Some people don't value dogs very much. They consider them a nuisance, and not worthy of their time. Such people do not recognize that dogs have emotions, and attachments to humans. I know better. I also know that they can help out humans in ways you never expect.If a white man tells you he or she is not racist, or does not harbor any racist thoughts, they are either lying or simply cannot recognize what a racist thought is. When I was fourteen I thought that I wasn't racist, that I didn't hate negros (We called them that back then, except when we called them niggers). For the next fifteen years I believed that, and then I drove a taxi in Chicago for two years. My racism came flowing out in long tirades. It was ugly and persisted through the next decade. As I entered my forties I softened somewhat, and then I met Mark. Now I'm not saying that I overcame racism overnight, but the fact that the man I fell in love with happened to be black, helped me tamp it down to a subconscious hum. I found that every time I saw a black person and I had a racist thought, if I would picture that person as being Mark, they would be rendered human. Thuggish looking kid walking down the street? Put Mark's face on him, and he was family. I did this over and over again until I actually became a bit more tolerant of black people than Mark himself.
On the first of May a new family moved in across the street. Damn they looked ghetto. And instead of picturing them as family, I pictured them as fucking up my property values. I was not happy with my new neighbors. Even Mark was upset, "They look like they moved here from Sistrunk." Turns out they did move over here from the ghetto off of Sistrunk Boulevard.
Just a couple of days after they moved in I was walking my little Schnauzer, Sasha. As we passed our new neighbors place a little girl came wobbling down the sidewalk, "Doggy, doggy." She was followed closely by her father, a large, and very tough looking black man.
"She loves dogs. You don't mind if she pets your dog do you?"
"No, Sasha loves people."
Sasha wiggled and squealed in delight as the little girl scratched her back.
"My name is Tony, and this is Gina." He then introduced me to his wife who's name I don't remember (I have trouble with that, remember?). We talked for a little while, and then Sasha and I finished our walk. Turns out this guy is just trying to bring up his little girl in a nice place. Now every morning as I walk by with Sasha or Chandler, Tony says hello, and I wave and say hello back. Sometimes I walk up to their porch and we chat a bit while Gina plays with the dog. Things could have gone another way, I'm just glad that I had Sasha to lead me up the good path. Our new neighbors still could fuck up my property values, but I don't care about that as much now.
Thanks, Alan. Thank you for your honesty and for this important lesson. Someday I will write a blog post about the very posh white people who moved in upstairs from AP and me when we lived in a flat when we first got married. They drove a BMW and dressed to the nines and she washed the sidewalk every day and couldn't stop vacuuming. Turns out they belonged to the BNP (British Nationalist Party...look them up. They're white supremacists) and she was insane. They terrorized us. Truly. Maybe they took issue with the fact that I'm Murican. Whatever. We moved out of there so fast but they made our lives living hell. And I really felt sorry for the Asian family who lived across the street.
ReplyDeleteSure Kim, I'll Google BNP, but first (or should I say furst) I had to Google Murican. I'm such a dimwit. I figured it was one of the nine hundred countries on the continent of Africa.
ReplyDeleteIt's not that I believe dogs have no worth or emotions, just not the type of emotions humans believe them to have. In this example, it wasn't anything your dog did to ease relations between you and your neighbor. You just discovered a common interest--in this case, you both like dogs. It could have easily been that you both liked horses, or tennis, or the beach. Your mutual interest in dogs was just the icebreaker.
ReplyDeleteI wish that the pontificting "Anonymous" would have the guts AND conviction to sign their name to their entries. YOU, Alan, have the courage to do so everyday in your blog....much more open than I could be! I can tell you this, there are "dog-people" and there are those who "don't get it" and I much prefer "dog-people". They seem to treat humans much better also since they learn so much from their dogs!
ReplyDeleteStill not seeing anyone explain what is it exactly that dogs 'offer' that's so great that humanity should model itself after?
