I'm sorry but I think all the people overreacting to this photo are
the ones who lack respect for these creatures. For them, cats are
only a means to show their superior sensitivity and morality. They
seek a way to lord over, not just innocent beasties, but their
fellow man. Shame on them and their nannying, puritanical
busibodiness.
C'mon fad.
You're not sorry.
You're happy to have a chance to lord over your fellow nannying, puritanical, busybody man.
I'm sorry, though,...that you feel inferior, and defensively attack those who you fear may be your superiors.
No one has suggested that cats are JUST(you mean only) "victims". The "respect shared creaturliness" you describe is the very point of the protestors posts/comments.
So where is your disagreement?
Reducing this tempest to a size more appropriate to the teapot, the essential proposition of the pro-respect crowd is this:
Deliberate treatment that is or may be harmful or (more likely in the present case) distressing to an animal should be discouraged as a form of "fun", ...and such discouragement may be appropriately given in the form of gentle instruction to those too young to have figured this out on their own.
Seems a harmless enough stand, no? Maybe even a reasonable one, given our "shared creaturliness" and all ;-)
It is interesting that this fairly mild-at-base bit of expressed opinion serves to red-flag you into charging, raspberry at full blast, into the midst of the puritanical busibodies,...you know, the ones without a shred of decency.
Nice of you, though, to concede a bit of progress being made by the "obtuse", "in-sensitive" one, ...it bears out your expressed ability to see "joy and love", ...while keeping a sharp eye(and tongue) on the "malicious", whom you imagine to be filled with hate. (Gotta watch that "beholder's eye" thing ;-)
I, too, see joy and love everywhere. That's why I forgive your condescending heaping of "shame" on those whom you erroneously describe as using consideration for cats/creatures only as a means for establishing their superiority over others.
Speaking again of superiority:
I freely admit to feeling superior, in this one sense, to anyone who dismisses any voiced concern for considerate treatment of other creatures as "fanaticism". If you must envision a fence between us, ...I am not confused about which side to stand on.
Neil,
Your cartoon-level reduction of all matters-of-concern to side-show sh*
-stirring stunts & "baiting", ($10/complaint, negative cat posts,etc.), and your "chimps", "looneys", "cat-people", etc., characterization of all with a particular view of an issue,...firmly establishes you as a shallow surface feeder (I can think-up names, too ;-).
You may consider this the ideal position from which to look down on everyone else, but there is more to it.
Some of those swimming (and thinking) a little deeper, are having a grown-up discussion about philosophy, inter-creature relationships, youth instruction, etc.
Does this mean that they are therefore effete, over-serious sticks-in-the-mud?
No, it simply reflects the fact that adults occasionally spend a bit of time in serious discussion of things which may actually be of some importance.
Of course this fact-of-ordinary -life is easily lost on the kid who runs screaming through the library, for "fun".
Your labeling, name-calling, and dismissive reductionist attitude prompts me to permit my own a&&hole side to show. I offer this for your (probably non-)consideration:
In spite of you need-for/delight-in pigeon-holing, "cat people'"are quite often also "dog people", "horse people", "deer people", etc., ...even sometimes "people people (Ugh!" ;-). They are not neccesarily "pansies" when compared with yourself. You have no way of knowing, of course (given your colored-perception) but odds are very good that I am more macho and intelligent than yourself, and enjoy more than a bit of leg-pulling / horseplay as well. It is as such an (at LEAST) "equal" that I give you this carefully thought-out advice, in response to your post.
Shove it!
Larry ( Can't help it,...I am SOO up-tight! Or maybe it's the wet-pants that make me act this way.
To respect a cat is to understand it shares creatureliness with us.
They are not just victims. They are just as capable of annoying us
as we are of annoying them! At lest mine are. And they sometimes
do it for fun!
Anyone who would drive a cat for miles to get it pose for him
started out with no sense of his cat (and most cats) are like in
the first place. It was nice that he learned. But how long did he
live with it before figuring this out? All he proved is that,
although basically obtuse, he was capable of being trained by his
pet. That does not give one the right to criticize other people.
He was lucky that his cat was smart enough to wake him out of his
torpor. The owner was not being sensitive. The cat was
intelligent enough to train him! For my money, the cat gets all
the credit, and the owner a big fat rasberry. Sensitive, my foot.
I'm surprised the busibodies did not crticize his daughter for
being a potential anoerexic, for typecasting her by letting her
wear pink and for letting her play in a room with an open fan. It
would make just as much sense.
And yes, it is extremely abusive to criticize someone's parenting
in public. No one with a shred of decency would do so. It
indicates a malicious heart to knowingly would a human being that
way.
I look at the picture and I see a family full of joy and love.
There is nothing the puritans hate more, I suppose.