Someday, when I am no longer living in a studio apartment but a nice home with a back yard, I too will own a puppy, Jessica. Muh ha ha ha!

Awww, he's adorable!

Look at those blue eyes! What a little heartbreaker.

He is cute enough to make you fart butterflies!

Awww! He's so cute!

The spice must flow!

Holy shit! Are you serious?! What is that lil' thing?

Well yes. Yes, I am incredibly jealous. I want a harem of doggity doggie dogs; I love them so. One day when I am in a more stable place in my life, I shall make the dream happen.

I am also barfing rainbows in addition to farting butterflies, Phlegmatic! I totally just cute overloaded.

*turns green with envy*

I want that!

Aw, he can has cheesburger anytime!

Baby cowdog! Is he a Queensland?

Oh my GOD.

An aussie, right? Too freaking adorable. My heart hurts from looking at the picture and not being able to squeeze and kiss the gorgeous adorable little schnookums. I fucking love your baby, Jessica.

I pay for doggie day care (yup. Day care) so I can have a precious little baby of my own. Day care is not cheap or even super-duper convenient (though don't get me wrong, I LOVE them to death) but it is beyond worth it for my little bundle of furry love. He is going to get a little brother or sister if/when I get a place with a yard (which is a total unattainable dream in LA).

Can't... comment... Cuteness overload!!

You are getting a boy dog and YOU CALL YOURSELF A FEMINIST!!??? ;-)

He is so cute. He's so little he still looks a little like a guinea pig but I'm pretty sure he's some sort of shepherding type doggie. So what is he?

He's a miniature Australian Shepherd. I dated a guy once who had one and I thought the breed was great. He won't be super small or anything, about 17-20 inches...yay!

OMG! He is adorable and look how tiny! Awwwww. I want a puppy. Is just one eye blue or both?

Awww, sweet puppy! Hope those four weeks between you and your little wiggle-butt go by quickly.

He's very cute. And I'm sure you'll be a good fur-mommy.

But I have to wonder why this dog? Why didn't you adopt a needy dog from a nearby animal shelter?

I'm guessing he's from a breeder. And he is being flown here as cargo? Please say no.

I knew it! Totally an aussie. Watching them wag their tails is among the Seven Great Cutenesses of the world. They just have these little stumpy tails that kind of wiggle back and forth rapidly, and when they get really excited their entire back end gets into it. So cute it HURTS.

You are so lucky!
I want a puppy!!!!!

Too cute for words

very cute. I hope he's not from a breeder!

Aw! Awww x 20000!

But what will your cat think?

umm, Pamela, Elaine, just revel in the cuteness. Though I happen to have one very rescued puppy, and will probably be getting one more, it is not my business where or how someone else got their dog, or for what reasons. Jessica can be trusted to make her own decisions without shaming- it would be like asking a pregnant women why she didn't adopt instead.

umm, Pamela, Elaine, just revel in the cuteness. Though I happen to have one very rescued puppy, and will probably be getting one more, it is not my business where or how someone else got their dog, or for what reasons. Jessica can be trusted to make her own decisions without shaming- it would be like asking a pregnant women why she didn't adopt instead.

SunburnedCounsel:
Actually, it's NOT like telling a pregnant woman why she should adopt instead.

There aren't 3-4 million babies being killed in shelters every year because no one wants them.

Many people are unaware of the problem of pet overpopulation and it IS our business.

Also, this is VERY much a feminist issue. Breeders make money off of the reproductive cycles of the dogs, and many times trash them when they are no longer productive.
Imagine you were forced to "have babies" with some stranger, carry those babies to term, go through labor, and then have those puppies sold. Over and over again. Without your consent or feelings considered.
Female breeding dogs often get cancer, as well.

I do not really care if it makes me the "bad guy" on this site. Breeding is a selfish act. You can get purebreds from rescues, shelters, and on petfinder.com

This is not a personal attack on anyone who buys from a breeder (we don't even know if this dog is from a breeder). But I absolutely refuse to not speak up about this issue. In short, a shelter dog dies with each puppy mill or bred puppy bought- pure and simple. Paying for a purebred is paying for someone to treat animals as baby-making machines.

Really good place for information:
http://hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/

Cats rule and dogs drool!

Just kidding... I like dogs, too, but my heart goes out to the kittens.

