If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#351
|
|||
|
|||
"Yngver" wrote in message ... MadHatter wrote: ...or that cat died of boredom. my cat has LOTS to do at home. plenty of places to hide, lots of things and humans to hunt. lots of things to shred and tear. That's great for your cat, but lots of cats *do* die of boredom, in the sense that bored cats have nothing much more to do than eat and sleep, and obesity has contributed to the shortened lifespans of many an indoor cat--as do behavioral problems. Not everyone makes up for the lack of exercise and mental stimulation that cats experience outdoors by making sure their indoor cats get plenty of exercise and playtime. And needless to say, not everyone who lets their cats out has given adequate thought to the dangers in their particular neighborhood. In the end the outdoors is still far more dangerous than the indoors, generally speaking. |
#352
|
|||
|
|||
"Mary" wrote in message
m... "Jeannie" wrote There is. And I think the underlying attitude I mention in other posts--the one of cats being "just animals" vs the one of cats being family members essentially equal to humans in value--is also a factor in the indoor/outdoor issue. I see this in the posts of the people who post from the UK; Who in this thread has made a statement like this? Who said anyone did? And who WOULD actually state something like this? You post implied you were talking about *this thread", ... you may now continue to back-track if you wish....BTW why are you posting in HTML? That's why I said "underlying attitude." I can't prove an underlying attitude. But I know it is there, in many people. How do I know? Their behavior tells me that the cat is dispensable. My friend, for example (who was from Scotland, by the way) a great horse and dog and cat woman--who stated outright that she would rather her cats have shorter lives--in other words die young--than not be allowed outside and she ALWAYS lived in busy urban areas. So far she has killed three cats. THAT tells me that she can bear to lose them. Even if she had not said it, any idiot could tell it by her behavior. She always got a new cat when one died. The most recent is declawed, and I can only hope this stupid bitch is keeping him inside. All that aside, we are discussing people and pets in general terms. Therefore whether or not anyone "in this thread" made a statement "like this" is not pertinent. Do I think any of you feel this way? You might. I think it is extremely pertinent as, it seems to me that you were casting aspersions again without any evidence to back them up. Tut, Tut some of you have seen it when you have taken your pets to large animal veterinarians. Then there is the "garden of eden" complex, where whatever is natural, including death via predators, is just the way it goes. Who thinks this way? I believe I have hit a nerve. No Mary, although I'm afraid you may have hit yourself in the head again These factors taken together with the fact that it is just so much more convenient to let your cat come and go as it pleases--especially with regard to cleaning cat boxes Not true... I see. So it is harder to clean the cat box when your cat eliminates out of doors? I have to clean the litter-tray every day as I have already said. and being mindful of whether or not anybody gets out-- Why is making work for yourself somehow more worthy when said work is un-necessary? LOL! I DID hit a nerve. Here you are essentially admitting that you let your cats roam to save you the work of cleaning their boxes. No...see above and I truly believe that these attitudes lead people to let their animals roam in situations that are truly dangerous for the animals. Such as in busy urban or suburban areas, or in urban areas where there are active predators. No-one has advocated this, in this thread at least... That is what is behind the venom in some of my comments. To endanger our pets for our convenience and then dress it up in a "wild thing be free" romanticized crock of horse**** is the worst. I have not read a single post where the "born free" mentality was apparent; are we reading the same thread? A clue for you, Princess: I have been reading this group and all of the cat groups for years. Well done... Want to see manifestations of this attitude? I've no need to Google, I know the attitude exists, it just doesn't exist in this thread which was why I couldn't fathom why you bought it up. Google for it. But you know it exists. Look in the mirror. I have looked in the mirror Mary and found my face looking back at me, I don't generally find that I can see "attitudes" in a mirror, maybe you can, who knows. You seem to be able to see "underlying attitudes" in newsgroups although this could be because you don't actually *read* the posts. Anyhow, it's Friday night, I've just got paid and I've got better things to do than sit in front of a computer arguing in ever decreasing circles with you about cat's! Jeannie --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.726 / Virus Database: 481 - Release Date: 22/07/04 |
#353
|
|||
|
|||
"Mary" wrote in message
