If I were to ask her to come to my place but not bring her terror of a child she would be mortified. Well, every year, I leave early because I don’t like leaving my dogs in a strange house (we stay with other family) for an entire evening. One year she invited us over and told us to leave them in the car. I don’t leave my dogs in the car. It’s not safe. Allow me to put them in your backyard, or bring them in the house, or you can expect a very short visit.
I know some of you don’t understand why people keep making this comparison, but when we say things, like “would you expect us to ask you to leave your kids in the car” what we are not saying is “our dogs are human”. What we are saying is “I’m not comfortable with leaving my dog in the car”. In my case I don’t want my dog shitting in a friend’s house because my SIL makes me leave them for eight hours while she drones on about stupid shit (OK perhaps I’m using them as an excuse).
And just so you know, if there was a fire and I had to run into the building, I would indeed save the human.
I wasn’t talking to you, dipshit.
Strawman.
Here. Maybe if I link them for you it will help.
Get off your high horse. No one is insulting you or foster parents, or making less of the love they feel as opposed to the “bad natural parents” who treat their kids like crap. Get it now?
Fuck. Corrected second link
You’ll have to clamber down first, so that others might ride. Didn’t your mommy teach you to share?
I don’t feel insulted; people like you amuse me. “Oooh, but natural parents care so much for their precious darlings! You just don’t understand!”
Yeah. That’s why we have Child Protective Services, Child Labor Laws, and foster homes. The blinkers aren’t on that horse, they’re on you. Take 'em off and quit pretending there’s something extra-special wonderful about being a “natural” parent.
Um, no. Natural parents (mothers, at least, still looking for a “paternal bond” cite) have a biological bond with children they give birth to. Period. Please link my post in which I said natural parents care more.
I hate that too. I have a friend whose dog wears clothes in the winter because he’s an aging whippet. I give her the kudos on that. But I don’t like the Paris Hiltons and others who accessorize with animals. I don’t think people who do this with their pets “love” them particularly. I think it’s just a way of bringing attention to themselves.
We call our cats “the kids” or “the girls (and the boy)” but by no means traipse around with them like they’re this year’s fashion. They all act like cats.
We also have the Humane Society, PETA, and cruelty to animals laws. So, unless your point was that there are abusive parents of fur-babies and skin-babies both, I’d appreciate a clarification.
Exactly.
And if I have a guest who doesn’t like cats, I put the cats upstairs. Very simple. No harm, no foul. And I REALLY LOVE MY CATS.
You know, if instead of starting and participating in this thread everyone had gone out and worked for World Peace this would be a better place.
Shame, shame shame on all of you.
Fie.
Pets != human children. Period. Anyone who feels differently has some kind of mental disconnect. It’s not necessarily an unhealthy one, but it’s there.
“But I…” “But they…” “Studies show…” “But I feel…” “It depends on your definition of…” No. No. No. No. No.
I mean, I’m personally really glad that a whole lot of folks seem to have a relatively BENIGN delusion, but it’s still a delusion.
It is also not clear from a reading of a the abstract of Lorberbaum’s fMRI study (Depress Anxiety. 1999;10(3):99-104) whether only biological mothers or a combination of biological and adoptive mothers were studied, and we don’t have access to that journal here at work.
Kinsleys’ rat study (Nature 1999 Nov 11;402(6758):137-8) performed 2 experiments, one of which compared maze performance of females who fell into three groups - maternal (apparently currently taking care of a litter of her own pups), fosters (apparently currently taking care of a litter of someone else’s pups) and nulliparous (no pups). There were no significant differences in maze ability between the fosters and the maternals, and both outperformed the nulliparous rats.
The authors’ conclusions were that brain changes related to pregnancy and birth combined with brain changes related to taking care of young seemed to be responsible for the differences in performance. They also seemed to imply that the brain changes in pregnancy & birth might be just priming the mother’s brain for the experience of raising pups, but that the experience of raising pups was the most responsible for the improvements in memory and learning.
Both of these studies seem to me to fall quite short of proving that biological mothers are uniquely bonded with their biological offspring.
True. I hope that you’ll scream in apoplexy next time someone calls their sweetheart “Pet,” as that’s equally delusional.
I know that folks with Asperger’s syndrome have a terrible time recognizing figures of speech; I wonder whether Trunk is so afflicted, or if it’s just extreme dumbness.
Daniel
I am trying to understand what you are saying.
I think you are saying: There is a special bond between the Birth mother and the child. We are not talking the level of love but an actual bond of some sought.
I am not sure what this bond is. Is it strictly genetic? Is it the act of giving birth? How does it work with host mothers or C-sections?
What is the bond?
I know the Bio-Mother and child shared the same system for around 9 months and this is indeed a special bond.
Once the cord is cut, what is the bond that differs from an adoptive Mom?
Please forgive the coloring; I wanted to highlight a few point or questions to reduce my confusion.
BTW: I knew Eleanor was a nurse, I did not realize you were also. It is practically my family business. Both my sisters and my only Niece are nurses.
Jim
You’ve been trying to claim that “maternal instinct” is something present in all biological mothers and only biological mothers. Since many women without children also have maternal instincts and many biological mothers have either none or a very limited one, your claim is false.
“Incidentally, I do have step-children that I’ve helped raise since they were very small. I love them to death, worry for them, share their father’s pride in the wonderful women they’ve become. But honestly, there is a bond I have with my own two that I will never share with my older girls. Because I didn’t give birth to them. You can go ahead and refuse to see the science behind that if you want; plenty of people choose to do so. I don’t see it as a lack on my part or theirs. It’s just the way human chemistry works.”
Here, for starters.
Such eloquence.
It’s a strawman you dragged into the discussion. I was just pointing out the irrelevance of it.
But I’m glad to amuse you. Always happy to spread joy to others.
light strand --if you’re not lonely (or perhaps feeling alone is a better choice of phrase-lonely can be a loaded word), why do you have pets as companions? Surely you have them for the company they give you.
That’s what they are–so much so that you cannot leave them alone to visit people who may not be comfortable with them. If your little niece of nephew is that bad–ask that SIL get a sitter.
Or realize that being human entitles one to such privileges as having to go to Auntie Light Strand’s house for a boring 3 hours. I have 3 kids–and yet I still tell my SIL (whose are all at the rugrat stage) that I am no longer babyproofed, so the she needs to think carefully about letting all 3 of hers run in my house. Dogs are even more unpredictable–why should I rile up my cat? So her golden retriever doesn’t suffer anxiety? This is crazy. the dog stays home or in the car (she nixed the tied in the backyard because she didn’t want dirt in her car).
Did somebody in this thread say that pets = human children?
You know, I’ve been standing all day long and my dogs are really killing me.
Really? Thank you. Please, tell me, what is it I want for lunch?
Maternal instinct exists in females, full stop. COMPLETELY DIFFERET FROM
“Adoptive parents don’t love their kids as much as biological parents.” Also completely different from “Women share a bond with their natural children on a biological level.” Both of your projected assertions on my part are false. Quit trying to find a hidden agenda in their against adoptive parents. There isn’t one.