PDA

View Full Version : Cat breeding


Dragoman
August 15th 09, 02:04 AM
I've been lurking in this group for a while, getting nuggets of advice
here and there, and I can't help but notice the dogmatic attitude the
majority of the participants have towards the breeding of our masters.
:) It was made explicit in the recent thread about "breading", but it
was apparent in other threads too. Dogmatism, however, is never good.

For some reason, this dogma assumes that all cats are equal, and if you
want a kitten, go to the shelter where they're overflowing. Would that
be the same advice you would give to people that want to have children,
and would you yourself practice it? After all, the planet has more than
enough people, more than can be sustained, in fact, and the orphanages
and the third world countries are overflowing with unwanted kids, whose
fate you can only improve. So sterilize yourself, (or don't have
children), and adopt. If you have done so, and if this is the advice
you're giving to wannabe parents, then I submit - you have all the right
to advocate the same for cats. If you haven't however, please STFU.

The responsible attitude, as I see it, is not to let the kitties breed
indiscriminately - far from it - but to treat each on a case by case
basis. Don't spay/neuter the kitty until they are let's say 2 years old,
before considering if they are really that special kitty that deserves
having one litter. After all, they are /not/ created equal, and not each
is cute, smart, affectionate, healthy and playful. The same way one
would not adopt just any kitty from a shelter, and would skip the ugly,
dumb, sick and inferior (and most often would /not/ find one worth
adoption), one should give a chance to your pet, if (s)he has the
qualities that you like. In that case, if you have secured homes for the
eventual kittens with acquaintances that have been charmed by your
kitty's qualities and that want to have a similar one, find a suitably
fine mate, and let them have a litter. If however, you can't guarantee
homes for the litter, or if the kitty is not up to par (and I admit that
this is the hardest thing to decide, for they are like our children, and
it is very difficult to see and admit their faults), then of course,
visit the vet. But after that, love them doubly, if possible, to
compensated for the potential offspring that you have destroyed,
essentially killing them (in the grand scheme of things).

jmc
August 15th 09, 02:27 AM
Suddenly, without warning, Dragoman exclaimed (8/14/2009 9:04 PM):
> I've been lurking in this group for a while, getting nuggets of advice
> here and there, and I can't help but notice the dogmatic attitude the
> majority of the participants have towards the breeding of our masters.
> :) It was made explicit in the recent thread about "breading", but it
> was apparent in other threads too. Dogmatism, however, is never good.
>
> For some reason, this dogma assumes that all cats are equal, and if you
> want a kitten, go to the shelter where they're overflowing. Would that
> be the same advice you would give to people that want to have children,
> and would you yourself practice it? After all, the planet has more than
> enough people, more than can be sustained, in fact, and the orphanages
> and the third world countries are overflowing with unwanted kids, whose
> fate you can only improve. So sterilize yourself, (or don't have
> children), and adopt. If you have done so, and if this is the advice
> you're giving to wannabe parents, then I submit - you have all the right
> to advocate the same for cats. If you haven't however, please STFU.
>

Actually, I have chosen to not have children, and have occasionally
suggested adopting rather than bringing more children in to the world.
Been called deviant for not having kids, too. Seriously.

So, thank you for allowing me, as an American, to keep my first
amendment rights :)

I'm not as militant as some, but I still advocate not breeding unless
you truly have exceptional, pedigreed cats (if nobody at all bred cats,
and they were all spayed or neutered, they'd go extinct, after all).

I'm a horsewoman as well, where the problem is magnified, and I believe
even stables who's primary business is breeding, should concentrate on
training and give the mares a break while the economy sucks, rather than
producing more unsellable horses.

Right now, we don't need more cats, dogs, horses, or humans.

jmc

John Doe
August 15th 09, 03:16 AM
Dragoman > wrote:

> I've been lurking in this group for a while

Apparently, Drag, you are nym-shifting or you are new to USENET.
The "STFU" comment suggests that you are new to USENET (or maybe
just trolling).