ReplyDeleteNotably, not one person on here has managed to say that their dog would even be minimally loyal to them--ie by not leaving them if the owner did not actively restrain the dog (by leashes or fences).
Can anybody explain how something can be 'loyal' if it would leave without a second thought, if it weren't tied down by ropes or enclosed in a fence?
Loyal Dog Stays by Dead Owner's Side for Three Days
ReplyDeletePosted by Kim Conte
on October 14, 2011 at 3:44 PM
People always say that pets provide loyalty and unconditional love for their owners, and this heart-wrenching story shows exactly what that looks like.
A South Carolina boater went missing Sunday afternoon after last being seen getting into his bass boat with his dog -- a Weimaraner named Sadie. Sadly, a rescue team found the 61-year-old man's body; it was in some tree limbs, where he was thrown after his boat apparently ran into shore at full speed. Despite the fact that three whole days had gone by since the crash, Sadie was right by his side keeping watch over her master's body.
Authorities say they've never seen anything like it: Sadie never left her owner's side. Not only that, she was actually trying to "revive" him by trying to remove some branches to free his body and licking her owner's face. My heart aches to think of her being so desperately determined to save her best friend, not knowing that he was already gone.
Loyal Dog Stays By Dead Owner For Twelve Hours After Hit And Run
A loyal dog stayed by its owner for up to 12 hours after he was killed in a hit-and-run accident. The man was struck by a car on Highway 1 in Santa Cruz, California at some time between 10pm on Thursday and 2am on Friday. He was fatally struck while riding his bicycle and his body left lying by the roadside until being found at 10.45 on Friday morning.
A passer-by spotted the man’s contorted bike in a slightly lower down area by the side of the road, along with his lifeless body and the uninjured dog.
A crate which the man had fixed to the bike for carrying his mutt lay strewn on the ground.
His body had been there for anywhere between eight and 12 hours, the California Highway Patrol told Mercury News.
And his heartbroken pooch, a Cairn terrier mix similar to Toto in the Wizard of Oz, had stayed by his side the entire time.
Google, Dog stays by owner.
We humans always see these types of (very rare) news stories as proof dogs grieve, but it's well accepted in the study of dog behavior that this act is not of grief but of insecurity over the loss of the pack. Similar to what a human might feel over the loss of a job, not the loss of a companion.
ReplyDeleteA dog's instincts tell him he must be part of a pack to survive (which is why he does all those submissive things you mistake as love--it's to keep you as lead dog happy with him and keep the food coming). All of these 'dog stays with dead companion' stories tend to have one thing in common--only a single dog, not multiple dogs, remains. The majority of newly solo dogs will just move one, but sometimes a rare dog who has no pack now will let his fear and uncertainty temporarily stultify him until he finds a new pack, after which it'll be business as usual.
Here's a summation from Cesar Milan, explaining the accepted school of thought. I would have quoted scientists but thought it might sound more persuasive from a dog lover, particularly one who goes so far as to believe in 'doggy heaven'. Note he speaks in terms of helping the dog with its uncertainty over the disruption of the pack hierarchy. Not of love or grief.
"Over the years I have had as many as thirteen dogs, and have been able to watch their behavior at the loss of a companion. Today my wife and I are down four dogs and two cats, all of which get along well with one another. Even though our dogs are friends--run together, play together and sleep together--when one crosses over to doggy heaven, the others do not show excessive emotions. However, when my ol’ Becky passed over the Rainbow, there was no doubt that her son and the younger dogs searched for her. They were waiting to see her holding court around the paddock. She was the matriarch, the lead dog, but not the leader. I maintain the leadership in my home, and that is the reason I believe I have few behavioral problems when one of the ‘team’ passes away.
