Is it cruel to breed animals as pets?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Lilalena, Oct 20, 2010.

  1. Lilalena Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    266
    This was one of the posts in a previous thread about cruelty to animals.
    It was never addressed properly there so I was a bit disappointed.
    It's a question I'm interested in and my answer to it is

    YES. Because the situation only benefits humans. The animal is trapped in an unnatural environment, a 'home' to us but a prison to it.

    If your answer is no, how do you rationalize it?
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2010
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    When talking about domesticated animals I would think that there are very good breeders out there that take great care in making absolutely sure there animals are well cared for and receive only professional vets care and proper nourishment along with room to jump around in. There's always those inhumane breeders out there as well and I do not agree with what they do in any of their methods of breeding their animals. So that is my opinion, find the bad breeders and stop them and only buy from breeders that are treating their animals well and you can confirm that. Also good breeders do not make their breeding animals have more than one or two breedings a year therefore keeping them in fit condition and not just wearing them out over breeding them like some do.

    That said I really do not like owning any "pets" domesticated or otherwise and have not done so for over 50 years now. But I cannot change others minds that want a pet and do not understand like I do what those animals go through to become their pets because if they did they wouldn't want any either. I hope one day "pets" won't be needed by people in order to show love and affection but they channel that love to other humans that need it more.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    My cat is my pet. She can hunt and is perfectly free to wander off if she wants. Yet she chooses to come home after roaming in the afternoons and sleep on my bed and eat nice food and nutrient loaded milk designed specifically for her metabolism. Yeah, poor girl. I'm so cruel to her. I'm sure she'd rather be sleeping in some muck and leaves under a bush and eating rats and rabbits.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    And no...she's not a purebred with a hundred and one genetic diseases, so please don't level that charge at me...she's a normal moggy and I chose her because she was the smallest in the litter and got bullied. Soooo cruel.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. SilentLi89 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    263
    I don't really think being a pet is so bad if you are loved and cared for. Basically children are pets (you feed, love, play with, nuture, and train...etc) until they grow up and my life as a child didn't feel like prison at all. If I were born as someone/something's pet and they loved me, cared for me and gave me the attention I needed. I would probably be just peachy. Maybe animals in the same situations feel differently, but I could never know what each individual pet values and what they do not. Of course I don't have any pets that were bred to be pets they came about because people left their dogs unattended... Personally I think it is a waste for animals to be bred as pets, when there are so many "accidents" whom you will love just as much, but I do not think it is cruel at all.
     
  9. Lilalena Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    266
    I meant cruel in the way that it turns animals into a commodity.

    I don't mean cruel in terms of the way they are treated day by day, but in terms of curtailing their ability to live in the wild and, especially, their freedom to not get neutered.

    I'm not saying you shouldn't have pets - we had 2 beloved pets who died of old age some years ago and it was traumatic for the family - a pet dog and pet monkey. But at the same time as having pets don't you always have the feeling that if they knew what they were missing out on - if their other option was a tropical savannah, for instance, i hardly think they would have chosen our house to live in.

    I'm not that interested in the reasoning that they could get hunted and end up dead in the forest if they weren't pets. Or if they could end up getting killed by other animals. I suppose (as silly as it sounds) I'm talking about how they don't get to maximize their potential, their creative powers, in a domesticated environment. It seems that as pets, animals enrich our lives more than ours can ever enrich theirs.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2010
  10. Lilalena Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    266
    Humans grow up after a sheltered childhood and then there's talk about getting out into the "real world", facing "real" challenges, searching for what can give "meaning" to your life. Pets never get the chance to leave childhood.

    (I'm aware this is assuming that there's such a thing as maturity for animals.)
     
  11. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    We're talking of pets as if they have the same desires as humans, though. The need to prove yourself as an adult, to find meaning for your life, to face challenges.

    I'll go ask my cat, but good luck translating 'Neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo' into an understandable answer.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    You'd be suprised...

    http://www.catchow.com/SearchResults.aspx?topicId=8&catId=1
     
  13. Lilalena Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    266
    We can't help but do that. It's called anthropomorphism. There is no point in having pets if we're not going to be anthropomorphic and treat them as friends or family members. I'm not trying to challenge our way of interpreting animals as though they were humans - I'm saying we only interpret it in so far as it serves our needs.


    How do you know she wouldn't rather be sleeping in some muck and eat rats and rabbits? That is what cats naturally eat. You assume your cat has the same likes and dislikes as you -because this serves your need for expression.
    but you can't assume that processed food is inferior to natural food, and that it would benefit from being in its own habitat interacting mainly with its own species - because these assumptions would not serve your need for tidiness in your home, and your need for expression.

    I'm saying if we're going to be anthropomorphic with animals - why not take it all the way and assume they prefer to be in their natural habitat, eating natural food, getting to interact more with their own species?

    By the way just to be clear I'm not saying YOU are selfish. I'm saying WE humans IN GENERAL, are being selfish. Including me - I loved my childhood pets as much as you love your cat. I appreciated their brilliance and even what I interpreted as their "wit" as much as you appreciate your cat's intelligence.

    Our monkey used to attract all the cats and dogs in the neighbourhood and there were afternoons when we would find them quietly gathered before her, looking up to her while she made a lot of arm movements. It was as though she was head of the local animal council or something. This is the truth. Of course my interpretation is "anthropomorphic".

    I realise there is a misinterpretation here that I'm making a PERSONAL attack on pet owners.

    I'm saying that even though we love our pets - there is something a bit unethical about the idea of keeping pets - the commodity angle

    Finally
    I'm surprised no one has objected to the idea of neutering.
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2010
  14. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    I'm a dog breeder so that's the only species I can speak to, but dogs are a special case. They were the first animal to be domesticated, and they domesticated themselves because they were attracted to our garbage piles. They are a pack-social species with an intense curiosity and a strong sense of hierarchy, so it was not much of a stretch for them to adapt to a multi-species pack, and to respect the authority of the members who were clearly more capable of leading the pack to happiness and prosperity: the humans.