> I can't help but notice the dogmatic attitude the majority of
> the participants have towards the breeding

> For some reason, this dogma assumes that all cats are equal, and
> if you want a kitten, go to the shelter where they're
> overflowing. Would that be the same advice you would give to
> people that want to have children

But of course there is a big difference, Drag. Whether you pick up
a cat from a shelter or from a breeder, in either case you are not
bearing a child.

> and would you yourself practice it? After all, the planet has
> more than enough people, more than can be sustained, in fact,
> and the orphanages and the third world countries are overflowing
> with unwanted kids

At this point, I might argue about the fact that we human beings
are in control of our own population.

> After all, they are /not/ created equal

In your opinion, Drag.

> and not each is cute, smart, affectionate, healthy and playful.

They might be different, but almost all cats make good pets, if
you know how to manage them. The only exception I have experienced
is with my current feral female, but she is clearly mentally ill.

> The same way one would not adopt just any kitty from a shelter,
> and would skip the ugly, dumb, sick and inferior

To each his own, Drag. I do not adopt cats from a shelter, I take
them directly off of the street. The only qualification is that
the cat appears to be in need and that I have room/time for
another.

Dragoman
August 15th 09, 04:20 AM
jmc wrote:
> Suddenly, without warning, Dragoman exclaimed (8/14/2009 9:04 PM):
>>
>> For some reason, this dogma assumes that all cats are equal, and if
>> you want a kitten, go to the shelter where they're overflowing. Would
>> that be the same advice you would give to people that want to have
>> children, and would you yourself practice it? After all, the planet
>> has more than enough people, more than can be sustained, in fact, and
>> the orphanages and the third world countries are overflowing with
>> unwanted kids, whose fate you can only improve. So sterilize yourself,
>> (or don't have children), and adopt. If you have done so, and if this
>> is the advice you're giving to wannabe parents, then I submit - you
>> have all the right to advocate the same for cats. If you haven't
>> however, please STFU.
>>
>
> Actually, I have chosen to not have children, and have occasionally
> suggested adopting rather than bringing more children in to the world.
> Been called deviant for not having kids, too. Seriously.

If that's really the case, as I said, I can't argue with you. You win by
default. :)


> So, thank you for allowing me, as an American, to keep my first
> amendment rights :)

I don't think this concerns exactly the First amendment, but you're
welcome. :)

>
> Right now, we don't need more cats, dogs, horses, or humans.

That's true, but we can at least exercise some kind of control on who
exactly has offspring. Right now, it seems, in all species except
horses, it's the least desirable ones. You have the right to disagree
about it, of course - I know nothing about horses.

Dragoman
August 15th 09, 04:36 AM
John Doe wrote:
> Dragoman > wrote:
>
>> I've been lurking in this group for a while
>
> Apparently, Drag, you are nym-shifting or you are new to USENET.
> The "STFU" comment suggests that you are new to USENET (or maybe
> just trolling).

First of all, it is 'Drago'. Second, what a ridiculous comment. STFU has
a long-lasting noble pedigree on Usenet, just like RTFM.


>> For some reason, this dogma assumes that all cats are equal, and
>> if you want a kitten, go to the shelter where they're
>> overflowing. Would that be the same advice you would give to
>> people that want to have children
>
> But of course there is a big difference, Drag. Whether you pick up
> a cat from a shelter or from a breeder, in either case you are not
> bearing a child.

You are not bearing a child when you pick one up from an orphanage
either. What's your point?


>> After all, they are /not/ created equal
>
> In your opinion, Drag.

Well, they are not. It's not a matter of opinion, just the way things
are. Natural selection wouldn't work if everybody was equal.


>> The same way one would not adopt just any kitty from a shelter,
>> and would skip the ugly, dumb, sick and inferior
>
> To each his own, Drag. I do not adopt cats from a shelter, I take
> them directly off of the street. The only qualification is that
> the cat appears to be in need and that I have room/time for
> another.

