Have You Ever Thought About This? The Ethics of Pet Ownership | Cornell University
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ส.ค. 2024
- 🌱 If you find my work valuable, you can become a regular supporter or make a one-off contribution through the following links (thank you!): earthlinged.org... & / earthlinged
💌 Find out more about what I do & sign up for a personal weekly newsletter: earthlinged.org
📚 Download my FREE 122 page e-book: earthlinged.org...
💡 Make the switch to vegan & get all of the support you need: switchtovegan.c...
CONNECT:
👉 Find more content on Instagram: / earthlinged
👉 Follow on Facebook: / earthlingedpage
The Disclosure Podcast:
🎙️ iTunes: apple.co/3853BF2
🎙️ Spotify: spoti.fi/37ZtGVS
🎙️ RSS feed: feeds.buzzspro...
My Animal Rights Organisation/Sanctuary:
🎥 Surge: surgeactivism.org
🌳 Surge Animal Sanctuary: surgesanctuary.org
⚡ Unity Diner: (Non-profit Restaurant): unitydiner.co.uk
🎬 Land of Hope and Glory (UK ‘Earthlings’ Documentary): landofhopeandgl...
![รวมมิตร ภาพนี้ก็ฮาเหมือนกันนะเนี้ย #4 SS2 [ พากย์นรก MEME.EXE ] | easy boy](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kl86m9gnLt8/mqdefault.jpg)
We adopted 2 dogs last year and I call them my friends. We do not own them we care for them and try to give them a happy life.
wonderful! 💚
Blu Pam Marshall I like that.❤️
I have a cat, but I say she owns me as she rules my household even though she does rely on me for all her needs.
Never, ever, EVER have I referred to any of my pets as "it"
None of my friends or family call their dogs ‘it’, but then I see people on Facebook and hear strangers saying it and it boils my blood. Like how can they not see how wrong that is?
Megan Webb they might be from a group that is even more sensitive than you and they are just worried about misgendering your animal.
“Is she a boy or a girl?” sounds stranger than “is it a boy or a girl?”
Very Socratic speech, simply asking people to question themselves, nothing else... well done this is exactly the kind of leadership we are missing in the world.
1:00 "A personal pet peeve"
If you pardon the pun...
"pet" means favorite. So "pet peeve" means like your favorite thing that irritates you. Kind of an oxymoron.
I was actually appalled this pun didn't illicit laughs from the audience. Then I realized it probably wasn't intentional. Afterwards, I felt utterly disappointed and frankly depressed over this missed opportunity. But now, I'm trying my best to focus on the satisfying alliteration this statement provided, and I truly believe things are looking up. One step at a time.
@hclyrics if the audience are mainly vegans, it is probably not in their nature to laugh, as most vegans I have seen are always angry
I am a vet student and I struggle with these questions everyday
Did you finish vet school? Has that helped you come to terms with these struggles?
When I usually use the term “mine” I usually mean it as “ mine to love” such as in “my mom” or “my friend” so when I say “my dog” I don’t mean that he is my property but as someone who is mine to to love and care for :)
Yeah! More like a part of me than just property. They are part of who I am as a person :)
You see it and understand it that way and that's good, but other people would still refer to you as the dog's "owner". Again, no silver bullet here but still wrong in how we as a whole collective view pets.
Don't worry these weak individuals can't bully anyone else because they would get beat... You own your pet and love it
so basically you’re just making excuses and defending yourself because you feel personally attacked
@@karensabortionclinic7491 Nope, just stating my POV, you can have your own POV as long as you are not hurting your pets :)
Howabout leaving animals alone.
They are not for human amusement.
I rescued some feral cats. They were terrified at first, dumped at the place I volunteer at. A month later and my house is cuddle central!
Same, I have 5 cats and they were all rescue sentenced to die.
What do you feed the cats?
La Frog they weren't feral, strays perhaps, if they were truly feral your arms would be ribbons and you wouldn't be getting cuddles
born free what's more what do they feed themselves, domestic cats are bad enough at hunting, and decimating song birds etc. Feral would be even worse (but these aren't feral cats, true feral cats don't take to domestication)
@@stupidhandles They were kittens without human socialization so they were feral. They were defensive at first and took 2 months of patience for them to come out of their shells
Adopt don’t shop. 🙏
Always...
His point was that we cannot adopt without breeding these animals into existence in the first place.
@@nomad9338 are you trying to say the dogs or cats never existed before and we magically made them? 🤔
I'm pretty sure it's not true.... We did made them domestic animals... I don't see as such a bad thing
The problem is that people go extreme... Vegans also
It's black or white, all or nothing.... But that's not natural.... Nature is about balance.... That's what people have to learn first
Yeah, adopt for now... and dont get into the pet-less vegan future for now, as this will just make many people oppose veganism. And veganism is a needed "evil" for now, as we definitely need to stop the attrocities.
Adopting still requires people to support the pet food industry. No amount of adopting will ever solve the problem.
The most responsible way to behave is to boycott domestication in all forms.
I agree, and while they are here they deserve to be looked after
Absolutely.
Yea, let me get a dog , take it away from its pack/family so it mainly socialises with me, make it dependent on me for food and then claim, "look how much it loves me!".
Who hurt you?
@@Corrupted-file Who hurt you?
💯. Still people will facade it with how it is empathetic thing to do
Great topic, I’ve been thinking on this as well. I’m not even comfortable putting clothes on my dog, and only use a leash when I have to. It’s definitely important to reconsider everything we’ve deemed to be normal.
Thank you for opening this conversation up!
this is how many people love ed
⬇️
This is why ed is malnourished ⬇️
That's quite a big family
@@contentlyshane have you seen how thin his arms are that's not healthy
@@Androbench ??? hes not malnourished lmao wtf? hes healthy
@@se3rsha if you think he looks healthy , you're mad
Talking about pets as family has lead to many people believing i have significantly more siblings than i actually do...
My mom rescued a chihuahua during her trip to Mexico...so now I have a little brother😂
🤣🤣🤣
I refer to my cat as my fourlegged son. ;P
I talk about my cats the way most mothers talk about their children. 😆 I think people get sick of hearing about it!
I see my ferrets as my kids, so my friends have thought I had kids if I worded it that way. It's pretty funny. I'm a dad of 5 furkids.
It's interesting. What you say about dogs suffering Stockholm Syndrome may be true, but I think it's difficult to disentangle that from the fact that dogs are pack animals and as such see their human significant other as pack leader, and behave accordingly. I don't think it matters if all these pure dog breeds are lost. Most of them were bred only to serve humans in some way. Mongrels are the most healthy of all dogs, and mongrels they will become if left to their own devices. I wish that breeding like this would cease, as it is cruel in its own way because it engenders susceptibility to certain physical problems inherent in each of the various breeds, causing these animals to suffer.
Cats are a different story, and one which fascinates me. Cats have an emotional centre in their brain which is exactly the same as that of humans (whereas that of dogs is very different). Therefore cats are entirely capable of forming unique bonds with humans (and many other animals) as friends and companions. These bonds are not based on hierarchy, much as in human-human friendships. It is harder to become friends with most cats for this reason, so many people see them as aloof and selfish. Cats come to you if they want to, not because they need to, which makes a friendship with a cat that more meaningful, in my opinion.
Whether cat or dog (or any other animal), nonetheless close bonds can be formed without incarcerating them, without controlling them. In an ideal world, therefore, we would peacefully co-exist with other animals, with our closest friends visiting or even moving in with us, which - it is believed - is how the human-cat relationship started thousands of years ago. And as close friends, we would of course care for them and help them when they got injured or sick. My main problem with 'keeping pets' is feeding them a natural diet, because of course cats are obligate carnivores, and our meat industry is not something I want to support. I look forward to the day when I can offer my best friends lab-grown meat. My cats and I cohabit because we want to, not out of a biological drive to be a member of a pack, but because we genuinely love each other. Be cruel to a cat, and it will either go feral or go to live with somebody who's kinder. A dog will stick with its 'owner' because there's nothing worse than being rejected from the pack.
Well put
Are all human friendships really based on hierarchy? Not seeing that personally
We are merely our cat's steward. He comes and goes as he chooses. It's a glorious arrangement. I find it interesting though that everytime I take him for his checkup they must ask me how much time he spends outside and am I dousing him with chemicals to "protect" him and do I feed the appropriate diet which they claim is something akin to Purina 🤨. I have to defend myself everytime. The answer is as much time as he wants, no to chemicals, and no to Purina 😂
@@TheJakecakes Good for you! That's brilliant! I too eschew any chemicals on or in my cats unless it is life-threatening. I certainly don't de-worm or de-flea them on a regular basis, and they haven't had fleas for years! This rote application of chemicals to cats' skin when there is no need is abhorrent and just makes money for the pharma companies.
@@catjane358 Couldn't agree more!
This may be verging on an over-anthropomorphization of non-human animals...
I'm not saying that animals don't have preferences, but I do think that it's a bit of a stretch to apply a complex psychological phenomenon like Stockholm Syndrome to them. Certain types of pet-human relationships can be harmful, but I authentically think that it's entirely possible to give an pet a fantastic life; far better than the one they might've lived in the wild.
In a similar way that children thrive when they are free within reasonable boundaries, pets can thrive in this same way. Of course, this still means that most house-pets probably don't have the freedom they ought to. People who have lots of land and time to devote to the pet, on the other hand, might be well equiped to have pets in a completely ethical manner.
💯👏 👏👏 👏👏 👏
It's completely ridiculous to use Stockholm syndrome.
And he's talking about a world without companion animals. What purpose would that serve? We should cultivate better relationships with animals, not get rid of the relationships we have.
I don't think he was making a statement that Stockholm syndrome with all its psychological meaning can happen to a dog, because that would be up to a psychologist to study, and Ed never is over-assuming about his own knowledge. I think he wanted to make a comparison about the dependent relationship a pet dog has to their "owner". How can you ever assume there is true love when it is between a slave and a master, where the master feeds the slave when they are happy with them, and puts them outside when they are not? It is easier for a person to understand this issue when they imagine Stockholm syndrome. It is not hard to believe that some kind of more complex feeling than "unconditional love" might be going on inside the dog. And it is dangerous that a person who treats a dog as a person typically treats a pet to think that "unconditional love" is really the case, because then they spread that possible untruth to other people, like their own children, who will one day buy a dog because they think the dog will be their source of "unconditional love". I think that is what is important in the comparison, and not whether or not the relationship meets all the technical criteria of Stockholm syndrome.
