Author
|
Topic: Lousy Cur (Read 759 times) |
|
Feagwath
Adept
Posts: 12
Reputation: 7.01
Rate Feagwath
  
|
 |
Lousy Cur
« on: 2003-08-23 17:13:14 » |
 |
It is estimated that the ancestors of what is now western culture have been domesticating the gray wolf for about one hundred and thirty-five thousand years. In this time, the dog has been trained to perform many roles and tasks, and for much of our culture today, is drawn hopelessly into the archetype of man’s best friend. Many maintain that this history of servitude and companionship to humans in general should keep dogs, by tradition as people’s personal companions. However, after all this time, the dog remains a noisy and irritating creature, completely useless in a society that no longer relies on hunting or herding, giving few valid reasons for it to be valued so highly in roles that no longer exist.
Dogs are violent creatures with instincts for hunting and killing. The experience of a dog’s bite is not a very pleasant one. Once you are bitten, a memory is made that will return again and again, adding trauma to your life. As a child I’d often have great anxiety while walking down the sidewalk in front of my house. I would worry that a dog would be loose somewhere in my vicinity, and would attack me where I stood. According to a special report by Jeffrey J. Sacks, MD, et al, between the period of 1986 to 1994, an estimated eight hundred thousand US residence sought medical treatment for dog bites (839). But it would seem, dog owners don’t even consider this when going out to purchase one of these dangerous animals. Dogs do not seem to be viewed with objectivity much at all by dog owners, they seem to only care about the ideal situation, in which a dog is completely loyal, well exercised, socialized, and fed.
An example of dog owners nonobjective thinking can be seen in their non-acceptance of other culture’s consumption of dog meat. Koreans are called barbaric for eating dogs, but there is no real justification for this name calling. People of the united states frequently consume pigs, which are clearly a more intelligent animal than the dog, and are not associated with the many problems that are attributed to the dog either. The head of a anti-Korean, dog meat eating movement Bridgette Bardot was not even aware (as according to Histoire des festins insolites et de la goinfrerie) of the great amounts of dog meat consumed in France during the time when France was under siege, during the Franco-Prussian War. Being French herself, perhaps she'd care not to remember. The circumstances in much of Korea do not allow for such discrimination in the choice of protein sources, especially made just to satisfy the cultural whims of westerners.
The exercise that dogs need is quite hard to provide by the average working family. Unless the owner lives in a rural area with a very large lot of land, dogs usually cannot get the exercise they need in enclosed yards of the suburbs. Unlike cats, dogs cannot move freely through the vast arrays of fences that separate the small areas making up suburbs, imprisoned in small yards for most of their lives. Being pack animals, dogs seem to fare much better when subjected to socialization, and most dog owners have only one dog. To relieve the feeling of loneliness, dogs naturally try to communicate in the easiest way possible, barking.
Walking down most any neighborhood street of the present, one is very likely to hear the barking of dogs. In a poll by The Humane Society of the United States, an estimated 39% of American households have at least one dog. This barking is usually quite loud and can be heard over vast distances. This noise disturbs the very nature of the community, undermining peacefulness with violent, repetitive noise. Simple activities like reading a book, or taking a walk can be continuously interrupted, needlessly filling millions of people’s lives with stress. There’s no telling how many hours of sleep are lost to dogs barking into the night.
What good do dogs bring to the world? This is the question that must be asked in order to gauge their usefulness versus their undesirable points.
I believe most of their attraction has to do with sentimental nostalgia. As children, people saw dogs on television, and with other families. The TV show Lassie stared a hero dog that rescued her owner several times. In reality, this dog knew nothing of what it was doing, but it is lovely to believe that something from the realm of nature would be so alike ourselves. This anthropomorphism can be seen in literature such as fairy tales, since the beginning of recorded history. People fear the wrath of animal spirits after the hunt, so they pray and honor those spirits, attempting to form connections with them. Everyone, in the end at least, is at the whim of nature, and an unquenchable fear dwells within us all for our very lives. The pet, including the dog, seems to connect us with this unknown force of nature in a similar way, but it is only a comforting illusion, and like a blanket, must be shed in the dawn when we wake.