m... "Jeannie" wrote There is. And I think the underlying attitude I mention in other posts--the one of cats being "just animals" vs the one of cats being family members essentially equal to humans in value--is also a factor in the indoor/outdoor issue. I see this in the posts of the people who post from the UK; Who in this thread has made a statement like this? Who said anyone did? And who WOULD actually state something like this? You post implied you were talking about *this thread", ... you may now continue to back-track if you wish....BTW why are you posting in HTML? That's why I said "underlying attitude." I can't prove an underlying attitude. But I know it is there, in many people. How do I know? Their behavior tells me that the cat is dispensable. My friend, for example (who was from Scotland, by the way) a great horse and dog and cat woman--who stated outright that she would rather her cats have shorter lives--in other words die young--than not be allowed outside and she ALWAYS lived in busy urban areas. So far she has killed three cats. THAT tells me that she can bear to lose them. Even if she had not said it, any idiot could tell it by her behavior. She always got a new cat when one died. The most recent is declawed, and I can only hope this stupid bitch is keeping him inside. All that aside, we are discussing people and pets in general terms. Therefore whether or not anyone "in this thread" made a statement "like this" is not pertinent. Do I think any of you feel this way? You might. I think it is extremely pertinent as, it seems to me that you were casting aspersions again without any evidence to back them up. Tut, Tut some of you have seen it when you have taken your pets to large animal veterinarians. Then there is the "garden of eden" complex, where whatever is natural, including death via predators, is just the way it goes. Who thinks this way? I believe I have hit a nerve. No Mary, although I'm afraid you may have hit yourself in the head again These factors taken together with the fact that it is just so much more convenient to let your cat come and go as it pleases--especially with regard to cleaning cat boxes Not true... I see. So it is harder to clean the cat box when your cat eliminates out of doors? I have to clean the litter-tray every day as I have already said. and being mindful of whether or not anybody gets out-- Why is making work for yourself somehow more worthy when said work is un-necessary? LOL! I DID hit a nerve. Here you are essentially admitting that you let your cats roam to save you the work of cleaning their boxes. No...see above and I truly believe that these attitudes lead people to let their animals roam in situations that are truly dangerous for the animals. Such as in busy urban or suburban areas, or in urban areas where there are active predators. No-one has advocated this, in this thread at least... That is what is behind the venom in some of my comments. To endanger our pets for our convenience and then dress it up in a "wild thing be free" romanticized crock of horse**** is the worst. I have not read a single post where the "born free" mentality was apparent; are we reading the same thread? A clue for you, Princess: I have been reading this group and all of the cat groups for years. Well done... Want to see manifestations of this attitude? I've no need to Google, I know the attitude exists, it just doesn't exist in this thread which was why I couldn't fathom why you bought it up. Google for it. But you know it exists. Look in the mirror. I have looked in the mirror Mary and found my face looking back at me, I don't generally find that I can see "attitudes" in a mirror, maybe you can, who knows. You seem to be able to see "underlying attitudes" in newsgroups although this could be because you don't actually *read* the posts. Anyhow, it's Friday night, I've just got paid and I've got better things to do than sit in front of a computer arguing in ever decreasing circles with you about cat's! Jeannie --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.726 / Virus Database: 481 - Release Date: 22/07/04 |
#354
|
|||
|
|||
"Mary" wrote in message om...
(...) cats being outside. Behind even the most measured words (such as Steve G.'s) there is an underlying, deeply entrenched cultural more that probably finds its roots in the Romantic period. Bwahahahaha - of all the quasi-intellectual ******** you've posted in this thread, this is by far the silliest. All you need to do is throw in a couple of Jungian archetypes and a bit o' relativism and you'd win the prize for most confused Usenet babble, 2004. The glorification and simultaneous demonizing and eroticizing of nature. You are the one demonizing nature here. A cultural thing? So, I guess all those American mountaineers don't actually exist. Ansel Adams was just a mass hallucination.As was Moran and the rest. (...) It's a kneejerk reaction to hundreds of years on conditioning, not a response to rational thought. Wonderful. I haven't heard such wooly thought for quite some time. Cultural classical conditioning as a reason for pets having access to the outdoors, fantastic. Now, put the LSD down and WALK SLOWLY BACK. Steve. |
#355
|
|||
|
|||
"Mary" wrote in message om...