Also, it's not about whether or not there are enough "good pet owners" out there that are willing to give an animal a truly fulfilling life (I think this is a very low number compared to the number of pet owners, but aside from that...), it's about the fact that the industry as a whole is very bad for animals. That is why so many dogs and cats are put in shelters, including kill shelters. That is why so many dogs and cats are abused in homes. If you support the pet industry, whether or not you are a good pet owner, you are supporting the horrible fate of most pets in the pet industry. You can choose to adopt instead an animal who would otherwise be discarded by society, and at that point I really do hope you are that kind of person who gives a pet a "fantastic life". But what Ed is saying at the end of the video is that, if all people start adopting and not buying from breeders, eventually there will be no more pets.
You might suggest some kind of perfect balance of "just enough" pets being bred that they aren't discarded, but how are you going to be sure - have policies and checks in place, protect pet-keeping through the law? This is a better problem to be trying to solve than the one we currently have, but even still, I disagree strongly that you can ever assume someone is better off safe in a cage than evolving naturally and freely.
@@genericusername337 Talking about dogs specifically; they are descendants of wolves (which are pack animals), and like wolves; most dogs fall into a subservient roles within a "pack". Over the course of thousands of years of selective breeding we have tamed dogs to the point where they now consider humans to be part of their "pack" (the natural pack hierarchy is recreated with the inclusion of humans). The process of this selective breeding may have been morally wrong, but we cannot change history, and so we have to deal with the consequences. If we ban the commodification of dogs, the numbers will naturally decline over time as Ed states. However, we will reach a point where dogs will be an endangered species and we’ll have to choose to keep them around or let them die out. This is an issue because currently we seek to prevent the extinction of endangered animals globally, and by letting dogs die off we would be making an exception. Therein lies a moral quandary about our responsibility to the preservation of other species generally. By what right can we make this exception?
Asides from this, if we make the argument that above all things we must minimise the suffering of animals, doesn’t it hold that therefore we should let many many species of animals die off? Because what is nature but a long period of suffering followed by a quick death? We would never make this argument of course, because we don’t truly want to minimise all suffering. We want to create a balance between suffering and “right to life”. We allow animals to suffer in the wild because we believe they have a right to life and we also believe have no right to intervene with that. Dogs have evolved to be companion animals and thus it is debatable whether their natural habitat is now with mankind. If we accept this to be the case we must also strike a balance between what is an acceptable amount of “natural suffering” against their right to life. From this it’s hard not to conclude that dogs should remain companion animals and we should do everything within our power to minimise their suffering. To not do so it to strike a contradiction in our treatment of animals, we preserve natural habitats and minimise suffering. So why no preserve the natural habitat of our domesticated dogs?
I want someone to counter this argument so I can learn. Theres probably some counter argument in whether wild dogs would naturally gravitate towards humans.
@@adammason6823 The reason that we try to protect endangered animals is because they are natural and have a chance of surviving and continuing to evolve and maintaining the ecosystem in which they live. That's why keeping endangered animals as wild as possible is so critical to the effort of helping them. If any of them were domesticated, like house-elephants, house-lions, etc. we would have the same problem with them as with dogs, but as things are, surviving their species means something very different than with dogs. With dogs, as you recognized, we have to be the ones to take care of them in a domestic setting unless we can selectively breed them out of this problem. This makes them a species much more problematic than an endangered one. As you said, we have to put on our grownup pants and deal with the moral problem we've created. Does this mean continuing to breed dogs and keeping them as pets?
Your statement of the problem seems to understand the word "natural" different than how I think it applies to the situation. You say that it is natural if it is true, like "it is natural for modern dogs to cohabit with humans." I think that it is natural if it does not depend on a made circumstance that must be artificially maintained, but, rather by the fact of some life simply living and being itself. Humans depend on humans, that is natural for us. We depend on plants because that is a source of nutrition. We don't depend on dogs, we are not dependent on or symbiotic with them in a natural sense. Dogs do depend on us, but actually supporting them in a kind way is artificial and does not come without major sacrifices from humans, so it's not natural. Still, there are lots of unnatural things that humans do that we think are worth it because they are helpful, pleasurable and/or at least not immoral. What would it look like for us to unnaturally keep up breeding dogs as morally as possible?
One: you said 'right to life', I think it's 'right to live and propagate on one's own' and not 'right to be bred by calculation by another species'. So I think they need to be able to choose when to have families, so this means interacting naturally and freely. Second, not being commodified in any way. I hope I don't have to justify this one. Third, having humans provide shelter, food (this is what we agreed on already), and grooming/medical care since we also bred them to have bad health. Then bring reality into the picture and realize that there will be unfit dog keepers, so you have to regulate and legally protect dogs that are adopted, just like we do with children, otherwise none of this means anything because people _will_ disregard everything I mentioned and breed, sell, confine and abuse dogs.
I think you're right... all of this is possible, on a really small scale not anywhere NEAR the size of the pet industry. Most families will not get dogs. But the species may be able to survive forever as long as humans are around to keep up such a noble undertaking, forever.
The alternative is adopting existing dogs without breeding them, giving them good lives, and looking out for their more natural cousins, wolves, while domestic dogs die out. That is not a tragedy for the species, that happened long ago, and that is not a tragedy for living dogs, since that is much better than what happens to them today.
I use the word ‘it’ as a gender neutral term referring to animals, because I’ve found that pet owners will get surprisingly upset if you use the wrong pronouns
"they"
thats because they are pussy snowflakes...dont let them force their social construct on you
@@RitiksVideos thank you for introducing the singular use of they to cishets 😬❤️
@@SuperEROQ nooo... Because some people are ignorant and expect you to know the sex of their dog somehow.
Then wtf do you call a human when the gender is unknown? A normal, decent human being would default to they/them, but I suppose you may be one of those “they/them isn’t singular that’s not proper english” dudes. Just say they/them when the gender is unknown- it’s not that hard and it’s a lot more respectful and avoids people getting mad at you.
This is a tricky question; dogs and cats are the vehicle through which many people come to understand that nonhuman animals are individuals too.
I don't think that will be a problem when the world goes vegan, you can see that animals are individuals by wildlife documentaries.
@@pep-o-butt672 We see it in documentaries, but we truly relate because of what we have learned by being in actual contact with other species. We get through to people by saying "Cows are like dogs" or "If you wouldn't butcher a dog, why do it to a pig", because that's what most people can relate to from personal connections.
I do my self have a dog (rescue dog) he is my friend and i am his, he does what he wants and i protect him at all times as he does with me . I have been blessed in my job and as a part time teacher that my dog (Bob) was able to be with me at all times,he at all time has shown that he is his own sentient being with his own way of doing things and being who he is in his special way. He understands the vibe and peoples vibes. He is more than a pet, he Mr Bob is my best friend and i love him unconditionally with every part of me.
The best slave to own is one that is captured and now dependent on his master.
@@blackmamba___ My cat was a stray who one day decided to just walk into my house and squat there. She's been with our family for five years now and she is quite the princess! She's very bossy and demanding and cute! LOL! We love her very much and are so happy she chose us!
oh please, dude. your dog does NOT get to 'do what he wants'. chances are, he can't even pee on his own schedule or choose the food he wants. hell, i bet he didn't even get to keep his fucking balls and he sure as fuck doesn't get to meet/engage with other dogs as often as he'd like and sure as hell doesn't get to have sex whenever he wants. you are not 'one of the good ones'.
That's great! But not all dog guardians are like you. Many are ignorant, indifferent or even abusive when the puppies outgrew their cuteness or developed health problems.
Dogs actually ask the guardian to let them out, if you pay attention the dog comes up to them barks once, looks were it wants to go, then if you follow the dog it looks at the door, possibly barks again, letting you know it wants to go out. Dogs do communicate with the guardian, also dogs understand words humans say, and facial expressions. So it's not correct to say that humans completely control dogs. Now some people do this, because they don't think about the dog, but those that care about what the dog wants give treats for no reason, they're like have a treat, they feed the dog twice a day, because they don't want the dog to go hungry, it's not about control, it's about the dog not being hungry, they don't treat them like an entertainer, in which they make them do a trick for a treat. The only time they might teach something like sit or stay, is because there is situations in which it would be dangerous for the dog, just like with children we don't let them do acts which are dangerous for them, because we understand that kids and dogs can be impulsive. I don't think there is any problem adopting a dog, or letting dogs mate if they want to, so long as you have the money and space to let them roam freely most of the time.
If you say that never having pets is logically you then have to apply the same logic to farm animal sanctuaries. Which is obviously false.
So the correct answer is as long as the animals have a good environment, get veterinary care, then I see no issues as long as the animals are not exploited. To think that some how life is better in an environment with predators is also illogical. We saved you from a nice home, and now go run from a lion. It's illogical.
I'm not saying I agree with breeding I don't. But I also have no problem with animals mating so long as the guardian can afford to look after them, and the space to build environments that are suitable. To me this is safer then living in the wild, there is many reasons humans built civilisation, and one of those reasons is to not have to run from predators.
So my opinion is it's fine to adopt animals. It's not fine to force animals to breed or to sell animals. It's not fine to exploit animals for your own gain. The only reason to adopt animals is the same reason you have children, it's to give them a decent quality of life. I see no problem with this. I thought about if I am just thinking from an emotional level, and I'm not, objectively living in a suitable environment, always having access to food, not having to run from predators, and getting veterinary care when ill, is much better then living in the wild, and having complete freedom, when that complete freedom comes with far more risk, and not much additional freedom. I'm not saying take animals out of the wild though, I'm just stating that domesticated animals are better off being around people.
I also don't think it's right to claim it's unnatural and so they shouldn't exist, they do exist and it's not right to decide their whole species shouldn't exist because of this, if they breed they most likely enjoy existence or they wouldn't want to breed, animals get depressed, and unhappy too, so if they naturally want to breed then why stop them other then because you can't afford to care for them, or don't have space and it would be cruel to be born in to a bad situation.