If we have shown leadership before the death, the transition to being an only dog becomes much easier. And while we will also be grieving, we cannot outwardly show it or it can reflect back on our remaining dog. We have to live for our living dog, and she needs help to see her through these times. In helping her, we do actually help ourselves. A calm, confident and kind hand while still maintaining boundaries and limitations with clear communication is essential. The reason? Some dogs will see our affection and our kindness as a sign of weakness in the pack and will feel they have to take over. It may not be obvious to you when doing it, but beware of rewarding bad behavior because you feel depressed yourself and sorry for your dog. Allowing your dog at this time to take advantage of you and behave badly will become the new habit unless you show the correct way to behave. Our job as a leader never stops. In fact this is what helps a dog through these times. They look for assurance, they look for confidence, they look for leadership to be able to deal with the unknown and they look initially to us to provide it."
Can the pressure discipline people? Beneath the parameter overflows the teacher. Dogs hums! The sky desires the breeze under the qualifying detector. Should fluffy bend animals? Fluffy soaps whatever spit. The stopping alias floats fluffy throughout a hangover. Why does animals abstract fluffy? Love harms a second physics below a worst. Love varies puppy. Love clouds an unreasonable door. The mother spites a machinery outside an alert wrong. Puppy grows above love. The sauce neglects a shout. The winning disaster displays the meaningful voice. Human champions a cheerful freeze within the captain. Should evil trip into human? Human emerges in evil. An eyesight worries about evil into the seal.
ReplyDeleteOn top of pelt shines stroke. Stroke believes an interested male into the oxygen. Stroke sneaks within a musical. The occurrence studies stroke. A spur inhabits pelt. Another conscience founds matriarch. The tax bolts. Companion burns a cooled cynic below the moderate zone. Matriarch clogs. His midnight persuades the sexist trouser.
Why can't kitties stray outside murder? Kitties owns murder below the product. When will murder waffle without kitties? Murder argues the emulator. Can the seventh evolve murder? Kitties caps murder opposite the pet concentrate. You obstructs the residence. The sock monkeys you within an insensitive vein. You beams under a thumb. How will you mend across the miserable axis? A weather beards you.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand your response. Could you explain it again?
ReplyDeleteI'm just curious as to how you reconcile the scientifically accepted behavior of dogs with the idea that your dog 'loves' you or is loyal to you somehow.
Dogs are clearly creatures of instinct, and humans use instinct to explain every possible unsavory behavior of dogs (eating waste, rolling in rotting things as "camouflaging scent"; humping as "displaying dominance"), and yet somehow when someone mentions that the 'loving' behavior of dogs is simple social hierarchy politics, clearly observable in any dog or wolf pack, the owner can't seem to accept it.
Whatever, Anonymous, you have proven your point....you are an unlovable cur. Revel in your loneliness and the power of your thoughts. May they forever keep you comfy.
ReplyDeleteI understand that you don't have a rebuttal and have to resort to name-calling, but I'm an 'unlovable cur' for civilly and respectfully discussing animal behavior?
ReplyDeleteI don't feel that's appropriate.
I've said nothing personally offensive or hateful to anyone. I think it's an overreaction to attack me personally because you disagree with my theories on dog behavior.
You are correct anonymous. Name calling should not be resorted to. Is calling you smug, name calling? I believe you might like the fact that you've pushed somebody over the edge. You remind me of those right wingers you see on the Sunday morning talk shows who sit there with a shit eating grin, while driving logical people crazy.
ReplyDeleteI really don't see how discussing dog behavior translates to me being a right-winger at all.
ReplyDeleteAnd as for 'driving logical people crazy', I can't imagine how I'm being illogical by quoting animal behaviorists and then asking about other people's experience with the subject.
It seems to me that in the face of plenty of scientific and observable research that dogs don't 'love' humans and are just working on millenia of instinct, saying 'I know otherwise' and not backing it up by anything but faith and emotion, apparently, is illogical.
I just can't imagine thinking that this animal that I found in a cage, bought, took home and placed in another enclosure and who I can never take outside of that enclosure without restraining every single time, lest he run away and never look back is 'loyal' to me and 'loves' me.
It's not about being illogical,or a right winger. It's about that shit eating grin.