People also seem to keep dogs for company. They talk to them, and often believe that they understand what they are saying. It would be just as effective to talk to a stone slab. Perhaps by going through their feelings verbally, people can relieve stress. But the cost of dog owner’s stress relieve is the great stress of others due in part by the noise pollution and fear that dogs produce. It is completely unsocial and reclusive to reject humans and think you can talk with dogs instead.
It is bad for a community if its members do not participate, and turning to dogs for what people do not seem to provide for an individual is a way of giving up on society. These individuals are of no more value to society then the wildlife itself. It is painful to give up the fantasy, but life is often painful, and if someone’s fantasy interferes with the life and happiness of others so often, then it is not worth its comforting value.
When weighed objectively, the true value of the dog is rather questionable. If, as a society, we plan to provide a world without so much cause for fear, anxiety, and hatred, then phasing out the dog from our lives would be a great start. It may be a decision that would be hard on some people’s emotions; People who need to grow, and accept that keeping these incompatible animals as willing slaves is not humane or reasonable.
|
Sing to me, my spongy ones,
Of birds, and bats, and things
And all the while they'd be hung
By necks and feets and wings...
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4287
Reputation: 8.94
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:Lousy Cur
« Reply #1 on: 2003-08-23 17:59:15 » |
|
In defence of dogs
1) People who have dogs as pets tend to live longer better quality lives [1].
2) Dogs have prevented many burglaries, robberies, assaults, drowning.
3) Dogs rescue people from avalances, earthquakes, explosion sites and other disasters on a regular basis.
4) Many sensory impaired people would be immobilized without their dogs (google 'seeing eye dog').
5) Working dogs (and I bred, trained and worked border collies as working dogs) allow the use of much lower manpower levels in farming, reducing costs. They also make exploration in arctic conditions possible, and are much cheaper and arguably less error prone than mechanical sniffer systems.
6) Pet care is a major business providing employment to hundreds of thousands of people.
7) A quick test of the true personalty of a person is whether they are liked by dogs. If dogs become nervous or aggressive around a person, the odds are you don't want that person around you or those you care for.
8) Dogs accept people as they are. They might even like feagwath if he gave them a fair chance.
9) Many forms of hunting would be unthinkable without dogs.
10) Dogs are nicer than people. "If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principle difference between a dog and a man." (Mark Twain)
The arguments advanced by Feagwath could, I submit, be more successfuly used to argue in favor of cannibalism.
Hermit
PS Before asking for justification for the above, remember that Google is your friend. If you are Google impaired, consider volunteering to become potroast - as your usefulness to 21st Century man is obviously limited.
1) http://www.ovma.org/pets/human_animalbond.shtml
Pets provide their owners with unconditional love and companionship. Now there's evidence that owning a pet is also good for your health.
A study by the US Department of Health concluded that pets increased the survival rate of heart attack victims. The study revealed that 28% of heart patients with pets survived serious heart attacks, compared to only 6% of heart patients without pets.
Another study revealed that the cholesterol levels of pet owners were 2% lower than the cholesterol levels of people without pets. The risk of those pet owners having a heart attack was reduced by 4%.
Owning a pet can reduce blood pressure as effectively as eating a low-salt diet or reducing alcohol intake.
A US survey of 1,000 Medicare patients showed that 40% of the elderly sought the services of a doctor much less frequently than those without animal companions.
Nursing homes that use companion animal therapy have experienced a significant reduction in the use of prescription drugs. The overall cost of caring for seniors also dropped.
Health benefits are simply one more reason for adopting a pet. Pets make wonderful, loving companions. Consider adding a pet to your household. Your veterinarian can help you research the best pet for your family.
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4287
Reputation: 8.94
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:Lousy Cur
« Reply #2 on: 2003-08-31 08:40:58 » |
|
Much better dog story and other memetic hilarity here http://www.snopes.com/critters/edibles/dogsoup.htm
Hermit
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
|
Logged
