Writer's Block: Pet central
May. 3rd, 2010 10:17 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ithika[Error: unknown template qotd]
Why are animal rights activists always picking the stupid fight when I hear about them on the internet? This is nearly as dumb as Sea Kittens. They are fucking fish.
Legally, you own your dog/cat/whatever. You aren't their guardian, you're their owner.
As far as I know, 'Guardian' is a term you'd use for a child, or an elderly or disabled person that you care for. There are probably other terms that I'm not aware of. To me, it implies all sorts of things about the relationship which I suppose you could say exist in your relationship with your dog - you provide food and shelter for them, protect them from harm, you might bathe them, but I think that 'guardian' suggests a human level of interaction.
Wouldn't it be offensive for someone who is under guardianship to be put into the same category as a dog? I'm trying to think of another example here, but I'm sure it's pretty offensive.
If this is because people used to own slaves and people have gone 'well, it's not ok to own people so it's not ok to own an animal,' they need to think seriously about where they're taking their fight. Regardless as to whether people actually are better than animals or if we just have a bias towards our own kind, owning a dog is not the same as owning a man.
If you're concerned about how your pet feels about the owner/pet relationship, maybe you shouldn't own a pet, because changing the term you use from 'owner' to 'guardian' isn't going to change a damn thing. At the end of the day, you choose the food your pet is going to eat, when it gets to go outside, when it comes inside, where it lives, where it goes, what toys it has to play with, what friends it has. It's entirely dependent on your care for the things it needs to live. Unless you are going to change the term to 'guardian' and with that make the dog go and do things a human under guardianship might do? Like go to school?
Please. There are so many more important issues than what you say you are to your pet. I have loved all of my pets, and I am quite confident that me being their owner rather than their guardian has made one speck of difference in their lives.
Why are animal rights activists always picking the stupid fight when I hear about them on the internet? This is nearly as dumb as Sea Kittens. They are fucking fish.
Legally, you own your dog/cat/whatever. You aren't their guardian, you're their owner.
As far as I know, 'Guardian' is a term you'd use for a child, or an elderly or disabled person that you care for. There are probably other terms that I'm not aware of. To me, it implies all sorts of things about the relationship which I suppose you could say exist in your relationship with your dog - you provide food and shelter for them, protect them from harm, you might bathe them, but I think that 'guardian' suggests a human level of interaction.
Wouldn't it be offensive for someone who is under guardianship to be put into the same category as a dog? I'm trying to think of another example here, but I'm sure it's pretty offensive.
If this is because people used to own slaves and people have gone 'well, it's not ok to own people so it's not ok to own an animal,' they need to think seriously about where they're taking their fight. Regardless as to whether people actually are better than animals or if we just have a bias towards our own kind, owning a dog is not the same as owning a man.
If you're concerned about how your pet feels about the owner/pet relationship, maybe you shouldn't own a pet, because changing the term you use from 'owner' to 'guardian' isn't going to change a damn thing. At the end of the day, you choose the food your pet is going to eat, when it gets to go outside, when it comes inside, where it lives, where it goes, what toys it has to play with, what friends it has. It's entirely dependent on your care for the things it needs to live. Unless you are going to change the term to 'guardian' and with that make the dog go and do things a human under guardianship might do? Like go to school?
Please. There are so many more important issues than what you say you are to your pet. I have loved all of my pets, and I am quite confident that me being their owner rather than their guardian has made one speck of difference in their lives.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2010-05-03 02:33 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-05-09 05:16 am (UTC)Also what is your icon? It is amusing!
(no subject)
Date: 2010-05-03 05:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-05-09 05:13 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-05-04 11:14 am (UTC)I don't think so. It's just a word. You're not putting them in the same category, you're just using the same word. It says nothing and isn't attempting to say anything about children under guardianship and you'd basically have to be trying to be offended to actually get offended by that. Other than that though I agree with you. Though I don't care about this issue at all :P
(no subject)
Date: 2010-05-09 05:15 am (UTC)It's a thing I thought was dumb and I decided to use it to procrastinate. :) I don't overly care about it either.