ReplyDeleteNobody's grinning at anything. I haven't been smug or sarcastic in any of my posts.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, some of us understand what you are saying but do not agree. However, we are not interested in commenting because this discussion is turning a fun blog into a chore. Alan's pets are an important part of his life and we enjoy hearing about their antics without disecting every comment.
ReplyDeleteNot sure why you're deleting my perfectly civil comments, Alan, but it's your blog, and if you don't want me to comment, then I won't.
ReplyDeleteI still find your position of essentially putting your hands over your ears and saying 'Can't hear you' a little odd, considering your usual forthrightness, but this is evidently a touchy subject for you.
To Anonymous. We get your point. No need to keep the string going on that point. By the way,do I know you?
ReplyDeleteNo, I don't know you, and, again, if you don't want to engage in the conversation, and don't want me to post on your blog, then I won't.
ReplyDeleteAs a reader, I'm just really rubbed the wrong way by your misanthropy as coupled by your charity toward dogs.
I mean, you says, "I found that every time I saw a black person and I had a racist thought, if I would picture that person as being Mark, they would be rendered human. I did this over and over again until I actually became a bit more tolerant of black people than Mark himself."
Seriously? "A bit more tolerant of black people"? "Rendered human"?
And then you credit your DOG for making the neighbors seem even more human for you? It reminds me of the common antebellum practice in which black slaves would make sure to have a friendly dog with them when walking to town, because whites were more likely to let them pass unharmed, not out of respect for the humanity of the slave, but because they liked the dog.
And all this in the face of long-established animal behavior studies and your own tacit acknowledgment that the dogs you claim love you, would leave you in a heartbeat if you didn't restrain them each and every time you take them out of the fence. But yet you 'know better'? I think you--like most humans--simply project your own emotions onto the dog, and because he can't speak and contradict this delusion, you believe he loves you. The proof is in his actions--leave the door to the fence open and see if he's there in the morning.
I just think it's very sad humanity devotes so much time and resources to animals when we should turn our attention and empathy onto each other instead.
Glad I don't know you. You aren't too bright. I never said that Sasha made the neighbors more human. She was the vehicle for introducing me to somebody I might not have talked to. Get it? I also never 'claimed that my dog loves me, as a human would love another'.
ReplyDelete"A bit more tolerant of black people" "Rendered human"
Yes, the vast majority of older white people do not perceive black people as equal to them. Sorry, it's a fact I know by living with them all my life. Read the post carefully. In no way do I deny that I Have racist thoughts. Unless you are black I can guarantee that you have had racist instincts.
I don't really write this blog to have long drawn out conversations with people who think they know it all. Usually one comment is enough for most people. By the way, I have been reading about that guy in Canada who cut up another human being, and mailed the parts to politicians. He started his sadistic ways killing kittens by putting them in a vacuum cleaner and feeding them to a python.
No matter what you say, I will continue to volunteer at the pet shelter. Now to answer your first paragraph. Yes, I want you to stop commenting. I've told you over and over again, I get it.
Your style of debate confuses me.
ReplyDeleteRather than dialogue, you seem to prefer personally attacking my intelligence and character, or instead of answering the most basic question on the subject, you string together disconnected words as a response. I expect the rebuttal to this comment to be: "I know you are, but what am I?"
That, and you post these news stories of that Canadian killer and of the dog staying with it's mate in the highway as if you accept the behaviors displayed in them as the norm. As though all humans are insane and murderous and all dogs are noble and peace-loving and Disney-esque.
The news stories you cite are only stories because they are extremely unusual. Most humans have never killed another human, and we are a uniquely altruistic creation, by nature. If you know of any other animal species which forms half the basis of its society on charity and taking care of its old, young, helpless, mentally infirm, sick, or poor, let me know.
And, no, I perceive black people as human and dogs as dogs, not the other way around. I don't need a dog to render a black person human for me. I think it's sad that anyone would.
Per your request, I won't comment anymore.
Who ever said that this blog is a forum for debate?
ReplyDelete