(...) cats being outside. Behind even the most measured words (such as Steve G.'s) there is an underlying, deeply entrenched cultural more that probably finds its roots in the Romantic period. Bwahahahaha - of all the quasi-intellectual ******** you've posted in this thread, this is by far the silliest. All you need to do is throw in a couple of Jungian archetypes and a bit o' relativism and you'd win the prize for most confused Usenet babble, 2004. The glorification and simultaneous demonizing and eroticizing of nature. You are the one demonizing nature here. A cultural thing? So, I guess all those American mountaineers don't actually exist. Ansel Adams was just a mass hallucination.As was Moran and the rest. (...) It's a kneejerk reaction to hundreds of years on conditioning, not a response to rational thought. Wonderful. I haven't heard such wooly thought for quite some time. Cultural classical conditioning as a reason for pets having access to the outdoors, fantastic. Now, put the LSD down and WALK SLOWLY BACK. Steve. |
#356
|
|||
|
|||
"Mary" wrote in message om...
(...) petty. As far as insulting anyone's nationality, the arrogance of the British with regard to the exercise of power over the colonies is the worst kept secret in history. Here's a clue for you old girl: The British Empire and colonies are long past. However, other countries now have the opportunity to lead the way in abuse under the banner of God. Mind you, perhaps the likes of Abu Ghraib just waft over your head - hey, **** the towelheads, they're only worthless foreigners anyway.? (...) because they are British. God's chosen leaders. Etc., etc. blah blah. Historical fact. God's chosen leaders? Hmmm: "I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job." - George Bush (http://politicalwire.com/archives/20...f_the_day.html). I suppose you hate those ****in' Nazi Germans too. Not to mention the Italians - bloody Roman empire, riding roughshod over Europe. (...) Sophistry. I find that sad. I simply refuse to acknowledge the nastiness you think of as irony. It arises from your petty, sneering nature-- Steve's got a good touch of it too S'funny, I don't recall attacking someone's country in this thread. Haven't called anyone a bitch in this thread. Haven't implied that people with a different attitude to their pets than me must not care for there pets. Haven't attempted to demean others views simply because I disagree with them. Haven't accused people is disagree with of being too lazy to read the thread. Haven't called someone a 'mental dwarf'. Haven't gone around crying that Americans have a tendency to overestimate their own intelligence. Petty, sneering nature indeed. --whenever you suspect you may be in the wrong. It's transparent posturing, nothing more, and not worthy of my acknowledgement. No charge for that analysis. You seem to have made of lot of replies to things that are 'not worthy' of your acknowledgement. (...) Now why would my nationality be a secret? On the other hand, why would I tell you anything personal about myself? You get to know exactly what I tell you about myself. Oh, I think we know rather more than that. Steve. |
#357
|
|||
|
|||
"Mary" wrote in message om...
(...) petty. As far as insulting anyone's nationality, the arrogance of the British with regard to the exercise of power over the colonies is the worst kept secret in history. Here's a clue for you old girl: The British Empire and colonies are long past. However, other countries now have the opportunity to lead the way in abuse under the banner of God. Mind you, perhaps the likes of Abu Ghraib just waft over your head - hey, **** the towelheads, they're only worthless foreigners anyway.? (...) because they are British. God's chosen leaders. Etc., etc. blah blah. Historical fact. God's chosen leaders? Hmmm: "I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job." - George Bush (http://politicalwire.com/archives/20...f_the_day.html). I suppose you hate those ****in' Nazi Germans too. Not to mention the Italians - bloody Roman empire, riding roughshod over Europe. (...) Sophistry. I find that sad. I simply refuse to acknowledge the nastiness you think of as irony. It arises from your petty, sneering nature-- Steve's got a good touch of it too S'funny, I don't recall attacking someone's country in this thread. Haven't called anyone a bitch in this thread. Haven't implied that people with a different attitude to their pets than me must not care for there pets. Haven't attempted to demean others views simply because I disagree with them. Haven't accused people is disagree with of being too lazy to read the thread. Haven't called someone a 'mental dwarf'. Haven't gone around crying that Americans have a tendency to overestimate their own intelligence. Petty, sneering nature indeed. --whenever you suspect you may be in the wrong. It's transparent posturing, nothing more, and not worthy of my acknowledgement. No charge for that analysis. You seem to have made of lot of replies to things that are 'not worthy' of your acknowledgement. (...) Now why would my nationality be a secret? On the other hand, why would I tell you anything personal about myself? You get to know exactly what I tell you about myself. Oh, I think we know rather more than that. Steve. |
#358
|
|||
|
|||
"Mary" wrote in message om...