In the end nature isn't the way some vegans think it is, it's not boxed in to wild area and human civilised area, many wild animals come up to people to get food, many animals that live in the wild get food off humans, especially birds, many animals scavenge off the dead bodies left behind from predators, many animals are dependent on others. So with dogs it's more likely dogs realised they could be round people and get food, then at some point humans took advantage of this trust. Which is what we did wrong. We exploited them. So the problem is always with exploitation, and has nothing to do with humans taking animals out of a wild 'natural' environment. As long as the animal is in an environment very similar to what is best for that animal that is fine, even an artificial environment is fine so long as the animal mental state seems positive, as in the animal isn't doing acts related to trauma, anyone that listens and looks at animals body language can work out what this is. In the end all that matters if we care about animals and think about what is best for animals. It's not about the animals being in the wild that is correct. The correct way is a way which offers an animal the best life possible.
I agree with you TheaDragonSpirit. I’ve heard arguments from both sides regarding the ethics of pet ownership. Also I don’t think pets are ever going to disappear so we might as well take care of them and love them and make best of an imperfect situation.
2:58 to your Stockholme syndrom argument, Ed, an argument to perhaps ease your mind... I dont think this is what we observe. Possibly in dogs, but there is good reason to believe, from anthropological evidence, that there is a strong element of symbiosis, that led to dogs also seeking out humans... BUT that is not my point - my point is, what about cats? They often assume stances towards their owner, that are commonly described as "cat owning the owner"... They demand attetion, instead of "offering it", they can be quite aggressive when not in the mood for foolery... etc. It is not signaling a development of Stockholme syndrome to me.
The only problem I have with Ed's speech about 'ownership', is this ; The idea of 'ownership' isn't just a cultural construct of dominance. It's also a legal construct that can help protect both the animals' interests and the legal 'owner's' interests. The 'owner' has the right to protect their 'own' animals from harm by other people, or by other people's animals that might attack them, or that possibly might try to poison them. I have every legal right to ask the reaching stranger not to give 'my' dog their strange food stuffs, for example. I can also ask them not to pet her, if I happen to feel that's best in order to protect her - because even a normally well behaved dog can sometimes become unpredictable whenever they and their owners have been under a lot of stress. If the dog snaps, and ends up biting someone, the state can still order the dog to be put to sleep - sometimes even if the dog's shots are all up to date. So, asking strangers to refrain from petting your animal friend might actually be a good idea to help protect both your pet, and the other human/s wanting to 'say hi'. 💜🐕💜
yEs
I guess we could change the term to guardian. Still contains the legal benefits without the property aspect. I mean, people pay to adopt a child, but they don't own them as property.
Exactly, “ownership” is more of a social/legal construct. Most people consider these animals family, and we have co-evolved a symbiotic relationship with them over thousands of years.
The legal status in the UK is not the same for cats. They are classified as semi-feral (legally) and, as such, are considered 'free-roaming' animals and allowed to go wherever they please.
They are not supposed to exist in first place
*Create a Better World by......GOING and staying VEGAN*
When you go vegan, it's for life. You can't stop being vegan, or you've never been.
@diegoo what are you talking about??
@diegoo at this point, with the amount of information available to you on the internet, saying that shit is just admitting your ignorance
@diegoo well one glaringly obvious example would be soy crops used for animal feed contributing to 90% of deforestation.
@diegoo watch cowspiracy, there you go. Plenty of information to get you started.
i dont see “it” as necessarily demeaning, but i also am okay with they/it pronouns for myself. it is how i feel more connected to nature in general and nonlife
well it is undoubtedly dehumanising. Even if you personally are ok with it, almost nobody would refer to another human with "it". That term is almost always used for inanimate objects and is what people think of when they think of "it".
That's not how pronouns work.
@@pinata111colada
Sometimes I’ll call creatures it, like if a fly is buzzing around me I’ll say,” OML it’s so annoying,” or sometimes I’ll slip and call my snake it b/c I don’t know their gender. Mostly just call my snake by their name.
@@user-sf9gs2pg1b well slipping up is probably fine, considering that our culture has fostered that sort of language. But yeah, I think we should all make the effort to treat animals with a lot more respect and acknowledge them as our equals by not referring to them as "it". If you don't know the gender, just refer to them as they/them, as you would with any person.
@@pinata111colada dehumanizing an animal 🤣
On personal level, I feel great responsibility towards two cats who live with my family. They're staying with us for life.
But are they free to leave if they want to?
Ada K. How may birds and small mammals frogs etc do they hunt?
Is it vegan to keep a destructive predator that decimates small animal populations?
@@stupidhandles veganism is about ending the exploitation of animals. Allowing animals to live a natural life isn't exploiting them.
@@stupidhandles and if you really care about frogs and birds then become a frog and bird advocate.
@@KaptainKastle Letting domesticated cats outside whenever is actually a bad thing. Look it up.
They can get lost for miles, get hurt.
I'm a vegan, and although I mainly agree, I do think that dogs are a particularly tricky one - although specific breeds have been deliberately bred by humans (often to the detriment of the animal's health), dogs in general have evolved symbiotically with humans, i.e. they were self-domesticated. The same might also be true of cats, but its certainly not true of fish, hamsters, rabbits, or any of the other countless species that are kept as pets. Its a bit simplistic to put the 'unconditional love' of dogs down to some kind of Stockholm syndrome - its a product of both nature and nurture. They're adapted to enjoy human company, and if you treat a dog well, it will love you. The human-dog relationship isn't inherently exploitative, it has always been one of mutual benefit, which is why dogs self-domesticated in the first place.
In an ideal world, we wouldn't breed naturally non-domestic animals, and they'd just disappear. There would still be wild rabbits, hamsters, mice etc, but the domestic versions would vanish, and I'd be fine with that. But do we have a right to allow that to happen to dogs, when their dependency on humans is part of a long, natural evolutionary process? I'm not saying that we should therefore allow the commodification of dogs, but to allow them to disappear due to some ethical ambiguity strikes me as problematic. Of course in the meantime we don't live in an ideal world, and we should always be adopting, but what happens when we reach the end goal, and we have no more commercial breeders? Do we have a right to bring an end to a whole species due to ethical queasiness? Would a world where humans have no meaningful relationships with non-human animals be one in which we have a lower capacity for empathy, and would it make the world a worse place? I think these are important questions that really need to be considered as part of the conversation.
Valid point but completely irrelevant considering there are countless dogs being sentenced to death needing homes for the foreseeable future
Bam Westy but we need to have a plan for whenever that day comes, and to have a comeback for all the people defending breeders because "otherwise we'd spay and neuter into extinction" it is a really hard thing to come up with an ethical answer to
I think we should kill them just to put them out there misery
The answers to your questions are yes, nothing, yes, and no.
They "self-domesticated" during a time when they lived by human camps and were fed meat in exchange for raising alarm. You could call that mutual benefit. Then they were further human-domesticated / bred to have hair covering their eyes, noses, and mouths, to develop tumors and cancers that kill them at age 7, and to sit in people's homes instead of around the perimeter of a settlement, in order to be cute, and at a time when people no longer need them to be protected. What they get in exchange is to have this existence.
I think of companion animals more in terms of guardianship than ownership. Legal guardians of children dictate to some extent what the kids do and when and provide them with food while still ideally respecting their individuality as much as possible. I think that is perfectly in line with how we can treat our furry family members without commodifying them. This shift would still require quite a change in how we perceive our relationship with animals and how we treat animals but the concept of companion animal need not be abolished in a vegan world in my opinion.
I get this comment is old and such, but I don't think you should be using the word dictate, children have their own valid opinions.
Also, if you can put a price tag on it, then it is a piece of property.
Protection happens through ownership, whether it's a pet or a child. You protect them through control, rules and disciplin, but also by ownership. A pet without a owner is to be considered living on the street. How can you possibly respect individuality, but then deny a pet mountains of food or the ability to leave the house as they please. The pet cannot be independent and has no understanding of what is best for them...
@@Phoenix.Sparkles it’s more in how you think about it. Your child is your child and if you adopt a child you will in fact pay for the privilege but most people do not consider themselves as owning their children. The same should go for companion animals.
The facts that you can litterly have your 'fur baby's' balls cut of (castration) without anyone rasing an eyebrow, or have your cat's claw taking out at vet proves, that pets are in the eyes of the law and thereby society, slaves/property.
@@Exxperiment626 Obviously we do not live in a vegan world. If we did, declawing and other unnecessary procedures like it would not be legal. Until such a time, vegans who live with companion animals will follow their ethics and the animals’ best interests as best they can.
@@Dearmylove_i You're right about the first part.
"Animals best interest"... Not sure about that.
Honestly, I think we have convinced ourselves that dogs and cats can't survive in the wild without us, as an excuse for pet ownership. Most pets (especially cats) will be fine on their own, it's lonely humans who needs pets, not the otherway around, for most parts. You could argue pet-ownership is more about fulfilling the needs of the human owners, than the needs of pets, in general of course, since there will always be exception like adoption permanently injured animals .
I really try to build a friendship with “my animals” yes I technically own them but I build a relationship with them and I talk to them and find ourselfs developing a way of communicating with each other.
My dog and I have such a trusting relationship she doesn’t even need a leash and she is able to tell me if she wants something from me I would like to give her more independents. We lived in a complex a while back and we usually kept the front door open, she was allowed to Rome free after I taught her how to safely cross the road. She would sleep in the driveway and visit our neighbors, this became really self destructive because they would give her treats all day long, she landed up becoming overweight. I treat animals like children and teach them valuable skills and lessons, I want them to look after themselves but there is nothing wrong with relying on each other
This makes sense. Any responsible slave owner would do the same.
@@blackmamba___ you are stupid domesticated dogs cant live on their own in the wild , they need humans, its evolution. i
@@AbhinavKumar-ov3xf "The master doesn’t need to chain his slaves; their needs will chain them to him. You can end slavery by the stroke of a pen, but the pressing call of necessity will reestablish it."-
@@blackmamba___ i agree that they should be treated with respect and love but not taming them would lead to their extinction
We don't own our cat. She chose to live with us. Just walked into the house one day and decide to stay. She needed a family and a home and we welcomed the addition. We are grateful to be worthy!
I love how he humbly states: "I don't know."
