S Reviews Shit

Then either

a) You aren’t bothered by the fact that animals are tortured and killed with your partner’s money. Then -> you’re not a vegan, you’re just plant based.

or

b) You’ve never talked to your partner about how animal products are unnecessary, unethical, env destructive, and unhealthy. Then -> what kind of a relationship is that? How does something of that importance NOT get brought up? Do they not care about what’s important to you? 

or

c) You have tried talking to your partner about things listed in b but they don’t care / don’t make an effort to listen. Then -> do they not care about truth or morality enough to listen to something that challenges them? If one cares about having the most logical opinion, wouldn’t it make sense to listen to opposing views? Wouldn’t it make sense to WANT to know what criticisms exist for the view you hold? If those criticisms are legit, they benefit because now they can edit their opinions to be something that makes more sense.

If your partner really don’t care about challenging their opinions and making sure their morals make sense, why would you want to be with a closed minded person like that?

or

d) They know and understand the ethical and env harm done by eating animals and they are able to eat and buy vegan products. But they just don’t give a fuck. They value their pleasure / convenience over ethics. Then -> congrats, your partner is an abusive piece of shit. They are the same kind of person who’d be mean to a waiter for no reason and turn around and be sweet to you. (Except, you know, worse because literal torture, confinement, exploitation, and slaughter is worse than being rude to someone.) 

So which one is it? Are you happy with that? Is that a good relationship to you? If not, change it. Talk to them, or be with someone who cares about you enough to listen / cares about the animals enough to go vegan / cares about truth and morality enough to consider opposing opinions. 

bonus round:

is this a joke

Was it ever just considered that people of two different beliefs– even if they are completely opposite– can coexists in harmony and love each other?

My other point stands. Humans naturally evolved with an omnivorus diet, choosing to dieviate from that diet nerds are be done CAREFULLY as has been noted even by yourself, and so it should not be forced on children until they are old enough to decide for themselves and can do so responsibly. (and for the love of god comparing stopping your child from eating too much candy is the the same thing as keeping your child on an entirely plant based diet)

And yes, I would say that about all diets, though I don’t think you can compare some people cutting out only one or two types of meat or certain cuts of meat the same as eliminating meat, dairy, eggs, honey in some cases, and anything that contains any animal product at all.

....which means feeding your child as a non-vegan is just as much an moral decision as feeding them a vegan diet, and both are a choice you are forcing on them.  You’re acting as if you get to somehow avoid making these choices for your kids until they can decide, but that’s absolutely impossible.  Feed your kid a hot dog? Congrats, you’ve just made a decision about their moral priorities.  Feed your kid a soy dog? Same thing. Buy them a shirt made in a factory by other kids?  Only use cotton that you’ve harvested and spun by hand?  All moral choices you’re forcing on them. 

Then either

a) You aren’t bothered by the fact that animals are tortured and killed with your partner’s money. Then -> you’re not a vegan, you’re just plant based.

or

b) You’ve never talked to your partner about how animal products are unnecessary, unethical, env destructive, and unhealthy. Then -> what kind of a relationship is that? How does something of that importance NOT get brought up? Do they not care about what’s important to you? 

or

c) You have tried talking to your partner about things listed in b but they don’t care / don’t make an effort to listen. Then -> do they not care about truth or morality enough to listen to something that challenges them? If one cares about having the most logical opinion, wouldn’t it make sense to listen to opposing views? Wouldn’t it make sense to WANT to know what criticisms exist for the view you hold? If those criticisms are legit, they benefit because now they can edit their opinions to be something that makes more sense.

If your partner really don’t care about challenging their opinions and making sure their morals make sense, why would you want to be with a closed minded person like that?

or

d) They know and understand the ethical and env harm done by eating animals and they are able to eat and buy vegan products. But they just don’t give a fuck. They value their pleasure / convenience over ethics. Then -> congrats, your partner is an abusive piece of shit. They are the same kind of person who’d be mean to a waiter for no reason and turn around and be sweet to you. (Except, you know, worse because literal torture, confinement, exploitation, and slaughter is worse than being rude to someone.) 