    Of course individuals of the species Canis lupus surely differ from one another as much as any other creatures, and many (if not most, or perhaps nearly all) of the wolves were not attracted to this deal. However, the few who were (DNA analysis suggests that all dogs are descended from a very tiny number of original lazy adventurers) were quite happy with the arrangement, and their descendants still are.

    Dogs do not regard their homes as "prisons" and in the vast majority of cases will return to it gladly if they're separated by accident. One of ours managed to squeeze through the open window of a parked car twelve miles from home, and was halfway home, going in exactly the right direction (better than I could have done), when someone spotted him and called us.

    Dogs regard their family as their pack and their people as pack mates. They regard their chores as service to the pack, although many of them are downright fun anyway, such as herding cattle, barking at strangers, licking our faces when we're sad, or injecting a little mayhem into an otherwise boring day.

    Cats also self-domesticated. During the early days of civilization, when agricultural technology became so efficient and productive that we needed to build granaries to store food, cats found the rodents in the granaries to be a steady source of food and they settled in. They soon found that grateful humans left tasty treats for them and even let them sleep inside their warm houses, in order to encourage them to stick around and keep doing the job.

    Like most solitary predators, cats are incredibly lazy--sleeping about 16 hours per day--and greatly appreciate the life of leisure we provide for them.

    OK, I said I only understood dogs and here I'm teaching you about cat psychology too. I've clearly had more experience with pets than you have or you wouldn't be asking such a patently absurd question.

    We also have parrots and with birds the situation is much different. Birds exhibit a phenomenon known as "imprinting." When they first open their eyes (with parrots that's about one or two weeks after hatching), they figure that whoever or whatever is feeding them must be their parent, and they "imprint" on that species--and any other species that lives in the nesting area and is clearly accepted by the parents as family, like the dogs and cats.

    So a hand-fed bird actually regards himself as a human, and so living among humans is not only not a "prison," it's his preference.

    This can be regarded in many ways, but before you jump to the conclusion that we're taking the poor birds out of their natural habitat and forcing them to become civilized, remember that parrots are the most intelligent birds, probably more intelligent than any mammal except apes and some of the cetaceans. Parrots are active and curious, and love to learn new things. We made Rube Goldberg contraptions out of welding plates, nuts and bolts for one of our macaws, and she always figured out how to disassemble them. One day we stumbled onto a supply of left-handed nuts and bolts. It took her three days to figure that out, and she was so happy that she was bouncing up and down and squawking with glee.

    A human habitation contains so many wonderful things to satisfy a parrot's curiosity that you have to lock them out of some of your rooms. One fellow came home and found his grand piano flat on the floor because his parrot had taken the legs off.

    The only way we have of determining whether our companion animals are happy is whether they look and act happy. Our dogs, cats and parrots certainly do.
     
  15. Mr MacGillivray Banned Banned

    Messages:
    527
    man was domesticated before dog.
     
  16. Pinwheel Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,424
    by a woman....?
     
  17. Mr MacGillivray Banned Banned

    Messages:
    527
    mother-in-law
     
  18. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    If she wanted that lifestyle she wouldn't choose to come home after roaming in the afternoons. Ya know, because if she preferred sleeping in muck she'd sleep in the muck, rather than come home to my bed.
     
  19. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    That's because it's necessary to control the population. There's a good reason cats and dogs give birth to 5-10 young at a time...because the wild is a dangerous place, and many will die before reaching maturity. Large litters is hedge against this. Living with humans is much safer than living in the wild. Life expectancy doubles, and without the threat of cold, predators or lack of food...virtually all young will live to maturity. Neutering prevents overpopulation.
     
  20. Lilalena Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    266
    NOTE: Multiquote facility doesn't seem to be working. Anyway,
    MACGILL:
    "man was domesticated before dog."
    I was going to say, domesticated by his own species is fine but animals domesticated by human species doesnt seem ok.
    BUT THEN:FRAGGLEROCKER:
    "They were the first animal to be domesticated, and they domesticated themselves because they were attracted to our garbage piles....."
    Ok , that's quite good, that answers part of my question.

    "I've clearly had more experience with pets than you have or you wouldn't be asking such a patently absurd question."

    I can accept that it can be seen as absurd, but it can't be PATENTLY absurd - now that's offensive. You do clearly have more experience with pets than me, and that's great for my question. But there are parts of it I am still looking for answers for.

    I can admit CRUEL is too strong a word - I think I should have paraphrased to : How is it not unethical to turn animals into commodities by breeding them as pets and pre-programming them to live in a fake Truman show-like world?" Of course they will always come back to your house, they've been programmed to do so, and their sense of territoriality ensures they will always do so / experiencing imprinting stage in front of you ensures they will do so.

    Please note, I don't have any sense or conviction that animal-breeders are criminals. My question is more about a nagging feeling that something we do that gives us pleasure, may not be all right.

    "The only way we have of determining whether our companion animals are happy is whether they look and act happy"
    This is astonishing. Your first statement, that they domesticated themselves, gives a more objective basis for the possibility of their being happy in domestication.

    MACGYVER:
    "That's because it's necessary to control the population. "
    This is obvious. But the question was more about - how would you feel if a complete stranger had you neutered - because it's necessary to control the population?
     
  21. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    Wrong. Cats that are unhappy at home will wander off.
     
  22. Pinwheel Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,424
    Yeah, I had a neighbour who had a cat that left after a kid they had kept pestering it.
     

Share This Page