Thank you Pamela. Those were my feelings, too. Along with these:

1. Transporting dogs in the cargo section of airplanes is not safe. Many dogs die as a result. The cargo area often gets too hot for dogs and they either die from heat stroke, get brain damaged from heat stroke, or die from suffocation if they can't breathe. This is why short snout breeds (like bulldogs and pugs) are exceptionally susceptible to death during flight and some airlines refuse to transport short snout dogs in the cargo area.
"Oh, your dog died in transport? So sorry, I'll get you a new one."

2. Many puppies are removed from their mothers too early. The breeders do it to help foster the human-dog bond, but in nature the pup would stay with mom for a few months, not a few weeks. It's cruel to get a tiny puppy.

3. The pregnant woman analogy is TOTALLY wrong. Breeders treat dogs like commodities, things to trade and sell, ways to make a profit. Babies are not commodities. And neither are dogs. They are living things that deserve to be treated with care and concern.

4. Every issue is a feminist issue. If it's "too rude" or "not my business" to question social assumptions about the commodification of living beings, the commodification of love and affection, and then I guess I should just stop being a feminist.

I do not really care if it makes me the "bad guy" on this site.

Pamela - obviously, I'm only speaking for myself here, but it makes you my f'in HERO. Just sayin'.

And to add to what Elaine said, speciesism is every bit as much my/our business as is misogyny. Why would it be ok for me/us to question the exploitation of women and not animals?

Jessica, that is one cute, cute puppy! Congrats!

While I agree that adopting is a great way to get a pet, so is getting your pet from a good breeder.

Going to a humane society or the pound is a great option for people who have a lot of flexablity as to the type, temperment, breed, size, energy-level, ect of puppy they get. When you adopt a puppy, you can assume NOTHING about it.

In cases where you need or want a certain sort of dog, a purebred dog (or even one with a known heritage) is the best bet to provide you with the sort of companion you need.

And there is not anything wrong with getting a dog or a cat from a reputable breeder. Of course no one should get one from a puppy mill if it can be helped. And if the breeder isn't taking proper care of their animals, you should report them not get an animal from them. Duh, every one knows that. But you should also be able to get the type of dog you want without getting harrassed by people who think they're cooler than you because yes they have a mutt. And that mutt has a sad story. Aren't they great people? Well, I'm sure they have a great dog, but that doesn't tell us anything about them. A purebred dog is not any better than a mutt. And a mutt is not any better than a purebred dog. They each have advantages and disadvantages. Dogs are dogs, they're all great.

Falling in love with a breed and getting a dog of that breed? There's nothing wrong with that. Breed oriented dog rescues are awesome. But not every area has one for the breed you might want. Esp if the breed you want isn't a very very common one, or if you can't go long distance to get your pet. And not all of them have puppies at any given time. On adopting adult dogs vs. puppies, I have to repeat what I said earlier, there are advantages and disadvantages to both. It's whatever works best for you and your situation.

Maybe we should stop scolding people on where they get their dogs, and focus upon how all these unowned dogs (and cats) are getting that way, and work towards prevention.

That means encouraging and providing education for dog training. That means making it easier for renters to find places to live with their pets. That means supporting more urban/suburban/rural dog parks, so that not having a yard doesn't limit your pup's quality of life (not to mention, what a great socialization tool!!! And it's fun. enough said), that means getting cities like Paso Robles, CA to let its residents to walk their dogs in the public parks, that means making castration and spaying more affordable, and it means getting rid of useless and pointless breed restrictions (which haven't been shown to make a difference and only make owners get rid of their pets, AND prevent humane societies from taking them in. Esp if they're purebred and can't just be passed off as yet-another-'lab-mix'...).

Kelly G-

What constitutes a "good" breeder? Is it being nice when forcing the breeding bitch to get raped and pregnant? Is it making her more comfortable during her unwanted and unconsented labor?

Someone who is trying to educate people about shelter dogs isn't doing it because they think they are "cooler" than someone. There IS something wrong with getting a dog from a breeder- you are *directly* responsible for the death of a shelter dog.

Even with a purebred dog, you cannot be sure of temperment, and many purebreds have severe problems inherent with that breed.

I do agree with you about breed bans. The animals themselves aren't to blame.

I really find your post insulting because it has the tone that I "think I am better than you" because I have rescued animals. I don't. I feel people come to this site to openly discuss issues and educate themselves. Sorry if you don't like the facts I present. The 6-8 million that go into shelters, and the 1/2 of those that die cannot speak for themselves. Someone has to speak up for them.

No one is asking anyone to hurt or get rid of their purebred dog. I am saying, however, that whoever does this really should consider what they are paying for when they buy a purebred dog.

