I recently heard that in San Francisco, one can "rent a pooch" for a day. My brain is still hurting from this. Why?
Because it caters to the solipsism of those who want a dog but don't want the full time responsibility. Maybe it is a degree of awareness and responsibility that one can recognize that they can not properly take care of a dog. But, I feel that it is unjust to not have a pet bonded to a owner or family. I wonder how socialized the pets will be, getting flung from person to person without any real companionship for the animal. In short, this rent-a-pooch company is treating the dogs as a means to an end and I don't like that.
My suggestion is that if someone is really wanting to take care of a dog for a day, then go to your local animal shelter and volunteer to walk dogs or be a kitty cuddler. These dogs and cats are in need of good hearted people to love them, even if it is just for a day. Animal shelters will train you to walk a dog and they welcome any time you can offer. It's free to volunteer and you'll be doing a great thing. And who knows? Maybe you'll find that you can take care of an animal full-time and you'll bring home a grateful and loving companion.
On another note, check out International ____ Day. August 2nd is when we swoon over Ryan Adams.
6 comments:
I am thinking that guys rent dogs to pick up ladies. I wonder how they explain where the dog went later?
Also, good job on Ryan Adams Day!
Dogs are not accessories. sheesh!
Sea Hag hit it right on the head. You don't see people renting cats do you? Because they are intellectually superior and would only fall for the rent thing once.
I don't think it's as much of a solipsism as it is narcissism, but either way it's bad.
But cats are not intellectually superior to dogs, they are actually just incapable of emotional bonding so quickly. Kind of like cat lovers, they are missing part of themselves that they cover up by pretending superiority.
OK - I'm going to maybe be the lone dissenter here, because I've adpoted dogs as adults (the dogs), but they kinda don't really care where they are as long as there's food and stuff.
Granted, they're not going to feel "at home" with a once-a-week "owner," but at least they're getting attention, which might be more than they would have gotten in other circumstances. I can see either of my adopted dogs just jumping in the back seat of a stanger's car and laughing "let's go!" without any censure of me...
Oh, and HI!
I suppose you can appreciate the idea of someone who--for whatever reason--cannot own a pet but still would like the emotional experience of being around one.
However, as a young river midget (before Hyperion rescued us) my family and I were forced to "perform" as living midgetaquines in a store window for The Banana Republic, and all the attention: it gets old.
Hyperion and I did come up with an idea several years ago to allow "part" ownership of pets by old people. The way it would work is that 2-5 elderly people (probably in a retirement home) would jointly own a pet, and the business would pick up and drop off the pet at the scheduled times. Each pet would get 2-3 days with the old person (or as much as they were capable of, health-wise), and then get more love. In this way the pet had some stability, and an old person could get the health benefits of being around a pet but not the full time responsibility that many of them are not capable of.
I also know there are services that take pets to nursing homes and such for one day, and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. It may not be as good as full-time ownership, but you cannot ask of a more noble occupation for a dog, and any dog I know would be proud to fulfill such a duty.
Li' Tobias Out
Post a Comment