4:24
I’m surprised you didn’t mention the fact that our pets, primarily cats, require the death of another animal to fed them. How much of our farm animals are killed for cat food? I’ve seen many vegan dog food options, but I’m not sure if that’s possible for cats.
one thing at a time
It is. There are many healthy vegan cats out there that thrive on plant-based diets, check out group Vegan Cats first in search lost on facebook. Give their "files" a look and also just scroll down the feed, there are many of those furry bastards who are just as happy as cats that eat a non-vegan diet. Research, regular urinary checks(which non-vegan cats should have as well as deceases cats can die from are the same fir vegan and non-vegan ones) and annually vet checks as well. The best option out there is probably Vege Cat(or kit for queens and kittens), it's a complete supplement from which you can bake kibble and make wet food, Benovo, Amicat, Evolution are also great options, Benovo is the most popular one. Just talk to people, politely ask for photos of their cat's blood checks and see for yourself.
I don't even think all dogs do well on a plant-based diet, I tried V-dog for one of my dogs and he wasn't the healthiest. I'm using natural balance now, but I do mix it with meat/bone for him. It seems my smaller dog does fine with Vegan dog food though, I don't even need to mix it with anything for her to eat it.
@@pep-o-butt672 no there aren't healthy vegan cats. You are spreading horrendous misinformation that leads to animal abuse and death. Cats are obligate carnivores and they cannot survive on a non meat diet. Your views are very dangerous and nobody should listen to the lies you are spreading. Reporting your comment.
I disagree. You see, we as human beings can survive without meat. On the other hand, our pets cannot. We cannot force our diets on to our pets. They eat meat because they need to.
I watched 20seconds anf you are already lying. Most breeders dont breed for money(good breeders). It costs more to maintian than what you can sell them for.
Second u say "unconditional love" is fake or not right. Of course they depent on us. We take care for them. All animals show that. When u were a child u depented kn our parents. So our love is fake cause we depent on our parents. That is what u are saying.
Is it bad we own things
U always say you care about animals. Why dont u really show it. U always say that it is bad we take a calf away from there mother. But why do u think it is right to take pups away from their family. Amd because we take them away later they remember ther mom better and u take them away in a time when they still relay on their mom tonteavh them things and support them. Mosy of thr times animals are not kept right. For example a dog is an group animal most of the time dogs are kept alone. So u are mentaly abusing them. So why is that right but if u take a calf away and out them with other calfs it is so wrong
Brah if u listened to the rest of the video he addresses all of your questions with a simple “I don’t know.” he’s just posing a question that seemingly may go against the ethics in which most vegans live their lives, If you aren’t a vegan you wouldn’t really understand. Also, the difference between calves and puppies is both the calf and her mother are going to be exploited and killed in the end. Net Positive.
I don't have a pet, I have companion animals, I call them by their names or their biological sex. I'm their parent, they are my children & they have been domesticated and would not survive in the wild. My companion animals constantly remind me why I'm vegan, their sentience and love is at the forefront of my mind everyday as I parent them; feed them, train them, engage with them, give them play time etc
pretty much listed every reason i don't have a pet.
Katie Pecotich I used to have six birds, I called them my feather kids. I always said they owned me, because they owned my heart. I still miss each and every one of them to this day.
My mom tells people they are her grandchildren😂 She has really started to think about animals differently since I’ve gone vegan and I love her for it 🌱
Domestic animals don't need humans to survive in the wild. They will do what they have to do to survive like their wild ancestors. Cats and dogs, there's a lot that are feral and survive without humans. There' also so many roaming cats that are owned, killing so many wildlife animals. Cats and dogs are invasive to wildlife. That shows how they can take care of themselves in the wild. Domestication means to get along with humans, doesn't mean all of a sudden they stopped being wild. Cats' and dogs' DNA is almost all the same as their wild ancestors. We only changed their personality and looks. They still need the same diet as their wild ancestors, and need the same enrichmemts as their wild ancestors. Pets in captivity could never have the exact enrichments like in the wild. That means lower quality of life.
@@vanessab9122 enrichments?
The cat owns me, not the other way around. I'm happily enslaved
Can someone please recommend a more humane meat containing complete catfood? I realize it can't be completely humane but I want to the best I can because we rescued him and taurine.
Cat food made with insects.
I've been questioning all this stuff recently. I grew up with dogs, whom I adored and considered to be more siblings. They definitely contributed to me being such an animal lover.
But, definitely some aspects of 'pet' keeping are contradictory and unethical. It's a complex moral issue for sure...
It depends on the motivation of the person who keeps animals.
I care for my best friend Blaze who is a dog , he has epilepsy and I look after him full time, he is so amazing and I love him so much
This is just another manifestation of an increasing deficit in personal reaponsibility. Too many people are putting their wants and desires ahead of their needs and responsibilities. It's become a serious societal problem in many ways. Don't do that.
We also need people to foster or volunteer for local animal shelters!
Yessssssss
True!
We also need to stop irresponsible people that create the problem in the first place. Just saying.
Animal neglect in a First World country is ultimately caused by negligent people.
Bonnie Hundley of course but I think it's really important to focus on giving thes animals a chance at a good life. I foster and I love knowing that these little guys have a chance. I love supporting spay and neuter programs because they're making a difference! Less and less shelter animals being euthanized each year! You're right education is key.
@@pri.sci.lla. Absolutely agree!
I love mutts. I've had adopted dogs. All priceless to me.
I wasn't so much suggesting only spay/neuter. Ha, I'm more cynical about humans in general. Enforced regulations and education make sense to me. Like if you're ever in Switzerland, where animal welfare is pretty good, they have laws in place to ensure that animals are properly cared for. In the USA, it's a bit lax by comparison. I like laws in place so, if I see questionable negligence, I can in fact call the police and expect them to investigate, not just turn a blind eye.
At least some cities in the USA have finally outlawed tie outs, and some have regulations that demand people keep their dogs indoors when temp's are extreme.
Yep screw people save the animals!
I never agreed with buying a pet instead of adopt, I never agreed with calling us humans owners of our pets or animals in general... It feels so wrong to me that many people think we are the owners of this world and we can do whatever we want with the others beeings because "they are just animals"... we don't own this planet, this earth...we share it or at least we should learn to share it.
I agree that we shouldn't go around treating animals however we want because they are not human but I do think that animals are below us and that if there was an owner of this world besides god it would be us.
Damn, pat yourself on the back. Amazing stuff!
@@shaunr5450 were you being ironic or you really agree? 🤔
@@corinacuralariu8471 Veganism is just another religion
@@kenvisvielgern4436 lmao how
Cats are not slaves to humans. Most cats I have ever had are let outside, not coming back for 2 days sometimes. The still come back as a choice because we feed them. We don’t put them on leashes. When they return, they give us love and we return that love as well. Also, we have never bought a cat but either the cat had kittens or we got a cat from a shelter.
yes but thats bad also, since your cat is an invasive animal and cats are known to fuck with the native animals around. so when you think about it, leaving kitty in the house is the most ethical option for everyone.
is your pride really that fragile that you cant just admit to yourself that the pet relationship is a fucked up one? do you really need to destroy the ecosystem for the chance to brag to internet strangers that your cat isnt a slave because it gets to go outside and maul the wildlife? jesus christ you people are delusional.
An other interesting point is that a lot of people consider adopting a dog the same as adopting a child; so they love him(it) like a member of their families. We don't force our children to spend a lifetime with us, eating the same things every day, sterilizing their instincts. I think the main mistake that everyones commit is to confuse education with command, we are two different species, we cannot relate to each other. In my opinion the only way to respect them at this point is to stop adopting/buying them and live with the remaining until they die. I condemn the excess that we, human beings, cannot contain which makes us selfish and pride.
Ps: Dogs for blind persons, dogs for petting, police dogs etc are the bottom of our humiliation.
A further question is how can you be a dog or a cat owner and not feed it meat ? Animals are inevitably going to die in order to feed them.
maybe rewilding dogs so that they can live in the wild?
That dependency used to be actually symbiotic inter-dependency and is the root of domestication. There is no malice or objectification in treating animals with that respect. If there is any exploitation involved it´s completely equal and sustainably beneficial to both parties. Letting them govern themselves has been a principle my (farming) family has raised me with and I still believe makes happier animals.
As much as there´s a tendency to impose object status on living beings, there´s a much greater spread at the other end of the spectrum: the majority of people these days will actively smother their animal companions - with food, luxuries they don´t need, "toys", grooming, cuddles ffs.... exactly as parents might to their children.
I have been with friends in the street and seen a cute dog and on asking to approach, the first thing they do is squeal and cuddle and kiss the poor animal. I can not and will never fathom this self-indulgent, anthropomorphic-projection onto a fellow creature. It shows a lack of respect for the understanding of a being´s existence. They aren´t our teddy bears. You don´t do that with strangers. You greet them with calm, authoritative benevolence like "hey, you cool?" "I´m cool, you good?" Afford them respect if you want it back, give them personal space (you don´t know what anyone is dealing with) and be warm, but cautious.
Good post
I mean, the key differences between domestication and symbiotic dependency is that one naturally occurs and they other doesn't, one is a consensual contract (to as much an animal can consent), the other is not. Domestication was made for the benefits of humans, not the animals. We never needed to domesticate dogs, horses, pigs. We did this because dogs helped with hunts, horses helped with travelling, and pigs were tasty. There was no consideration for the benefits of the other animal. Although now we have animals and think they're cute and treat them with more respect, it is still, in a way, non-consensual. Like Ed said, it's essentially Stockholm syndrome. Of course a dog would prefer to stay with their human that they grew up with since they were a puppy rather than be thrust into the wild, especially considering we bred them to be unable to be in the while. I think, if we were to truly value the lives of animals, we shouldn't superimpose our will because we think they may benefit from it, freedom is freedom and should be respected among animals.
Additionally, I would probably also argue against the idea that its equal and sustainably beneficial to all parties. Firstly, the idea of owning someone legally is inherently unequal. We don't own humans, so we shouldn't own animals. We should have animals dependent on us with no true freedom of choice.
Very basic stuff here. I think anyone who lives with a non human animal would eventually understands all this.
My dog rıfkı is one of the major reasons why I was able to understand that other animals are individuals too and this realization later led me to go vegan.
