Triggered by a news item (source) yesterday morning, I felt I had to write this column (aka post).
The topic: Pets
The news: The number of kittens dumped this summer increased by 3x over last year
those who own Pets are in essence Slaveholders
For decades we are discussing the fact that we humans use animals for our own benefit. In all sorts of industries. For- what seems to be - ages, we are debating this topic. The topic of whether we are ok with the status quo, whether we have to adapt, or as I propose, whether we shall take this discussion to the max. Leave animals in peace and never try to benefit from them against their free will.
Our Wrong
...with regards to breeding and growing animals for their fur is a discussion that already started before I saw the dawn of light. These days most of us are of the opinion: Fur-for-Human use, is bad.
...by killing whales is something plenty of cultures around the world agree with, except a few.
...in killing sharks for their fins (to eat) is countered by (again) a few cultures around the world.
...with regard to keeping animals captive in what we call a zoo is an ongoing debate. While debating, we continue to keep zoos open.
...towards breeding and growing cows, pigs, chickens and whatnot to end up on our dinner plates, may seem a big topic, though we - as a collective - tend to eat more meat year-on-year.
...by keeping pets isn't a topic.
...in killing all sorts of insects - for some, on a daily bases - isn't recognised at all as a topic of concern.
Pets
The proponents of holding pets may seem to have good reasons. Pets are fun. Pets bring happiness at home. Pets give pleasure to kids. Pets prevent peeps from feeling lonely. Pets may not only be loved by their owners but also brings love at home. Pets aren't like humans, they are not consciously aware like humans. Pets don't have the higher intelligence we humans possess.
These may all seem valid reasons, especially when we accept the fact that animals are a lower class than humans, a class that we can exploit to serve our needs.
Really?
Animals can be treated like products and objects?
Fortunately, an increasing amount of tech innovations will allow us to render the use of animals to zero. AI in combination with Robotics will take over the roles we give our pets. In the meantime, we shall change our attitude towards animals, and pets in particular and change our behaviours accordingly.
Numbers
I wonder if many peeps amongst us are against holding pets. Looking at the figures (source) about pets in my country (the country of the low lands aka the Netherlands), it doesn't seem to be the case. More than 27 million pets in a country with 7 million households. That's about 4 pets per household on average! Official figures state around 55% of households keep pets which basically means around 7 pets per household on average. With a population of 18 million peeps, we are close to 1,5 times the number of pets to the number of citizens.
Would you conclude more than just a few society members are against pets?
No to Pets?
Perhaps some believe holding pets isn't for them, perhaps some believe pets shouldn't be allowed. But I wouldn't be surprised when this group is tini tiny. Since holding pets is so common! Buying a new pet is something we seem to do in a blink of an eye. At the same time, when we don't want the pet anymore, we simply dump them. As quite a few households seem to do this summer with their cats and kittens. Pet owners taking it to the next level.
Political Party Fighting for Animal Rights
In my country, a bit more than two decades ago, the first political party was established focussing on animal rights: "Partij voor de Dieren" aka - translated into English - "Party for the Animals". For two decades this party is fighting for the rights of animals. With some moderate success. I suppose the fur topic is pretty much history. A large part of Dutch society - my country of living - isn't condoning anything regarding fur anymore. Perhaps this party also achieved a bit better treatment and use of animals for testing of new products. Though this political party also believe zoos shall be dismantled, no real progress on that front. While an increasing number of peeps think that we shall not hold animals in captivity, in zoos, most of them go with their kids and young ones to the zoo. The argument: "My kid wants to go to the zoo; We can't just deny that!" Owww ok, when our kid wants something, we shall grant that wish at all time? Even if that goes against our own views?
On all other topics of humans versus animals, this party didn't achieve much or isn't even touching them.
Animals in Zoos versus Animals at Home
Regarding pets, this party doesn't seem to be of the opinion that holding pets at home is quite similar to holding animals in zoos. Not that this party isn't trying to give more 'rights' to pets. For instance, they proposed a decision period before a pet is bought and delivered. This is to prevent impulse purchases. The House of Commons aka the Parliament voted in favour of such a ruling. However, the responsible minister isn't doing anything. Such a cooldown period isn't remotely touching the topic of holding pets and what this in reality means.
We shouldn't be surprised when a political party focussing on animal rights, isn't voicing or discussing the fact that holding pets is similar to holding animals in a zoo, we can't expect a larger part of society to have such views.
Or can't we? For many readers and writers in our own HIVE community, the concept of politicians and governments is evil anyways. When so, no political party has to show the correct path for us. We shall determine and decide on our own. Why do we never debate this topic? Why do we continue to buy and hold pets? And why do we simply dump them whenever we are done with them?
Why more Pet Dumping this Summer?
When our governments forced us to be at home more, during the recent two years of (semi) lockdowns, the number of families buying pets skyrocketed (source). The news today: 3x more kittens being dumped in the street, woods and whatnot.
No clear view of whether this is the direct result of the lockdowns, but sounds quite reasonable. During the lockdowns the number of pets purchased was sky-high. Even if the percentages of dumpers versus holders stay the same, the absolute amount of dumpers increases by definition.
Others say: The dumping happens because pet shelters are full. As if that is a different reason pfff. Full shelters are a direct result of many more families getting rid of their pets. A relation one can't simply omit, or deny.
Pets equals Slaves equals Trash seems to be the situation
Perhaps a strong statement, but what is the difference? Does a pet have the ability to do whatever he or she wants? Does a pet have the freedom to go anywhere he or she wants? Does a pet not have owners? Owners that rule over their freedom? What is this different to being a slave? When pets are slaves, what does this mean for their owners? And when we direct our pets to act upon our commands? Owners of pets are equal to slaveholders.
And even worse. When we are done with our pets, for whatever reason, we dump them. Some even kill their pets. Others kill them indirectly by leaving them wherever. That fact makes these (former) pet owners, these former slaveholders, killers. When trying to be a bit more positive and a bit less aggressively worded: Pets equals trash at best.
Speak Your Mind
Or not 😆
all media by edje unless stated otherwise