So which one is it? Are you happy with that? Is that a good relationship to you? If not, change it. Talk to them, or be with someone who cares about you enough to listen / cares about the animals enough to go vegan / cares about truth and morality enough to consider opposing opinions. 

bonus round:

is this a joke

Was it ever just considered that people of two different beliefs– even if they are completely opposite– can coexists in harmony and love each other?

Then either

a) You aren’t bothered by the fact that animals are tortured and killed with your partner’s money. Then -> you’re not a vegan, you’re just plant based.

or

b) You’ve never talked to your partner about how animal products are unnecessary, unethical, env destructive, and unhealthy. Then -> what kind of a relationship is that? How does something of that importance NOT get brought up? Do they not care about what’s important to you? 

or

c) You have tried talking to your partner about things listed in b but they don’t care / don’t make an effort to listen. Then -> do they not care about truth or morality enough to listen to something that challenges them? If one cares about having the most logical opinion, wouldn’t it make sense to listen to opposing views? Wouldn’t it make sense to WANT to know what criticisms exist for the view you hold? If those criticisms are legit, they benefit because now they can edit their opinions to be something that makes more sense.

If your partner really don’t care about challenging their opinions and making sure their morals make sense, why would you want to be with a closed minded person like that?

or

d) They know and understand the ethical and env harm done by eating animals and they are able to eat and buy vegan products. But they just don’t give a fuck. They value their pleasure / convenience over ethics. Then -> congrats, your partner is an abusive piece of shit. They are the same kind of person who’d be mean to a waiter for no reason and turn around and be sweet to you. (Except, you know, worse because literal torture, confinement, exploitation, and slaughter is worse than being rude to someone.) 

So which one is it? Are you happy with that? Is that a good relationship to you? If not, change it. Talk to them, or be with someone who cares about you enough to listen / cares about the animals enough to go vegan / cares about truth and morality enough to consider opposing opinions. 

bonus round:

is this a joke

Was it ever just considered that people of two different beliefs– even if they are completely opposite– can coexists in harmony and love each other?

Okay, so, you’re sort of right and sort of not. 

Your dog has a fear reaction, apparently, to people of the build/features/ect that match a Mexican heritage. That doesn’t meant that your dog is prejudiced against all Mexicans, but that it has learned to correlate that general appearance with pain and bad things. 

A dog can be afraid of POC or gender groups without EVER having a negative interaction.  The whole ‘my dog hates men, so he’s been abused by a man!’ thing is not helpful.  Dogs are not good at generalizing across categories.  That’s why a dog that is housetrained at home may piddle inside grandmom’s house.  A dog that does great walking on leash without pulling in his own neighborhood may try to rip his owner’s arm from the socket in a new place because he doesn’t yet know that the same rules apply.  It’s why it’s so important to train in a variety of situations.

Dogs often exhibit fear reactions to categories of humans they haven’t met before.  The unfamiliar is all that is needed- no past mystery abuse required.  A dog may do great with kids, men, women, etc., but absolutely loathe men in hats simply because they were never exposed to it during the critical socialization periods.  And while ‘prejudice’ isn’t inherent, a fearful personality IS genetic in dogs.  A dog that was prone to be fearful because of their breeding is going to show a stronger fear response to a person belonging to a group they aren’t familiar with. 

Why is the ‘past abuse’ answer dangerous?  For one, it doesn’t spread the information that dogs NEED to be socialized WIDELY as pups.  They need exposure to people of all shapes, sizes, and colors- just as they need exposure to all kinds of flooring. 

Secondly, it gives people a great reason not to work on training issues.  End of the day, it doesn’t matter why a dog has decided a certain type of person is scary.  They need slow, careful, and kind training to get over it.  People who believe the dog’s reaction is due to abuse are going to be less likely to help the dog get past the reaction.

And lastly, the reason above is why it is particularly dangerous for shelters and rescues to spread this myth.  Way too many shelters invent past abuse that can never be confirmed, and that can lead to an owner taking a dog out of pity and getting in over their heads.  And since a fearful reaction like this MAY suggest the dog is genetically more fearful, it can be easy for that new owner to get a dog with issues they aren’t prepared to handle.  Fearful dogs are not the best choice for a first time or inexperienced owner.