When I say "my" dog its not to imply that I own him. He is my dog as much as im his human :)
It's the human language too, we are restricted in the words we learn to spk
Ah yes, my phone is my phone as much as I am the phone's owner.
im a vegan and we bought our dog from a breeder. We were in contact with our breeder for months and knew them very well. They breed for the good of the breed. In some countries it is very difficult to adopt like ours. There simply aren’t stray dogs in Finland. The other option is importing rescue dogs from another country. But that comes with risks. The dog could have behavioral problems and I have a little brother who is 2 years old. We can’t have an anxious or aggressive dog. That’s why we got a puppy from a reputable breeder we know personally. Dogs have evolved along side humans and have influenced our evolution too. Dog is man’s best friend. Although advocating for adoption is great we should also not condemn buying from caring breeders.
The animal have no consent and that's the way it should be
This subject needs more attention and publicity. Great it’s dealt with here. 👍
I don’t necessarily think any dog that I have owned understands that I’m the one that cares for the in the sense that they appreciate me feeding them or supplying water. Don’t get me wrong if they’re hungry they’ll come to me but it doesn’t make them like me simply because I care for them. I think cats especially are a good example as not every cat genuinely likes people although at feed time they’ll be super lovely. Dogs are the same to me, they’ll love everyone they meet if they learn people are kind and the same goes if they’re used to cats at home - they’ll love every cat they meet. Just something to think about
One interesting theory that might help us grapple with this situation better was mentioned in a book I read recently called "Hopeful Histories". They argue that humans have bred dogs and tended to most like the ones that were friendly to them. Therefore, dogs have evolved to become more amenable to humans because the ones that did have ability to form bonds with humans+be friendly managed to survive. That means that dogs today have evolved to like human company perhaps (or perhaps more darkly, adjust to/pretend to like it) which would make the case that dogs are meant to be in human company and having dogs are companions (but not as pets) can certainly continue in other ways in the future.
I see the problem but our relationship is some what symbiotic so maybe that is the aproach veganism can take, what I still cant acceot is making dogs and cats eat only vegan diets
Why not? If it is healthy for them, what is the sense in chopping up animals and feeding them to each other?
@@RitiksVideos Maybe you can feed dogs a plant based diet but cats NEED taurine. It is found naturally in fish and meat.
@@wondermama8179 taurine is supplemented even in conventional cat foods
Lmao this is kinda ridiculous. A pet doesn’t know that it’s a pet, and quite frankly it doesn’t give a fuck. The vast majority of the pets in the western world (cats/dogs) have wonderful lives.
You're the opitomy of lying to yourself to justify your actions 🤣🤣 it should be illegal to own just one cat or dog and leave it home alone, its literally prison, it's emotional slavery, you go to work and since you're a sad excuse of a human you wanna have your emotional slave that's been depressed and sad all day happy to see you when you get home from work, piss off with the BS, I love eating meat, but I'm sure as hell not going to willingly enslave something to my emotions just to make me a little bit happier
Good point Ed. I think there will be ways around continuing to have pets in a vegan world in the future. Not sure how at this point, but as you said it’s a conundrum 😉
We should strive to have better relationships with animals, not get rid of them.
Could today's domesticated dog & cat breeds survive well enough, without us humans, in the wild? Actually, many scientists and animal behaviourists have pretty much already said that many of them could. They might wind up decimating some species of wildlife though. We already know that ferrel cats excel at that, when it comes to small birds. They have also stated, however, that many of the very small breeds of dogs probably wouldn't make it. I don't think it's a very likely scenario though. If humans go extinct, we'll probably end up taking them and most of the other mammal species right along with us, whether we intend to, or not. 🤷🏻♀️💜🐕🤷🏽♂️🐈💜🤷🏼♀️
Some would survive, but there would be a drastic drop in their numbers especially amongst dogs, which would be a real bonus for the long-suffering environment. There are almost a billion meat-eating dogs wolfing up the World's resources (yes I know not their fault, but ours). Probably in the wild one or two puppies in every litter would survive to adulthood. And of course I'm talking about larger dogs that still have some resemblance to their lupine ancestors. Those mutant, yippy-yappy things wouldn't last a week.
Pretty sure my dog actually owns me; not the other way around! Dogs are highly intelligent and are actually surprisingly good at communicating. Marley will sit in front of me and stare. I ask him to show me what he wants, and he does. If he is hungry, he goes to the fridge or brings me his food bowl. If he needs to go potty, he goes to the back door. If his water bowl is empty, he leads me to his water bowl. If he wants to take a walk, he leads me to his leash. If he wants to play, he brings me a toy. Of course, I drop everything and immediately attend to what he wants like a good human!
SomeHumans EatAnimals I have never abandoned a dog, nor do I intend to. Actually, most of my dogs have been rescued because their owners abandoned them. You like to make an awful lot of assumptions about people you know nothing about..............
You taught your dog to do those things.
Yesterday I cried for 2 hours straight. I finally watched Dominion. EVERYONE needs to see this!
This is my go-to movie to recommend to people who say they don't care about animals. If you can watch this movie without batting an eye, then you truly don't care about animals, and I'm just gonna stay as far away as I can from you, because you clearly are a psychopath. Thankfully, most people aren't psychopaths!
I watched a brief portion of Earthlings 10 years ago and to this day I still think about what I saw there. Horrifying.
@Ribeye Demon aaaaaand we've found the psychopath
@@tibhamel yes true!
@@ZenKloom :( it is so sad right?
I understand what your saying but I got my dog from a breeder cause I know they breed them properly health wise
Some people have the gall to tell others they “have to” adopt rather than buy from a breeder. It’s good to promote rescuing animals, but individually it’s none of your business how I obtain a pet unless it’s directly harmed in the process.
That being said, if you harm an animal, please share your address so I can harm you too.
I eat animal yes and I would love to give you my address but Let’s be real you pussy ass vegans don’t hurt animal so why would you harm another animal (humans) 😂
@@Carniboarder troll
Dogs and humans mutual evolution, dogs hung around because they got food and we let them because they provided security. As the relationship grew we grew more and more dependent on each other to the point where a lot of dog species are not like there wolf ancestors and could not survive the wild anymore.
ya
You're right never did humans breed dogs selectively for certain traits. It all happened naturally and morally. The traits like being docile, quiet, lax were never bred for. The pug surely evolved to have a flatter face that causes many breathing problems. Doesn't it scream survival of the fittest.
BTW this post is sarcastic, but just the implication that a lot of the breeds about today came about naturally was so absurd
Ed forgets that the human-dog relationship is symbiotic. I’m not here to defend certain breeding practices which lead to ridiculous animals like Pugs, but welcoming dogs into our families is a part of human evolution, and we are still learning new ways in which these animals can help us. Ed is starting from the premise of “all dog breeders are bad”, which is clearly false, and carrying on the logic from that flawed beginning. He’s saying that guide dogs are unethical. He’s saying that having a pet dog is unethical. He’s shedding light on the extremism that is veganism. It’s a binary good v bad, which seeks to toss out all the good things because there are some bad things.
My cat was starving, she used to visit my garden, I saw how hungry she was and put food out for her until she just moved in- I asked around our village if anyone new her. She moved in with us we took her to the vets to have her neutered and microchipped. She has really bed eczema and is allergic to vegan foods as they make it worse, I feel terribly guilty for buying meat based food for her, but I love her and can’t think of life without her. She greats me when I walk through the door and sleeps on my bed with my husband and I! I adopted her before we went vegan 🌱
Thank you for raising this issue 😊💚
You sound like you're doing the best you can and that's wonderful!
So she had a chance to surrive outside, but didn't made it. But you got involved in this natural process and forced her surrival... you know who had never a chance to surrive, see the sun, breath fresh air and run around? The animals that die for you and your cat the next 1-2 decades straight. It's easy when you don't have to kill them yourself, right? But instead giving money to the meat industry for cat food.
That's not vegan at all, that's selfish behavior because you think cats are cute.
There are many victims because of your decision, and having victims needs justification .. so what's your justification?
RichyRich2607 thank you for your wise words. You are right I have no justification. Sadly my cat was ran over the other day so I no longer have to worry about feeding her. All very very sad, it made me ill buying dead animals to feed her. But I’ll never get over losing her. She gave me so much pleasure. During lockdown my dad his mum and my husband have all died and now my beautiful fur baby has been taken from me...... I understand your anger about me feeding her dead animal flesh. Me my husband and my daughter (she converted 2 boyfriends) are all vegan and have been vegan for years now. But I had my cat before going vegan so I was ignorant of the suffering. Now I’m just grieving my loses
Pet is more complicated topic than veganism itself. That's why I'm not getting a pet until i understand it completely. Although we had a dog in our family during childhood. Me & the dog were like buddies literally rolling on each other and understand every gesture we make. But sadly, he died due to an illness in his mid age :/ He was so awesome and a unique dog! And cats are mostly mischievous but really cute. No comment on them :p
Update: I'd love to have a pet chicken or a sheep if I'm getting in future! They are no less than a dog or a cat
I have 2 dogs, always took great care of them. They are 16 years old now. I call them pets and I don't see the problem. Me calling them pet clearly does not hinder my ability to look after them well. Nor will my pets be "offended" and demand a "safe space" if they hear the word pet. Just saying, sounds bordering another example of "progressives" trying to change and control the English launguage so they they can play professional victim. Of course they are making the animal the "victim" in this scenario, but only so they get to appear virtous to other snowflakes.
I've been contemplating this very subject 👌 Nux, is my best friend. He stays close to me because he's experienced that I won't let harm come to him, he lets me know when he's hungry or wants to go into the garden. He walks by my side off the lead if/when I ask him to because he's learnt from his exeperience that I have his best interest at heart. I drape a lead over his neck when we're walking in public because the law says he must be kept on a lead.
I'm in agreement with what you've said in this video.
What I'm saying is that I'm finding there are always to cooperate and live with the animals we already have with us. Being careful to be respectful of their nature also, I've noticed well meaning people try to engage with dogs as though they are people, this can be very harmful too. Treating a different species as an equal human isn't healthy, it's important to understand the psychology and nature of other species so not to overburden them.
❤
I think it is very important that we live close to companion animals and have a kind of symbiosis with them that benefits both parties. Not all animals are suited to be companion animals of course, but at this stage, dogs certainly are. I think it's very important for our respect for other animals that we understand how close other animals are to ourselves, and having companion animals is the best way I can see that will create that mutual love and respect. It will spill over to our treatment of all animals.