This is so only if your goal is a quixotic quest to save all cats. Mine
(and I believe most cat lovers') is not. I don't want to save all cats,
I just want to find the one that will be my friend and companion, and
such are rare and far between. You are not friends with all people you
know either; why should it be any different with cats?

HardySpicer
August 15th 09, 04:37 AM
On Aug 14, 6:04*pm, Dragoman > wrote:
> I've been lurking in this group for a while, getting nuggets of advice
> here and there, and I can't help but notice the dogmatic attitude the

Yes this holier than thow attitude will get you nowhere for sure.
Bunch of tree-hugging hippies.


Hardy

John Doe
August 15th 09, 05:36 AM
Dragoman <dragoman moodragon.net.invalid> wrote:

> John Doe wrote:
>> Dragoman <dragoman moodragon.net.invalid> wrote:

>>> I've been lurking in this group for a while
>>
>> Apparently, Drag, you are nym-shifting or you are new to
>> USENET. The "STFU" comment suggests that you are new to USENET
>> (or maybe just trolling).
>
> First of all, it is 'Drago'. Second, what a ridiculous comment.
> STFU has a long-lasting noble pedigree on Usenet, just like
> RTFM.

That is silly rhetoric, Drag. Anyway... Is trolling the reason you
are nym-shifting?

>>> For some reason, this dogma assumes that all cats are equal,
>>> and if you want a kitten, go to the shelter where they're
>>> overflowing. Would that be the same advice you would give to
>>> people that want to have children
>>
>> But of course there is a big difference, Drag. Whether you pick
>> up a cat from a shelter or from a breeder, in either case you
>> are not bearing a child.
>
> You are not bearing a child when you pick one up from an
> orphanage either. What's your point?

That was my point, Drag, apparently you are having trouble
following your own line of reasoning.

>>> After all, they are /not/ created equal
>>
>> In your opinion, Drag.
>
> Well, they are not. It's not a matter of opinion, just the way
> things are. Natural selection wouldn't work if everybody was
> equal.

We are not talking about natural selection, Drag, we are talking
about a personal choice. By the way... Where do you usually post under other nyms, Drag?

>>> The same way one would not adopt just any kitty from a
>>> shelter, and would skip the ugly, dumb, sick and inferior
>>
>> To each his own, Drag. I do not adopt cats from a shelter, I
>> take them directly off of the street. The only qualification is
>> that the cat appears to be in need and that I have room/time
>> for another.
>
> This is so only if your goal is a quixotic quest to save all
> cats.

But in fact, Drag, I know that is not possible. I do not try to
save all cats. Like you, they are for companionship. The
difference is that I choose to kill two birds with one stone, by
taking in a cat(s) that is in need.

> I just want to find the one that will be my friend and
> companion, and such are rare and far between.

That sounds like a personal problem (or just more silly trollish
rhetoric) to me, Drag.

> You are not friends with all people you know either; why should
> it be any different with cats?

To paraphrase Will Rogers "I love a cat because he does nothing
for political reasons".

















>
>
> Path: news.astraweb.com!border5.newsrouter.astraweb.com! news.glorb.com!news2.glorb.com!news2.arglkargh.de! newsfeed.straub-nv.de!feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!not-for-mail
> From: Dragoman <dragoman moodragon.net.invalid>
> Newsgroups: rec.pets.cats.health+behav
> Subject: Re: Cat breeding
> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 23:36:26 -0400
> Organization: Blue Moon
> Lines: 47
> Message-ID: <h65b2s$odg$1 news.eternal-september.org>
> References: <h6524t$31j$1 news.eternal-september.org> <00259735$0$1977$c3e8da3 news.astraweb.com>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Trace: news.eternal-september.org U2FsdGVkX189oBd09lASCDNhrHzfEcBqip7m/3E4nQ2h7qKMnsP9Z7jLlt9D/00UYDqZy6E3LnBjjSkKaPWhy//lUmT0WXPjvjYQTLu3m9UuZwMB+erxTZLgbzdDCvSSSS3X7av5P gdZTUdZHJsTZVv57HO4k0mN
> X-Complaints-To: abuse eternal-september.org
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 03:46:37 +0000 (UTC)
> In-Reply-To: <00259735$0$1977$c3e8da3 news.astraweb.com>
> X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX1/qY158fQlVSjAvutNXKLdAxQ3Ss9iqSmGh/cb4vHtxkg==
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:lcLxBaajaG6WWJL/oPCpHcSbB+w=
> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
>