I believe the aspect socialization plays in creating what appears to be potential racism in dogs was mentioned in the original post the asker here was commenting on, which is why I didn’t cover it in the response to this ask. However, that was a failure on my part - it’s always important to consider socialization and upbringing, as pointed out here, because past negative or abusive experiences are unknowns and are a really bad assumption to proceed upon. 

As an aside, it’s also interesting because it illustrates how a dog’s world view can be very different from our own.  We categorize too (often without even realizing it), but we have the ability to generalize.  So we have categories for flooring like carpets, tiles, etc.- but it all goes under the broader category of ‘things that are safe to walk on.’  A dog doesn’t generalize as well as we do, so they have to learn that each narrower category is safe individually.  For some dogs that happens very quickly, even without early exposure.  For others, it turns into a situation where they won’t set paw in certain areas of the home because the kitchen tiles might as well be lava to them. A lot of owners would think the dog was being silly or unreasonable, and might well decide to try to ‘flood’ them out of their fear with force instead of gentle desensitization.  Understanding and respecting how the canine mind works in respect to generalizing can help avoid frustration for owners and makes things so much easier for our pets. You see a ton of youtube videos of dogs that are clearly terrified of benign things, with owners that think it’s hysterical when their dog cowers away from a balloon or balks at walking at grass.  A scared dog is a *stressed* dog.  Stress isn’t funny!  A scared dog is a dog that needs *help*. Just because *we* don’t understand why the dog is afraid doesn’t mean that dog’s fear isn’t very genuine.  People need to think of a time they were genuinely, deeply afraid and then consider how it would feel to be forced into the same situation while someone stood by and laughed (someone who claims to love you, no less!) 

Okay, so, you’re sort of right and sort of not. 

Your dog has a fear reaction, apparently, to people of the build/features/ect that match a Mexican heritage. That doesn’t meant that your dog is prejudiced against all Mexicans, but that it has learned to correlate that general appearance with pain and bad things. 

A dog can be afraid of POC or gender groups without EVER having a negative interaction.  The whole ‘my dog hates men, so he’s been abused by a man!’ thing is not helpful.  Dogs are not good at generalizing across categories.  That’s why a dog that is housetrained at home may piddle inside grandmom’s house.  A dog that does great walking on leash without pulling in his own neighborhood may try to rip his owner’s arm from the socket in a new place because he doesn’t yet know that the same rules apply.  It’s why it’s so important to train in a variety of situations.

Dogs often exhibit fear reactions to categories of humans they haven’t met before.  The unfamiliar is all that is needed- no past mystery abuse required.  A dog may do great with kids, men, women, etc., but absolutely loathe men in hats simply because they were never exposed to it during the critical socialization periods.  And while ‘prejudice’ isn’t inherent, a fearful personality IS genetic in dogs.  A dog that was prone to be fearful because of their breeding is going to show a stronger fear response to a person belonging to a group they aren’t familiar with. 

Why is the ‘past abuse’ answer dangerous?  For one, it doesn’t spread the information that dogs NEED to be socialized WIDELY as pups.  They need exposure to people of all shapes, sizes, and colors- just as they need exposure to all kinds of flooring. 

Secondly, it gives people a great reason not to work on training issues.  End of the day, it doesn’t matter why a dog has decided a certain type of person is scary.  They need slow, careful, and kind training to get over it.  People who believe the dog’s reaction is due to abuse are going to be less likely to help the dog get past the reaction.

And lastly, the reason above is why it is particularly dangerous for shelters and rescues to spread this myth.  Way too many shelters invent past abuse that can never be confirmed, and that can lead to an owner taking a dog out of pity and getting in over their heads.  And since a fearful reaction like this MAY suggest the dog is genetically more fearful, it can be easy for that new owner to get a dog with issues they aren’t prepared to handle.  Fearful dogs are not the best choice for a first time or inexperienced owner.

love these gays and how gay they are especially the part where they are exclusively gay and i love how they’re already LGBT+ characters they’re awesome and gorgeous and so very gay

So how can anyone take her away? 