I can tell you that the dogs I live with probably dictate more about my life than I do about theirs :-). But of course, in the end, I decide. Just as with children, I have to take that responsibility. And I agree, I can't stand when people say "it" about animals. I think that is going away, though.
So in some places dogs really need rescuing, in others, most dogs are well cared for and there are basically no "excess" dogs without homes. I think it would be a big mistake to stop breeding dogs, but it has to be done responsibly. We know so much about their diseases and problems that we must guard that knowledge and keep building on it. Dog breeding is not all about money, but that is what sometimes happens when it's not taken seriously, and greed takes over. That can happen to any activity. But dog breeding is a service like every other, in order to keep a functioning symbiosis between dogs and us. A breeder should not sell dogs, he or she should sell a service. So my solution is keep breeding healthy, happy dogs, and also adopt whenever possible.
I agree with you in most of your comment. There are dogs bred to guard Endangered animals. Do we stop breeding them and replace them with shelter dogs who aren't suited for that environment or job? This isn't a black and white issue. I don't think he should be comparing the care taking aspect of having a companion animal to Stockholm syndrome. And I think we need to cultivate better relationships with all animals. This doesn't need to resort to getting rid of companion animals.
Yes dog breeding should never be more money!! I know many breeders who charge only the money it took to raise them and cover their vet fees etc
@@ASMRyouVEGANyet 'There are dogs bred to guard Endangered animals.' I'll take your word for it, but how many are we talking about here? Of the near billion dogs on the planet at the moment, I don't know a few hundred? Dogs, and cats, are both a menace to the environment (clearly this is the fault of Humans who breed them in such naturally high numbers), and I think the example you give is very much the exception that proves the rule. Personally I think in most cases having a pet can not be justified (though obviously if I was blind, for example, I'd probably consider a guide dog pretty essential, and so would feel breeding labradors to be entirely justifiable). Possibly vegan pets are the way to go, but that seems a controversial topic, to say the least! But a billion carnivorous dogs is unsustainable, and most of these exist to fulfil a selfish human desire.
God forbid he ever need a Guide Dog. I think his sanctimony over animal ownership might lessen a tad when it's a choice between that or plodding along the street with a pointy stick...
Animals are not here for us. They are not a commodity or a resource. Dogs have the mentality of a child and service dogs should get to play and can't.
If you had a human doing what service dogs do. For free. They'd be a slave.
I love the way your mind works. This is an issue that I have spent a fair amount of time contemplating, as I adore being handmaiden to my cats. It is certainly not our animal's jobs to teach us compassion, but that IS how many of us first become sensitized to animal rights. I feel that a "companion animal-less" future may end up a little soulless. I suspect as we learn more about the unique and precious beings that we share the planet with, that they will be honored more and more as individuals with personalities and motivations that may not always perfect align with our own but can be harmonious. I also think that as they become rarer, they may become more valued. My mother used to say that dandelions were the perfect plant: beautiful, edible, fun. But because they are so prolific, we deem them weeds. As "pets" become less commonplace and we find homes for the multitudes, I hope and believe that they will be acknowledged for the gifts that they truly can be. This may move us even more quickly into a more compassionate future.
It seems so sad, but I agree
if this were true, why would it be so hard for pet owners to admit that their relationship with their animals is one of ownership? doesnt that kind of show the opposite of what you're saying? that its actually pushing people away from even properly identifying animal rights.
if you cant even assess an animal living in a domestic situation as a form of slavery, then you have zero grasp on animal rights.
The first ever video of earthling Ed where I didn’t agree with his way of thinking 😔
Jess Holden agreed (maybe not the first for me, but)
Not the first for me, but it has happened. He doesn't address how dogs are bred for specific jobs. for instance some endangered animals have specific dogs bred to guard them. What should we do? Use shelter dogs instead? That'll be a disaster. Not all breeds are here because of looks and fashion. And it's sick to equate care taking to Stockholm syndrome. And we should strive to have better relationships with animals, not to get rid of them.
ASMRyouVEGANyet? I agree, mixed breeds sure can be great dogs, but it’s always a bit of a gamble of what traits the dog will grow up to have, and specific breeds have known temperaments and abilities most of the time. Just some examples to add to yours, are Retrievers being great medical assistance or alert dogs/guide dogs. German shepherds or malinois being great police dogs, spaniels being expert bomb sniffer dogs. bernese mountain dogs being fantastic avalanche dogs, the list goes on. And also to add that we aren’t ‘making’ these dogs do these jobs, they absolutely THRIVE on using their brains and working, and it’s a two way street if we treat these animals so incredibly well and give them so much love, and in response they give us their assistance. I mean when I lose my vision at times, my retriever helps me. This isn’t to say a another cross breed couldn’t also do this, but I needed to get a puppy and teach it along the way and labradors just has the best traits and empathy level to deal with my lifestyle.
Jess Holden You just stepped over into the cruelty and explotation side of USING animals and promoting breeding over rescuing unwanted shelter dogs. Beatings used as training have been caught on tape on these "police" and "bomb sniffer" dogs, much like what they do to circus animals. There was recently on expose on those "avalanch" dogs too. I suppose you like police riding on horse's backs. Don't be so naive. You're not treating an animal well when they're being used. You enjoy being beaten to perform?
I took it more as a thought exercise than his absolute way of thinking
I've always only had rescue animals as companions. Have to disagree on the statement that our pets love us because everything is on our terms and they live to our routine, try living with a Bassett Hound, we live to serve him and everything is done his way or not at all 😂😂😂😂😂
I thought about this before I got my cat. I had always wanted my own cat. Upon getting her yes, she is my cat, but I realize more than anything I’m her human. I asked myself when I got her if she was happy. If I should have just left her to be with her family. Then I thought, fuck no, she is my family. I didn’t bring her here to not be loved and cared for.
Feral cats can live 2-5 years on average, while indoor cats can live up to 15- 17 years. I don’t know about you, but I don’t think it’s immoral to add 10 years onto an animal’s life. My cat is my best friend.
What’s truly unethical tho, is Karen not wearing a mask at the grocery store during a pandemic.
I think that a short life can be fulfilling the same way that a long life can be spend mostly unhappy.
you extended that cat's life and in doing so sentenced many more animal deaths. Cat's must eat meat and you have added a decade of chicken death to sustain your cat.
Thing is the unethical thing is your deciding you're the one with the right to decide whether add or subtract from an animal's life span. What about that: castrated humans live longer, what about someone deciding you should live 20 years more? Your cat is a life and an individual, well, he's not yours anyways. Is your her human though? Have you cat made a choice to be there with you?
Its very sad part of society that domesticating a pet is considered empathetic and good thing to do.
The psychology behind all these, most of the times is that they want to keep a living being for their amusement and remedy to loneliness. Sometimes, it is because they can control someone, etc. The psychology most of the times are very evil.
The most sensible thing to do is to make them grow in a controlled environment where they can thrive, and we assist them as much we can without making them feel having Stockholm syndrome to a guy.
The best way out of this mess and the most ethical thing to do in my opinion is, we, the human race, should stop reproducing more humans. I don't know whether you agree with is idea.
Best comment on here,I love all animals,I just hate the animal rights activists who push their vegan beliefs on people and the activists are still human! I love your comment!
Nice speech. I adopted my two cats from shelter and most important got them neutered. I don't see them as just pets.. things etc.. but part of me and my soul.
Animal Lover yes, definitely dogs adopted should be neutered.
And you feel fine to buy meat for them? Imagine having the name "animal lover" while buying food from the meat industry all the time. That's hilarious.
@@RichyRich2607 Imagine thinking that pet supplements don't exist. That's hilarious.
We could reach a point in our lives where we could coexist in harmony with the other animals, where we could walk around the streets and see a bunch of wild deers, or wild raccoons, or free roaming dogs and cats friendly approaching us or just walking by our side without the need to escape from us, to hide, or to harm each other.
What a beautiful life would this be.
(sorry for my english)
I ain't walking down the street with wild racoons.... Those animals are nuts.....
@@beyamoth just like humans
@@drenskywalker absolutely.
But, the chances of being chased by a random human is significantly lower than being chased by random racoons in my experience.
I believe we can solve the problem of dogs without homes by putting restrictions on the breeding, sale and import of dogs, without necessarily ending all of those things in entirety. If we restrict the sale of dogs to individuals and small scale breeders, we can eliminate the commercial market where most harm is done and still have dogs for those who want to bring one into their family. It might not be a drop of the hat frivolous thing anyone can do anytime as there will be more scarcity, but that will likely result in less impulse adoptions and hopefully mean people think a bit more before bringing a dog into their life.
This is on point more than ever now, how many “on trend” dogs have been bought for lockdown but will end up dumped? I’m on my third rescue in a row
Do you rescue and rehome or just rescue? Either way, good job :)
Do you think it's ethical then, for a disabled person to have a service dog whom they adopted from an animal shelter and trained themselves? That's a very common thing these days, and is basically what I've done. There are certain rules I think should be followed in this kind of case, of course. #1 being 'Don't deliberately do anything that might endanger your service animal'. That's one reason I haven't gone to any of the protests around here lately - aside from my being at increased risk if I catch the COVID-19 virus - I would end up having to have my service dog with me, and I won't ever deliberately put her in a potentially dangerous situation for the sake of something she could never possibly understand. So, I just stayed home with her. By the way, not only is she family to me & my sweety - and our roommate - we are family to her to. Whenever we go out on walks together, she's frequently looking back at the others to make sure the rest of her 'pack' is still there. She really prefers that we all stay together, as much as possible. Lol! 😉💜🚶🏻♀️🐕🚶🏽♂️🚶🏼♀️💜😄
You should never train a service dog yourself unless you are a professional dog trainer. It is ok to have a service dog - but in the dog's best interest she should be trained by a professional. If you make mistakes in the training, your dog might suffer mentally while you are not aware of it (because you do not know dog behavior). It is also ok to train dogs for protecting services - but always, ALWAYS trained by professionals, otherwise we can make great damage to the dog and harm others, dog bites etc. and it can lead to the dog being euthanized so be careful with "self-trained" dogs. Only basic training can be done by those who do not know dog behavior as teaching a dog to sit, give paws etc. does not need spe
cial guidance.