dejablues[_4_]
August 15th 09, 07:23 AM
"Dragoman" > wrote in message
...
>
> You are not bearing a child when you pick one up from an orphanage either.
> What's your point?

Children are picked up from orphanages? Oh Happy Day!
Where are these orphanages and how might I pick up a child from one? I
thought that adopting a child was very difficult and expensive, but you have
given me hope!
Please tell me, where are these orphanages?

Netmask[_2_]
August 15th 09, 09:26 AM
jmc wrote:
> Suddenly, without warning, Dragoman exclaimed (8/14/2009 9:04 PM):
>> I've been lurking in this group for a while, getting nuggets of advice
>> here and there, and I can't help but notice the dogmatic attitude the
>> majority of the participants have towards the breeding of our masters.
>> :) It was made explicit in the recent thread about "breading", but it
>> was apparent in other threads too. Dogmatism, however, is never good.
>>
>> For some reason, this dogma assumes that all cats are equal, and if
>> you want a kitten, go to the shelter where they're overflowing. Would
>> that be the same advice you would give to people that want to have
>> children, and would you yourself practice it? After all, the planet
>> has more than enough people, more than can be sustained, in fact, and
>> the orphanages and the third world countries are overflowing with
>> unwanted kids, whose fate you can only improve. So sterilize yourself,
>> (or don't have children), and adopt. If you have done so, and if this
>> is the advice you're giving to wannabe parents, then I submit - you
>> have all the right to advocate the same for cats. If you haven't
>> however, please STFU.
>>
>
> Actually, I have chosen to not have children, and have occasionally
> suggested adopting rather than bringing more children in to the world.
> Been called deviant for not having kids, too. Seriously.
>
> So, thank you for allowing me, as an American, to keep my first
> amendment rights :)
>
> I'm not as militant as some, but I still advocate not breeding unless
> you truly have exceptional, pedigreed cats (if nobody at all bred cats,
> and they were all spayed or neutered, they'd go extinct, after all).
>
> I'm a horsewoman as well, where the problem is magnified, and I believe
> even stables who's primary business is breeding, should concentrate on
> training and give the mares a break while the economy sucks, rather than
> producing more unsellable horses.
>
> Right now, we don't need more cats, dogs, horses, or humans.
>
> jmc

and the pope should endorse homosexuality to reduce the burden on mother
earth, especially in south america, india and china.

No Name
August 15th 09, 09:39 AM
"HardySpicer" > wrote in message
...
On Aug 14, 6:04 pm, Dragoman > wrote:
> I've been lurking in this group for a while, getting nuggets of advice
> here and there, and I can't help but notice the dogmatic attitude the

Yes this holier than thow attitude will get you nowhere for sure.
Bunch of tree-hugging hippies.


Hardy


you will have more luck converting Osama Bin Lardarse to Christianity

jmc
August 15th 09, 02:20 PM
Suddenly, without warning, Netmask exclaimed (8/15/2009 4:26 AM):
> jmc wrote:
>> Right now, we don't need more cats, dogs, horses, or humans.
>>
>> jmc
>
> and the pope should endorse homosexuality to reduce the burden on mother
> earth, especially in south america, india and china.