She can’t be erased.  She can’t be stolen.  She exists, and what any one player chooses to do in their own game has zero effect on yours.  If someone mods her into a 8 foot tall asexual aromantic nug...why does it matter?

 As far as the blood issue goes...that’s like saying animals are never killed for their fur because the process of skinning would make the fur bloody.  Correctly skinning causes little blood staining, and in any case wool and fur are both washable.

They usually don’t last more than about a week and generally aren’t serious. As long as the cats owner took them to the vet and stayed on top of treatment I’d say this video is fine, sometimes animals get sick without it being anyone’s fault. Here’s a more recent video of Romeo, looking better.

Also, I love me some cheesy graduation songs.  The cheesier the better.  I will sob if I hear Wing Beneath My Wings and I will not apologize.

Teacup pigs don’t exist, either. Teacup pigs are just baby pot bellied pigs, and although pot bellied pigs are significantly smaller than some other breeds they’re significantly larger than alleged “teacup pigs.”  Here’s an article on the subject.

Some people would like to know the genetic history of their pets so they have a better understanding of what to expect temperament and health wise, this is something you can’t get when adopting. 

When you expect every dog to be nothing but a pet, you disregard all those centuries of partnership between our species.  Greyhounds and beagles are both hunting dogs, but they were each designed for a particular *kind* of hunting, and they can’t simply step into each others’ paw prints.  When all you want is a pet to lick your face in the morning and not bark *too much* at the neighbors, your options are wide-open.  But when you need a dog to hunt rabbits, herd cows, lead the blind, or protect your kids, you need to make important choices.

And you know what?  There is *nothing* wrong with selecting a breeder because that’s the breed you grew up with and you like how they look and act.  No one should *ever* choose any dog purely for appearances, and that goes for adopting from shelters as well.  But if a person has done their research and feels sure that a particular breed is right for them, even if the dog *doesn’t* have a single set job, more power to them.  A dog that is chosen based on specific, well-research criteria is a dog that is likely to stay in the home.

Some people would like to know the genetic history of their pets so they have a better understanding of what to expect temperament and health wise, this is something you can’t get when adopting. 

When you expect every dog to be nothing but a pet, you disregard all those centuries of partnership between our species.  Greyhounds and beagles are both hunting dogs, but they were each designed for a particular *kind* of hunting, and they can't simply step into each others' paw prints.  When all you want is a pet to lick your face in the morning and not bark *too much* at the neighbors, your options are wide-open.  But when you need a dog to hunt rabbits, herd cows, lead the blind, or protect your kids, you need to make important choices.

And you know what?  There is *nothing* wrong with selecting a breeder because that's the breed you grew up with and you like how they look and act.  No one should *ever* choose any dog purely for appearances, and that goes for adopting from shelters as well.  But if a person has done their research and feels sure that a particular breed is right for them, even if the dog *doesn't* have a single set job, more power to them.  A dog that is chosen based on specific, well-research criteria is a dog that is likely to stay in the home.

This operates under the assumption that if someone doesn’t get a dog from a reputable breeder they will get one from a shelter, which isn’t necessarily true. They very well may just, y’know, not get a dog?

There are plenty of valid reasons someone may go through a responsible breeder as opposed to a shelter, and I’m not talking about “wanting x breed” because I’m well aware of breed specific rescues.

You can be for responsible breeding and for animals. You can be a reputable breeder and for animals.

There is an absolute place in this world for purebreds of known lineage.  For one, the same people saying you should *never* go to a breeder will also rant about health issues in many breeds.  You know how those health issues get solved?  Responsible breeding.  If not for those breeders working to make their breeds better, you're left with only backyard breeders who don't health test and don't care if their bitch limps on both hinds by the time she's 2. 