I agree with the notion of adopt don’t shop as things are at the moment, but if a situation develops whereby our actions as vegans are going to cause animals to become extinct then the ethics change, and if we rigidly stick to being against commodification for commodification sake, therefore allowing animals to become extinct, we become the reprehensible ones. Maybe we would need breeders in those situations - people will always want to keep pets - and maybe they’ll be the people with the requisite knowledge; or maybe we could have a government breeding program. People will always want pets and we can’t dictate to them that they can’t have them. That’s unethical in and of itself (We can only educate and let people make their own choices).
I agree you with this statement. Pet Ownership ethics is not Black and White. Everyone Vegan and Non-Vegan will have different opinions. Also since pet ownership is unlikely to stop we might as we give pets the best lives as possible.
Yes
It's refreshing to see that someone has a similar stance as me regardiny "pet ownership." Having fish or birds or dogs might sound nice, but controlling their entire lives and essentially being their god (in my view) degrades their existence. Humans would be miserable if a more powerful life form adopted and turned humans into a commodity so why do it to other animals?
I mean depends on what you mean by god. Do you think just because for example if my dog shet on the carpet that i wold then let him starve just because of that like i get it there reliant for me for there food but just because thei did some shit such as ruind my carpet lr did something that they werent supost to do dosent mean im going to harm them or even not fed them. I woldrnt do that for example to a child ho is also reliant of me to give them food so ye
Many people don’t know how to control their dogs. Our family have had two cats killed by neighbours’ dogs. I’ve been attacked by dogs in three separate occasions and jumped on numerous occasions. Some of my family have been pushed over by dogs that jump up at them. I don’t care how much of a family member someone feels their dog is - it needs training, controlling and kept on a lead in public. And, if it’s a greyhound, lurcher or attack/guard dog, it should have on a muzzle when it’s outside the house.
Well yes, we live in a humans world and manners are taught to us and should also be taught to our companion animals. This is not only for the safety of other people but for the safety of the animal.
This is a perplexing problem and situation for sure. I believe that we, as ethical vegans, have a responsibility to seek to aid all species in their existence, as they are today, regardless of the fact that they have been bred and eugenics have been used to manipulate such breeding. It is our plight, responsibility and privilege to aid the oppressed to the very best of our knowledge and ability, as you said, in as harmonious an existence as possible.
With regard to the extinction of species, I am not convinced this is necessary. All life is valuable and precious and therefore to be protected. ❤️🌱❤️
All life is valuable but by letting domestic species breed we will keep on destroying wild species. To keep domestic animals alive we need to give them water, food and medication - it's a waste of resources. They exist and have children only for those children to be taken away and be given to other people. Every domestic animal should be neutered and than they all should just disappear. Because that how nature intended it to be. Humans shouldn't create beings for their needs, humans have each other.
I think you've missed a point Ed, dogs and cats are not domesticated because WE made them that way, they are domesticated because they evolved to have a symbiotic relationship with humans. Both benefit from each other. Wolves didn't evolve, dogs did.
This
Dogs don’t benefit from humans in any way, wolves were perfectly fine before we started forcing them to fuck each other. We tell them when to eat, shit, play, sleep, etc. They rely on us rather than their own natural instincts, and are used for our desires only. I find it funny how self centered humans are, and you trying to justify owning dogs by calling the relationship symbiotic is priceless.
@@cxmbosama3437 some cats just come by homes and kill rodents and drop it on the doorstep of people so they will be fed. Dogs have helped humans hunt for generations. You can see these relationships on art from 1000’s of years ago and now you want to come and change it? It seems like its just the way its always been. That’s not to say we shouldn’t do more to make the world a safer place for both people and animals. Just saying the cats and dogs companionship seems to go back really far
@@cxmbosama3437 Yes, they do benefit from humans in all ways, that's even how wolves got tamed ffs.
Cats are not domesticated, they are still pests as they were before, people were just stupid enough to let them in their homes.
Consider this: Man's best friend is the creature we have even genetic dominion over. We made even their behaviour what we want it to be by millenia of breeding. Would you lock your friend up in your house and leash it when you allow it to go out?
I guess if we got to a point where there were no more dogs/cats in shelters, only dogs/cats in homes, it would be fine for them to reproduce. It shouldn't be forced upon them, though. And it shouldn't be used to make money.
Aa much as I agree with adopt dont shop, we NEED reputable and responsible breeders and thinking otherwise is naive. If we stopped supporting responsible breeders, only the irresponsible back yard breeders or accidental litters would be left to breed, who take NO accountibilty of genetics. Our pets gene pool would be horrifically affected and we would end up with unhealthy, deformed and sick animals like brachiceohalic breeds like pigs and persians. As someone who is very active is the pet hobby and studies genetics, nutrition and husbandry in both a home and educational setting, PLEASE support responsible breeders, even if its verbally. I'm so sick and tired of seeing entire species or breeds destroyed by irresponsible breeding, we need to fight that and keep food breeders going, like back breeding pugs to have a long nose again etc. - and yes, I am vegan and adopt and rehabilitate pets in my free time.
I know this is mainly about dogs and cats etc, but I study herpetology and I rescue and buy reptiles, but I only buy depending on the species (and some time I have into a chain pet store and took the malnourished python). Many species are vulnerable in the wild now because people take them to be pets, so we need captive bred individuals to keep the wild population safe. I’m a bit on the fence because I do believe a lot thrive in captivity, and there’s lots of research for that, but I worry.
We literally take away the freedom that animals would have if we didn’t exist
I’m not responsible for the atrocities committed by people for thousands of years. The only thing that we can do from here on out is leave animals alone, the natural world will take the best care of animals. Whether animals suffer, live or die isn’t something we should control. Look at the mess humans have made already, trying to repair the harm done isn’t going to help the issue. Nature is always in balance and doesn’t need arrogant, egotistical, control freak humans to set things straight. The countless breeds of animals that were manipulated and created by humans will either adapt and thrive or suffer and die, let nature decide how these beings will flourish or die off. It isn’t cruelty, it is wisdom in understanding the unfortunate innate source of what compromises this world we live in. If you want to fight suffering and death then attack the very core of what this world is about, the very basic laws of our natural world. Our planet and reality is one where suffering and death exists, easing suffering doesn’t eradicate it, if anything it prolongs it and makes it potentially more torturous.
The big question is why does suffering and death exist?
We live in a dualistic world. No life without death. No joy without suffering. We can not change the very nature of this world. It’s a sick and twisted mess for a seemingly sadistic universe. No living being asked to be a part of this horror story, yet here we are. Allow the sick and perverted natural laws of this world to take the reigns. If we don’t fight whatever cruel agenda is there maybe we will have an easier go of things and expedite our inevitable demise.
This really got me thinking and I so appreciate this video. Every thing outlined is so well said. I have also thought about the “future without pets” and gotten pretty sad. However, I then I realized that part of the reason breeding is necessary is because not only do we dictate the lives of pets, but also their reproduction. Perhaps in the future we can find a way to let animals live more naturally and reproduce as they want to, rather than sterilizing some animals while forcing others to reproduce constantly. Just a thought I wanted to share here :) I love seeing all the comments!
Cave Beast thank you for your response. I realize I wasn’t very clear. When I say a “future without pets” I was referring to the part in the video where he mentions that if we stopped breeding dogs/cats/etc. we would eventually not have any more pets. My only point was that even if we stop forcing pets to breed, they will still reproduce naturally if we don’t continue to sterilize them. It is undeniable that we dictate the reproduction of animals, and I was simply pointing this out to prevent a future without pets. I don’t think we need to get rid of having pets by any means. You seem to be angry and trying to tell me how to change, but I don’t seek to dictate the diet or lifestyle of anyone but myself. You seem to be promoting something “natural” (when you mention that meat consumption is natural) while at the same time saying that if we let things happen naturally I might not like the outcome (with the wolf pack example)? I’m not really sure of the point you’re trying to make or if you’re trying to change my mind about something you think I believe, but I was simply saying that if we stopped breeding animals, but still allowed them to reproduce naturally, we could still have pets. I’m sorry this seemed to upset you so much.
It ask us to look deep into ourselves , it not easy. Some can other not and find hundreds answers to comfort themselves. Need time or for some newer .Domination is sweet until you realize , if ever ,it is all but ethical.
My cat (age 12, adopted 6 years ago) lives in my garage with a cat door to the outdoors, so he comes and goes as he pleases, but he does love to spend time with me and with my family. He loves to hop up into our laps and get lots of belly rubs and cuddles. He has a couch, and the garage stays between 50-80 degrees Fahrenheit (with a heating pad in the winter for extra warmth that he loves to sleep on). He comes back for food and clean water but he gets water from wild sources too and likes to hunt mice and rabbits very occasionally (I don't love this, since I'm vegan, but he is a cat after all. I don't think he eats them, but perhaps he could). I can't imagine that he doesn't love us, since he could run away at any time, but chooses every day to come home to us for a safe place to sleep and a few hours of family reading on the porch or in the garage. I think he has a great life, with all his freedom, and his medical and nutritional and shelter needs taken care of, and people who love him and spend time with him whenever he comes around to meow for us (he is very talkative whenever he wants attention, and purrs lots when we pet him or hold him). I call him my sweet boy, my geriatric kitten, my orange baby, etc, but not in any different way than a parent uses the possessive "my child". He is mine, but I am his as well because he has my heart.
I do love animals. I have an ethical problem with enslaving them. And though I do not consider most household pets to be enslaved I object to the fact that (usually) many other animals are enslaved and slaughtered in order to feed them.
