At essentially no point does the article consider what the dog’s next-best alternative is, or suggest one. The two most likely answers are ‘nonexistence’ (for dogs you get from a breeder) or ‘prison’ (for dogs you get from a shelter). I’m open to the possibility that some dogs (abused ones, possibly also tiny breeds with genetic breathing problems) have lives worse than nonexistence. I don’t think you can credibly claim most do, and I don’t think you can credibly claim that any meaningful proportion of owned dogs have worse lives than they would in shelters.
The article seems to assume that dogs have a full set of human drives, and are disappointed not to be given the opportunity to write Doggie Shakespeare or something. I envision the author watching some videos of lions and then saying ‘they have no lives beyond waking, eating, and sleeping. Clearly their life is a misery.’
The article does an impressive dive into Bulverist psychoanalysis of ‘here’s why dog owners are evil perverts for having a dog’:
‘What does it say about a human who enjoys this emotional transaction? It says that on some level they like the idea of having dominance over another being. And, they want that dominance to be a feature of their daily life.’
On reflection I think the most accurate summary of this article is ‘willful outrage-bait’.
(Disclosure: am dog owner)
I found this article somewhat baffling.
At essentially no point does the article consider what the dog’s next-best alternative is, or suggest one. The two most likely answers are ‘nonexistence’ (for dogs you get from a breeder) or ‘prison’ (for dogs you get from a shelter). I’m open to the possibility that some dogs (abused ones, possibly also tiny breeds with genetic breathing problems) have lives worse than nonexistence. I don’t think you can credibly claim most do, and I don’t think you can credibly claim that any meaningful proportion of owned dogs have worse lives than they would in shelters.
The article seems to assume that dogs have a full set of human drives, and are disappointed not to be given the opportunity to write Doggie Shakespeare or something. I envision the author watching some videos of lions and then saying ‘they have no lives beyond waking, eating, and sleeping. Clearly their life is a misery.’
The article does an impressive dive into Bulverist psychoanalysis of ‘here’s why dog owners are evil perverts for having a dog’:
On reflection I think the most accurate summary of this article is ‘willful outrage-bait’.