4 ms·
Why I agree this is terrible, you might want to reconsider your comment also. Pets are a luxury for well-off people. It is in no way a necessity of life like fo
by warp_factor 8y ago
Why I agree this is terrible, you might want to reconsider your comment also. Pets are a luxury for well-off people. It is in no way a necessity of life like food, or a basic shelter.
- beaconstudios 8y agowhat's your point? I'm aware of that, but the "first world problems" meme exists to point the finger at people who have so few real problems that they make a big fuss about trivial inconveniences (Starbucks ran out of skimmed milk so you had to use semi-skimmed, best blow it up on twitter). You're supporting a reduction where anything beyond "I'm dying" is a first world problem. Grief at the loss of a pet is not a problem reserved for those who are so privileged that they have lost all sense of proportion. Poor people get sad when their pets die too, but poor people don't generally express the extreme emotional fragility that "first world problems"-havers do, because they have actual problems to be concerned with.
- warp_factor 8y agoThanks for your comment, it made me change my mind. The point of the comment was to put it back into perspective that "pets" are still very high on the luxury pyramid.