3 ms·

I agree with your first statement. I find your second statement a little bizarre. People are going to feel varying degrees of attachment to their pets. Why wou

by ohazi 8y ago

I agree with your first statement. I find your second statement a little bizarre. People are going to feel varying degrees of attachment to their pets. Why would you care? You can think it's silly or weird, but who are you to take offense at something like that?

seppin 8y ago
> I find your second statement a little bizarre. Every once in a while, the Bay Area picks a new phrase that it enters into the public lexicon. "Pet owner" was said to invoke slavery, so "pet guardian" was the new thing you had to say, otherwise face consequence.
- ohazi 8y ago
  I wish people would just stop getting offended so easily. If you want to consider yourself a "pet owner" -- that's fine with me. If you'd rather be a "pet parent" -- more power to you. But to take offense at someone else choosing either one of those for themselves? Fuck off! What the hell do you care? If it hurts your sensibilities then do it differently yourself, but leave other people alone!
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
jsonne 8y ago
I'll chime in. My first child is due in 3 months. I find it offensive when my friends compare the burden of pet ownership to that of raising a child because there is so much more work, preparation, and much higher stakes. I think that's the reason people react so strongly to sentiments like that.
- cabaalis 8y ago
  No need to be offended. It's probably just ignorance of the difficulty (in the nicest use of the word), as well as a desire to be feel included as their peers begin families. There is obviously no comparison.
- ohazi 8y ago
  Congratulations, and best of luck to you (honestly). I completely agree with you that being the parent to a human child is harder, more work, more stressful, and that the stakes are way higher. I can absolutely understand feeling belittled and upset if someone tries to argue that raising a child is anything like taking care of a pet. It's not. I don't think that this is the argument that most people who refer to themselves as "pet parents" are trying to make, but certainly some of them might be doing so. I think that that's silly and easily refutable. However... This whole thing seems too similar to the religious conservative argument that referring to gay unions as marriages was degrading the sanctity of their own marriages because of a word. That argument has always seemed pretty pathetic to me. The weightiness of a concept isn't diminished when people decide to recycle a word [1]. The sanctity of someone's marriage isn't defined by use of the word marriage. Similarly, the sanctity of human parenthood has nothing to do with how dog owners want to refer to themselves. Language evolves, and it's usually pointless to fight this process. Sure, ambiguities that are introduced may be annoying, and you may get frustrated that you now have to clarify something when previously you didn't, but there's no reason for you to have the right to dictate how other people decide to see themselves. Trying to fight this with outrage and offense seems to me like shouting at a rain cloud for getting you wet. If people want to refer to themselves as pet parents because they don't currently have or aren't planning to have children ("No, I'm not a real parent, but I am a pet parent"), leave them be. If they seriously want to make the argument that taking care of a dog is anything like raising a kid for 20 years, shake your head in smug amusement and leave them be. They're obviously wrong, and you know it. Hell, I even know actual parents to human children who also have a dog or two, and who consider themselves both parents and pet parents. They're clearly just trying to be cute rather than equating the two. Enjoy it if you think it's cute, or don't, and then leave them be, because at the end of the day, it doesn't affect you. It'll only affect you if you let yourself get upset by it, and that's just a really poor use of your time and energy. [1] Obviously a lot more was/is at stake for the LGBTQ community, and I don't mean to belittle actual LGBTQ struggles for equality and acceptance by comparing them to the plight of people who want to be cute by referring to themselves as pet parents (there, I guess even I need to clarify).
- throwaway413 8y ago
  I’m offended that you didn’t wait 3 more months before being offended! (Kidding, and congrats on the child)
nradov 8y ago
I dislike the phrase "pet parent" because it implies a false equivalence with actual human children. Also the pet-industrial complex has latched onto it as marketing message to guilt pet owners into buying a bunch of unnecessary crap.

by ohazi 8y ago

seppin 8y ago

> I find your second statement a little bizarre. Every once in a while, the Bay Area picks a new phrase that it enters into the public lexicon. "Pet owner" was said to invoke slavery, so "pet guardian" was the new thing you had to say, otherwise face consequence.

ohazi 8y ago
I wish people would just stop getting offended so easily. If you want to consider yourself a "pet owner" -- that's fine with me. If you'd rather be a "pet parent" -- more power to you. But to take offense at someone else choosing either one of those for themselves? Fuck off! What the hell do you care? If it hurts your sensibilities then do it differently yourself, but leave other people alone!
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

jsonne 8y ago

I'll chime in. My first child is due in 3 months. I find it offensive when my friends compare the burden of pet ownership to that of raising a child because there is so much more work, preparation, and much higher stakes. I think that's the reason people react so strongly to sentiments like that.

cabaalis 8y ago
No need to be offended. It's probably just ignorance of the difficulty (in the nicest use of the word), as well as a desire to be feel included as their peers begin families. There is obviously no comparison.
ohazi 8y ago
Congratulations, and best of luck to you (honestly). I completely agree with you that being the parent to a human child is harder, more work, more stressful, and that the stakes are way higher. I can absolutely understand feeling belittled and upset if someone tries to argue that raising a child is anything like taking care of a pet. It's not. I don't think that this is the argument that most people who refer to themselves as "pet parents" are trying to make, but certainly some of them might be doing so. I think that that's silly and easily refutable. However... This whole thing seems too similar to the religious conservative argument that referring to gay unions as marriages was degrading the sanctity of their own marriages because of a word. That argument has always seemed pretty pathetic to me. The weightiness of a concept isn't diminished when people decide to recycle a word [1]. The sanctity of someone's marriage isn't defined by use of the word marriage. Similarly, the sanctity of human parenthood has nothing to do with how dog owners want to refer to themselves. Language evolves, and it's usually pointless to fight this process. Sure, ambiguities that are introduced may be annoying, and you may get frustrated that you now have to clarify something when previously you didn't, but there's no reason for you to have the right to dictate how other people decide to see themselves. Trying to fight this with outrage and offense seems to me like shouting at a rain cloud for getting you wet. If people want to refer to themselves as pet parents because they don't currently have or aren't planning to have children ("No, I'm not a real parent, but I am a pet parent"), leave them be. If they seriously want to make the argument that taking care of a dog is anything like raising a kid for 20 years, shake your head in smug amusement and leave them be. They're obviously wrong, and you know it. Hell, I even know actual parents to human children who also have a dog or two, and who consider themselves both parents and pet parents. They're clearly just trying to be cute rather than equating the two. Enjoy it if you think it's cute, or don't, and then leave them be, because at the end of the day, it doesn't affect you. It'll only affect you if you let yourself get upset by it, and that's just a really poor use of your time and energy. [1] Obviously a lot more was/is at stake for the LGBTQ community, and I don't mean to belittle actual LGBTQ struggles for equality and acceptance by comparing them to the plight of people who want to be cute by referring to themselves as pet parents (there, I guess even I need to clarify).
throwaway413 8y ago
I’m offended that you didn’t wait 3 more months before being offended! (Kidding, and congrats on the child)

nradov 8y ago

I dislike the phrase "pet parent" because it implies a false equivalence with actual human children. Also the pet-industrial complex has latched onto it as marketing message to guilt pet owners into buying a bunch of unnecessary crap.