Is it possible that the reason we want to be around animals is because before the agricultural revolution (and further human civilisation) we used to spend much more time in the wild alongside animals? It’s so sad that now we’ve confined ourselves to this “sterile” life without wildlife (not to mention that I’m simply referring to the most fortunate members of society today. There’s plenty of people in even worse situations than the middle/upper class)
One factor I hate about able-minded, able-bodied vegans is that they assume all humans aren't disabled. We need dogs and dogs need us. We need to stop viewing them as objects and more like symbiotic beings... extensions of ourselves. I know blind, ASD and other humans who would not be able to live secured lives without their companion animals (they can't be fully independent because they depend on a nonhuman being for navigating the world). The way a dog and human bond to the point of moving simultaneously and as one unit is something to behold. It is like watching how a fish guides a blind lobster for food and protection... in return the blind lobster provides a secured, well managed home for the fish to live in. I see that as the future between humans and nonhuman animals... symbiotic relationship a balanced give-take relationship. Your ideas about eliminating dogs is very dangerous for us humans who aren't typically development. Many of us rely on dogs for our sheer existence and close to an enriching independent as possible lives. Just because you don't suffer from disabilities and/or disorders doesn't mean the rest of us are so blessed and fortunate as you "normies" are. I could see an end to "owning" other animals, but dogs... dogs have been with humans over 50,000 years and I say over, because I have a sense that dogs literally evolved side by side with us humans as that fish who developed a symbiotic relationship with the blind lobster (these guys seek out each other first week of life... that is how powerful the bond is). For someone who considers himself as being wise and knowing a lot about nonhuman animals, you sure overlook at a lot of evolutionary reasons and factors as to why humans take in an animal companion and family member.
This is a very good point.
Also some of us need other humans to help care for us & accommodate certain needs. It would be like saying that makes us petty & dependent, so we'd be better off not existing for our own good.
There is nothing negatively exploitive with existing and being given accomdations. It never sat right with me how ableds view companionship and assistance as negative.
Yes! I think about a world with no house cats. (I am a cat lady, volunteer @ cat shelters, etc. so..) No more cats seems quite bleak.
I never thought of my actions -adopt don’t shop-as a way of controlling their extinction. Wow.
All I know is, Breeders must be stopped!!!!
“Until every cage is empty” 👊
They will not go "extinct". This segment of his talk is a bit out there. He's relating care taking of companion animals to Stockholm syndrome. WTF? And no, we don't need to work towards a future with no relationship to other animals. How disgusting. We want to cultivate healthy relationships, not get rid of them.
I can't imagine life without cats either. Breeders are the evil here, not cats. TBH I stopped listening before I got to the Stockholm syndrome part. Sounds like a Peta philosophy to kill off all the dogs & cats. I only hear this from vegans who have never formed a close bond and relationship with an animal they live with.
It's very black or white from Ed's perspective, isn't it? We tend to romanticize freedom, but freedom does not necessarily mean less suffering.
I dedicate a lot of time and money to make sure my fourlegged son has his kitty needs met and has a good life. I'm more informed on his surroundings than he is, so I make restrictions to keep him safe. Same as you would for a baby or toddler. An adoptive parent is not a glorified kidnapper.
When breeding pets is a passion-project instead of a profitable side-gig, the animals are seen as more than monetary assets, and are generally treated better. I don't think we need to eradicate pets as a concept, I think the concept we need to eradicate is that they are assets and property, rather than companions and family members.
My suggestion for US activists, is that you push towards getting a ban on crating/caging dogs and cats with the exceptions of travel, pet shows, and rare cases where it's necessarily for animal wellbeing(where you'd need a vet permit), maybe with slight leniency for shelters. It would be the end of dogs and cats being sold in pet stores, it would be the end of large scale mill operations, and people would need to raise their pets instead of locking them up at the slightest inconvenience.
It's viable and practicable in terms of legislation, and someone does not need to be in the ideological fringes for you to be able to pitch it to them.
DragonSky Lords people don’t need to live with animals anymore than they need to eat them. And think of the countless fish and chicken and cows that go into making food for cats and dogs. Adopting instead of buying won’t solve that problem.
@@spease116 Adopting will help. They're alone and abandoned. It's the least we can do. You're not adding to supply and demand, and you're not supporting breeders by adopting. We need to try to give them a good life. They need us
My struggle isn't even that. The question is: is it moral to have pets ? I guess the answer depends on the pet. Should we feed our dogs with vegan food ? How about cats that are obligated carnivores, is it moral to have them ? If we stopped to have cats, for instance, would it mean a drop in the overall suffering in the animal kingdom?
"Is it moral to have pets?":
Is it moral to breed, sell, own and imprison sentient living beings in tanks, cages and hutches? No.
Is it at all necessary to own 'pets' of any kind? No.
1) I am HIS human.
2) adopt, don't shop AND help foster if you can. That helps clear up space in shelters.
3) he goes to bed when he wants to. Are you actually trying to put the idea in people's minds that having relationships with other animals is always bad? Relating care taking to Stockholm syndrome? That's a stretch. Do we actually want to live in a world where we have zero relationship with other species?
What's the point of that? You're taking this a bit far. This is your own personal opinion and shouldn't be put out there because people already think you represent all vegans. This kind of talk is like what Vegan Cheetah was saying, that having companion animals is abuse. We want to cultivate healthy relationships with animals. Not get rid of them all together.
I want to be a betta fish breeder when I’m older, and while I’m sure there’s definitely breeders who do it for money, I doubt that’s the only motivation. Betta fish are beautiful creatures inside and out and the first time I saw my betta make a bubble nest I decided I wanted to breed in the future. Sadly, I couldn’t give him a family because he passed from tail rot before I had him long enough to get the supplies. But like that’s why I want to breed. I want to ensure my own fishy companions come from safe, clean environments and no better way than to breed and raise them from fry. I also want to enable other people this opportunity, and I’d only sell them to fund taking care of my fish in the first place. So while I won’t doubt there are breeders who exploit animals, I also have no doubt there are people who breed animals because they love them.
Yeah it sounds like you missed the point
U can give me the animal but in no way shape or form would I ever pay for one. Dates back to supply demand, ur money is the way u vote. By paying for animals ur giving breeders and the suppliers reinforcement for what they do.
Nicholas Huss we paid a small fee to the rescue centre for our dog and cats. The money helped the centre fund the care of the animals left behind and it included a voucher to take them to the vet for a checkup. Not a fee we begrudged paying.
However a lot of the money that the pet industry makes is through selling pet food. The overwhelming majority of it comes from other animals. Whether a pet is adopted or bought. The fundamental problem is not buying pets but rather pet ownership altogether.
Damn, pat yourself on the back. Amazing stuff!
It's financially irresponsible to take a gamble and adopt a dog that might have complications that will cost you heavily in the future. Adopting is nice, but there are reasons why people don't adopt.
@SomeHumans EatAnimals That's not true. Certain breeds are susceptible to certain complications. I'm not sure, but I heard that mutts have the least likelihood of having issues, so I guess adopting mutts wouldn't be as burdensome if that were the case.
If you have a pet or an animal you care for, feed it its natural diet, at least mainly raw food, dog= omnivore, can be vegan raw fruit and veg, cats= carnoivore, raw meat, you could get offcuts or organ from the butcher .. if you just feed them tinned food etc this is why they get really ill and die early, in nature they would not be eating processed cooked food and animals in nature are way more healthy. Just the se with humans.
Love them enough to feed them closest to how they should eat and give them clean water, distilled= distill it yourself or collect the rainwater which is distilled, not tap water full of chlorine, floride, meds etc..
I like how you don't necessarily come to a conclusion here. It's good to have a conversation even when we don't necessarily know what's wrong or right.
definitely something more people need to think about!! i think that living with animals is certainly in some ways a wonderful thing, but people need to see them as equals and as family members rather than as their property and i've thought about this before but you put it into words more concisely and i appreciate it lots!! keep doing what youre doing
Equals? Hmmm. What if I told you the very device you're using right now to post on this thread is made with dead animals. Would that change your mind? Your electronic device is made with animal stearic acid. This compound that is derived from animals is used as an emulsifier in your electronic device with high density in tight tolerances to withstand Heat, pressure and friction to keep your device from blowing up or burning up. Many electronic manufacturers have tried to use a plant-based stearic acid and they have failed drastically. The Apple company tried it and their prototype couldn't get out of the Prototype stage. So if animals are your friends, would you be willing to stop using this electronic device that you do not need to have to live, and yes there are many people in this world that live without electronics, or are animals really that important to you? How about the medical field and all the vaccinations that are made with animals to keep you healthy and protected from deadly diseases? I could go on and on with a number of products that you need in your life. So I'm curious, how do you put an animal equal with humans when you are willingly using an animal product? Should we use human stearic acid and kill people so you can have Electronics? Is that the same? I'm curious.
Jeremy Snow This is not about perfection. It’s that is your goal you will drive yourself into insanity. This isn’t about what WE CAN do, as consumers. As the person behind the dollar. Because the dollar plays a large role in our society. This about reducing your harm as practically possible. And there is many ways you can do this.
Jeremy Snow But yes. I definitely would stop using electronics. They’re fucking cancer. Our minds are the key to intelligence.
@@Monai3ficent I am not vegan, but I understand your points and conviction for your cause. However, this Ed guy and others like him on TH-cam are nothing more then militant absolutionists...same as alot of vegans posting on this video and many other vegan videos. If u look, u will discover a very common theme of belittlement and hate towards people who are not vegan on these videos....as well as a very large sense of ego with holier then thou minds that believe they are always right. Yet, most every convenience, luxury, and necessity in life is produced by the very people that most vegans despise with the usage of animals. Just like with the example of electronics, there is not one vegan on this planet that has ever produced an electronic device without the usage of animals. I understand your point about you can only do what you can do and you're not going to be perfect, but with militant vegans such as your leaders and a lot of other vegans posting on these videos, it seems to me that those that believe animals are human equal and should not be used as food or products., should start practicing what they preach. I truly do not believe you can stand on a soapbox and tell people how wrong they are for using animals while you yourself use them when you do not need to do so for life and then try to exempt yourself with a fallacy or some other remedial excuse. It's either for the animals or it's not. It's too easy to preach at someone about eating meat in their diet but it's so easy to exempt yourself from your own evils that you preach about when it comes to the minds of most militant vegans. This is a hypocritical stance and one that I find very displeasing about vegans. I believe veganism is Honorable from a personal standpoint. However, what I have found, in most vegans, they are not honorable and are a hypocrite to what they preach. To me, it's like an alcoholic preaching and belittling people for drinking whiskey, but they have no problem drinking wine. Understand my point?
I don't care about the language that you use: I don't wish to be imprisoned in a house by an upright ape.
Whenever people start lecturing about the meaning of words, you can almost predict they are going to make a false or misleading statement. "It" is not used exclusively to refer to inanimate objects -- "it" is used to refer to a myriad of things, concepts, ideas, and non-human beings, and sometimes even human beings.