Actually, I've heard one "makes sense in a weird way" theory that
homosexuality IS one of Nature's ways of controlling population (not one
of the more effective, but meh). You do not it's not limited to just
humans right? I've seen it recorded in dolphin and equine populations,
though I imagine every type of mammal has individuals who "swing the
other way".

I remain neutral on what the Pope should do as I'm not one of his followers.



jmc

cybercat
August 15th 09, 07:40 PM
"Netmask" > wrote in message
...
> jmc wrote:
>> Suddenly, without warning, Dragoman exclaimed (8/14/2009 9:04 PM):
>>> I've been lurking in this group for a while, getting nuggets of advice
>>> here and there, and I can't help but notice the dogmatic attitude the
>>> majority of the participants have towards the breeding of our masters.
>>> :) It was made explicit in the recent thread about "breading", but it
>>> was apparent in other threads too. Dogmatism, however, is never good.
>>>
>>> For some reason, this dogma assumes that all cats are equal, and if you
>>> want a kitten, go to the shelter where they're overflowing. Would that
>>> be the same advice you would give to people that want to have children,
>>> and would you yourself practice it? After all, the planet has more than
>>> enough people, more than can be sustained, in fact, and the orphanages
>>> and the third world countries are overflowing with unwanted kids, whose
>>> fate you can only improve. So sterilize yourself, (or don't have
>>> children), and adopt. If you have done so, and if this is the advice
>>> you're giving to wannabe parents, then I submit - you have all the right
>>> to advocate the same for cats. If you haven't however, please STFU.
>>>
>>
>> Actually, I have chosen to not have children, and have occasionally
>> suggested adopting rather than bringing more children in to the world.
>> Been called deviant for not having kids, too. Seriously.
>>
>> So, thank you for allowing me, as an American, to keep my first amendment
>> rights :)
>>
>> I'm not as militant as some, but I still advocate not breeding unless you
>> truly have exceptional, pedigreed cats (if nobody at all bred cats, and
>> they were all spayed or neutered, they'd go extinct, after all).
>>
>> I'm a horsewoman as well, where the problem is magnified, and I believe
>> even stables who's primary business is breeding, should concentrate on
>> training and give the mares a break while the economy sucks, rather than
>> producing more unsellable horses.
>>
>> Right now, we don't need more cats, dogs, horses, or humans.
>>
>> jmc
>
> and the pope should endorse homosexuality to reduce the burden on mother
> earth, especially in south america, india and china.

And you are still a status-seeking moron.

cybercat
August 15th 09, 07:42 PM
"jmc" > wrote:>
> I remain neutral on what the Pope should do as I'm not one of his
> followers.
>

I'm pretty much with you, but I do think he should supplement his wardrobe.
Dude has got to want to just blow off the robes and slip on a pair of
shorts every now and again.

jmc
August 15th 09, 08:44 PM
Suddenly, without warning, cybercat exclaimed (8/15/2009 2:42 PM):
> "jmc" > wrote:>
>> I remain neutral on what the Pope should do as I'm not one of his
>> followers.
>>
>
> I'm pretty much with you, but I do think he should supplement his wardrobe.
> Dude has got to want to just blow off the robes and slip on a pair of
> shorts every now and again.
>
>

::pictures the Pope wearing shorts, flip-flops, a tie-dye shirt, and
mirrored sunglasses ::

does that mean I'm going to hell now? :-D

jmc

cybercat
August 15th 09, 11:18 PM
"hopitus" > wrote:
>Your "pic" is conservative. Mine has Him losing the shirt and shorts
>and in a red Speedo like the rest of them. Anyone sporting shirt and
>shorts on South Beach is from someplace like MileHigh, where I am.
>There are no natural beaches here.

Eyyuu! The Pope in a red speedo!

