>All the puritan whining about dogs assumes its a standard issue frat boy bringing in his basset hound, but the puritanism melts away like ice from a blowtorch

>All the puritan whining about dogs assumes its a standard issue frat boy bringing in his basset hound, but the puritanism melts away like ice from a blowtorch when its the blind lady instead of some frat boy antics. Well yeah, for obvious reasons: 1) It's not a luxury for the blind person to bring her dog into work, it's a necessity. 2) It's not her pet, it's a service animal, and she will presumably treat it like a service animal (i.e. no cutesy excusing any bad behaviour, no doggy-talking all day long etc). 3) Seeing-eye dogs go through a tremendous amount of training to make them basically not act like dogs, so that they won't be hyper, and won't randomly bark, and won't randomly crap on the floor. Pets go through bare minimum training (if that) to make sure they don't savage a human. Surely you can see why the analogy between a service animal and a pet isn't apt? It's like calling a Democrat hypocritical for disliking domestic firearms usage, yet allowing military firearms usage; sure the object in question is nominally the same, but the context and effects are entirely different, and it's really the context and effects that the speaker is objecting to.