And once again...genetics in dogs can have a huge effect on temperament.  Shyness, dog aggression, prey aggression, herding ability, etc. are all partially genetic.  What people are really saying here is that no one should ever get a dog for a purpose.  But not all dogs are pampered house pets.  A ranch dog needs very different skills, behaviors, and temperament than a house pet.  You have hunting dogs, sports dogs, service dogs of many kinds, flock guardians, etc. etc. etc. And some mixed breed or unknown dogs will be able to do those jobs, but the same people yelling not to go to a breeder would be enraged if a person adopted a mixed breed or dog of unknown lineage with a purpose in mind and than had to return that dog if it wasn't able to do the job. 

Limes are bad for dogs, so are lemons.

In most videos of a dog ‘versus’ a lemon or lime, the dog is only licking the fruit and then reacting.  Merely licking a lemon or lime one time is not going to cause a reaction.  I wouldn’t recommend encouraging your dog to lick citrus fruit of any type, but a person who does isn’t risking their dog’s health so long as they don’t allow the dog to actually consume it and they remove the fruit after a lick or two. They’re just being…well, kind of mean for exposing the dog to something they know the dog won’t like, and possibly risking the dog getting into a dangerous amount of the fruit on their own in the future if they decide they *do* enjoy it.

The same is true for some other toxic foods.  Onions and garlic, which are toxic to cats, cause damage to the red blood cells.  These damaged red blood cells are then filtered out by the body.  If enough blood cells are damaged and removed, anemia results.  However, RBCs are damaged and removed by the body on a routine basis.  The amount of onion or garlic needed to induce clinical anemia varies by the amount, whether it is fresh or dehydrated, and how often it is given.  A pet owner shouldn’t purposely give their cat garlic or onions, but a pet who ingests a trace amount will be just fine.  My cat gets spaghetti sauce on occasion as a treat, which does contain dehydrated garlic.  However, I know it’s a very small amount of garlic, he only gets to lick clean a mostly wiped off plate, and he gets it rarely.

Chocolate can cause toxicity, but again the amount needed to cause a reaction is not as small as people fear.  Baker’s chocolate is much more dangerous than milk chocolate (and white chocolate isn’t toxic at all.) It’s always a wise idea to check with your vet if your dog gets into chocolate, but a stolen Hersey’s kiss or two won’t cause a problem unless your dog is a tiny little guy or gal. 

I’ve also seen this blog (or maybe one of your sister blogs?) say that any dairy is bad for cats and dogs because adult animals are lactose intolerant.  Well, that’s true…but the degree to which they are and the effect it has on them can vary widely, just as it does in humans.  If a pet owner is already in the habit of sharing an ice cream cone with their dog and the dog has not previously experienced diarrhea or bloating, they are fine to continue…again, with the caveat to keep it to a small amount.  I would never give a cat even a small bowl of milk to drink in its entirety, but a cat or dog who licks clean an ice cream bowl or steals a few laps from the breakfast bowl is not likely to get sick from it unless they are unusually sensitive.

(References for the sake of it…I’m a vet tech with 15+ years of experience.  I’ve treated more cases of chocolate poisoning then I can possibly count, but I’ve calmed down a much greater number of pet owners convinced their pet was about to drop dead when they were well under the dangerous threshold. I’ve treated two cases of lime/lemon poisoning…one from a dog that lived in a house with a lemon tree in the background and one who ingested household cleaner with lemon oil in it. I’ve seen six cases of onion and garlic related anemia, four in pets being fed baby food daily and two in animals given garlic supplements bc/ the owner read it would keep fleas away.)

But that one sip isn't dangerous, nor is it child endangerment.  Acting as though it is does no one any favors.  We don't need to make everything into an emergency or an act or gross irresponsibility.  I deal with so many pet owners who have been thrown into an absolute panic over things they read online.  Sure, I'd much rather they call in and make sure, but hearing a woman sob because her 75 lab mix ate half a chocolate chip muffin isn't fun (to be clear, that amount of chocolate is not going to hurt a dog of that size in any way whatsoever.) Giving people a better understanding of the real risks helps everyone, including the pets.  Otherwise you get people at home pouring hydrogen peroxide down a dog's throat to make him vomit because he stole a small chunk of Hersey's Bar (yes, this actually actually happened...more than once.)