Cheryl[_3_]
August 15th 09, 11:41 PM
"jmc" > wrote in message
...
> Suddenly, without warning, Netmask exclaimed (8/15/2009 4:26 AM):
>> jmc wrote:
>>> Right now, we don't need more cats, dogs, horses, or humans.
>>>
>>> jmc
>>
>> and the pope should endorse homosexuality to reduce the burden on mother
>> earth, especially in south america, india and china.
>
> Actually, I've heard one "makes sense in a weird way" theory that
> homosexuality IS one of Nature's ways of controlling population (not one
> of the more effective, but meh). You do not it's not limited to just
> humans right? I've seen it recorded in dolphin and equine populations,
> though I imagine every type of mammal has individuals who "swing the other
> way".

And in the bird world, there are many cases of penguins selecting a same
gender mate.

jmc
August 16th 09, 02:29 AM
Suddenly, without warning, cybercat exclaimed (8/15/2009 6:18 PM):
> "hopitus" > wrote:
>> Your "pic" is conservative. Mine has Him losing the shirt and shorts
>> and in a red Speedo like the rest of them. Anyone sporting shirt and
>> shorts on South Beach is from someplace like MileHigh, where I am.
>> There are no natural beaches here.
>
> Eyyuu! The Pope in a red speedo!
>
>

Did you know the Aussies call speedos "budgie smugglers"?
Budgie=parakeet. Think about that for a minute, but you might want to
sit back from your keyboard while you do :)

It's one of my favorite Aussieisms.

jmc

Netmask[_2_]
August 16th 09, 04:48 AM
hopitus wrote:
> On Aug 15, 4:18 pm, "cybercat" > wrote:
>> "hopitus" > wrote:
>>> Your "pic" is conservative. Mine has Him losing the shirt and shorts
>>> and in a red Speedo like the rest of them. Anyone sporting shirt and
>>> shorts on South Beach is from someplace like MileHigh, where I am.
>>> There are no natural beaches here.
>> Eyyuu! The Pope in a red speedo!
>
> I forgot where you are. On South Beach there will be stuff on display
> there
> seen nowhere else in USA but common on Brazilian and French beaches
> "Let It All Hang Out" is more than a saying in south FL.
> You must admit I had the gentility (for which I am not noted in ng's)
> not
> to mention the clothing-optional beaches there (google "Haulover
> Beach".

he he mid mid western state american tourists to Sydney beaches look
distinctly uncomfortable as they see topless mums and kids sunbaking up
the southern end of Bondi and especially at Glamorama sipping latte
coffee and guys quickly slipping everything off to change (with a towel
that always drops). Australia never had a puritan period - anti clerical
and bawdy right from the start. May it never go!

cybercat
August 16th 09, 07:21 AM
"Netmask" > wrote in message
...
> hopitus wrote:
>> On Aug 15, 4:18 pm, "cybercat" > wrote:
>>> "hopitus" > wrote:
>>>> Your "pic" is conservative. Mine has Him losing the shirt and shorts
>>>> and in a red Speedo like the rest of them. Anyone sporting shirt and
>>>> shorts on South Beach is from someplace like MileHigh, where I am.
>>>> There are no natural beaches here.
>>> Eyyuu! The Pope in a red speedo!
>>
>> I forgot where you are. On South Beach there will be stuff on display
>> there
>> seen nowhere else in USA but common on Brazilian and French beaches
>> "Let It All Hang Out" is more than a saying in south FL.
>> You must admit I had the gentility (for which I am not noted in ng's)
>> not
>> to mention the clothing-optional beaches there (google "Haulover
>> Beach".
>
> he he mid mid western state american tourists to Sydney beaches look
> distinctly uncomfortable as they see topless mums and kids sunbaking up
> the southern end of Bondi and especially at Glamorama sipping latte coffee
> and guys quickly slipping everything off to change (with a towel that
> always drops). Australia never had a puritan period - anti clerical and
> bawdy right from the start. May it never go!

Tell us again about your *coughcough* coat of arms.