"Steve G" wrote in message om... (...) If the objectivism / relativism argument is an essential part of logical thought, then I'm a Norwegian pig-polisher named Olaf. You can't determine what is true without deterimining what is real. Nice to meet you, Olaf. Well, scientists don't spend their time wondering whether their test tubes actually exist, or whether the universe is really there or not. Oh look - we've just looped back round to 'A is A'. (...) If they are fenced and nothing can get in at them, they might as well be inside. Well, no - the risks are still greater in a fenced garden than indoors. (...) But there is a grain of truth in it. It is one of the things that distinguishes general American thought about cats and that of the British. In part because of the largely rural parts of Britain, and the "farmer" mentality that an animal is just an animal and as such is pretty much replaceable. And this you state, in the land of the declaw. Further, based on other - more representative discussion boards I read - it seems that declaw (and outdoor access) are far more prevalent in the US that you'd think from reading this forum. Here's another clue: Britain ain't a nation of farmers (the old saw is 'a nation of shopkeepers', and even a nation of pet lovers, though I don't suppose your clear contempt for Brits would ever let you accept that). US farm people can be the same way. I will admit that I hate this, because I don't think they are dispensable. Letting a cat have outdoor access is not synonymous with thinking the cat is dispensible. S. |
#359
|
|||
|
|||
"Mary" wrote in message om...
"Steve G" wrote in message om... (...) If the objectivism / relativism argument is an essential part of logical thought, then I'm a Norwegian pig-polisher named Olaf. You can't determine what is true without deterimining what is real. Nice to meet you, Olaf. Well, scientists don't spend their time wondering whether their test tubes actually exist, or whether the universe is really there or not. Oh look - we've just looped back round to 'A is A'. (...) If they are fenced and nothing can get in at them, they might as well be inside. Well, no - the risks are still greater in a fenced garden than indoors. (...) But there is a grain of truth in it. It is one of the things that distinguishes general American thought about cats and that of the British. In part because of the largely rural parts of Britain, and the "farmer" mentality that an animal is just an animal and as such is pretty much replaceable. And this you state, in the land of the declaw. Further, based on other - more representative discussion boards I read - it seems that declaw (and outdoor access) are far more prevalent in the US that you'd think from reading this forum. Here's another clue: Britain ain't a nation of farmers (the old saw is 'a nation of shopkeepers', and even a nation of pet lovers, though I don't suppose your clear contempt for Brits would ever let you accept that). US farm people can be the same way. I will admit that I hate this, because I don't think they are dispensable. Letting a cat have outdoor access is not synonymous with thinking the cat is dispensible. S. |
#360
|
|||
|
|||
"Mary" wrote in message m... There certainly are two sides to this debate. There are more than two sides, in fact. That's what debates are about. It's a discussion, FCS. Anyone who feels strongly about anything would "come across as feeling superior" to you, because you lack the skills to counter the basic arguments. Once you've done the "give me a specific example" and the creative snipping that takes comments out of context, all you have left is "nice superior attitude." Fortunately, posturing doesn't get you much. Mary, you remind me of our PM , he makes things up in his head , believes his own lies , denies everything even when it placed under its nose and ignores what he doesn't like. It's impossible to debate anything with you; you simply don't debate and you have no intention of debating, full stop. If you are going to make allegations then you have to be prepared to prove they are true if called to do so. Now , you said this one of cats being "just animals" vs the one of cats being family members essentially equal to humans in value--is also a factor in the indoor/outdoor issue. I see this in the posts of the people who post from the UK; You haven't produced any of these alleged posts so why should we accept this statement ? You might have misconstrued what was said or perhaps they're figments of your imagination . BTW it's interesting to see you haven't responded to Tracy's post . Alison |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Real Life gets in the way | Tanada | Cat anecdotes | 54 | November 1st 04 07:41 PM |