And as for your suggestion of "Maybe we should stop scolding people on where they get their dogs, and focus upon how all these unowned dogs (and cats) are getting that way, and work towards prevention."

Prevention includes educating people as to why these animals are in shelters- which my previous post addressed, and the very thing you had such a problem with.

::applauds faerylore::

Proud owner of a rescue pup, here. He's, quite seriously and sincerely, the best thing that ever happened to me. He makes me happy like no human ever has. He is the sweetest being on the face of the planet, and I selfishly thank my lucky stars that some idiot was fool enough to abandon him so I could scoop him up to love and cherish him for the rest of his cruelly short life.

I'm sooo with you on the prevention thing. LA just passed a mandatory neuter/spay law, which is a good start. I have an uncle who refuses to neuter his purebred male sheltie, but went and got his purebred female spayed right away -- he reasoned that, oh, the male dog is good, he won't go off and impregnate someone else's dog. But he had to be careful about the female, because he didn't want to have to care for an unexpected litter of puppies. Obviously pisses me off beyond my ability to verbalize. Anyway, now he'll have to neuter his boy dog. HA.

They need way more places where people can take dogs. Sorry to sound totally misanthropic, but most places let you bring in kids, who are just as noisy and screamy and dirty as dogs, if not more so. Pisses me off that I'm forced to leave my dog in the car or in my stuffy apartment if I want to go just about anywhere. Fortunately I'm in a huge city, so there are a FEW options. But surprisingly few, considering how large LA is, and how good (i.e., outdoor-encouraging) the weather is. More dog parks, and fewer restrictions on where people can take dogs, would be beyond awesome.

Well, yeah, but TLF, nobody is actually allergic to kids! I mean, I know that if people started taking cats everywhere, I wouldn't just find it annoying, I'd have to take medication daily, and I'd get pissed off.

I love the multi-paragraph lectures based on no information whatsoever about how Jessica is obtaining this dog.

EG-

please re-read my post, as I clearly stated that we do not know where this dog comes from. I was responding to another post which specifically addressed me. (I know it is easy to skip lines on forums, though.)

What constitutes a "good" breeder? Is it being nice when forcing the breeding bitch to get raped and pregnant? Is it making her more comfortable during her unwanted and unconsented labor?

Have you ever been around a bitch in heat? I'm asking seriously, because it seems to be fairly uncommon these days.

We're not talking orangutans here, where reproduction is carried out by rape. A bitch in heat is receptive to any and all comers.

It's really a trivialization of rape to call dogs mating "rape."

Someone who is trying to educate people about shelter dogs isn't doing it because they think they are "cooler" than someone. There IS something wrong with getting a dog from a breeder- you are *directly* responsible for the death of a shelter dog.

By that measure, anyone who isn't getting another dog right this instant is directly responsible for the death of a shelter dog.

Incidentally, the CACC here in New York is now a no-kill shelter. When I rescued my dog from there, it was still a kill shelter, having not been under the new management. So, yes, I literally saved my dog from death.

But most shelters and rescue groups in New York are no-kill -- which is actually one of the reasons that there are very few spaces available for new dogs, particularly large dogs.

I live near Prospect Park, which is a popular spot for people to abandon their dogs, because they know there's an active dog owners' group (actually the biggest lobbying group in Brooklyn) and someone is likely to not only find their dogs, but take them in. I don't know how many rescues I've been involved with -- and both dogs and cats (I've also seen white rabbits and ducks), but in only one case have we been able to find space with a rescue group. And that was a purebred Westie.

Many of the rescued dogs were simply kept by their rescuers. The rest were listed on Petfinder through a rescue organization (even if they didn't have space, they'd lend their name to the placement), and in one case, he was turned over to the CACC after he bit me (his rabies status was indeterminate).

So forgive me if I don't find your "I'm not criticizing, but I'm criticizing" stance in exactly good faith.

Zuzu-

Firstly, thank you for helping animals!

I am not trivializing rape in the least. (By you saying this, I could say that you are being speciest, if we are talking about trivializing, because you could be trivializing the treatment of breeding bitches.)

I am saying that exploitation of an animal's reproductive system IS a feminist issue. I am not attacking Jessica or anyone else. Whether or not she got this dog from a breeder, he is adorable, I do hope he has a happy life with her, and I don't doubt she'd be a good mom for him. But many people simply do not know about the suffering in shelters, and they simply do not know that they even have that option. For many people, dogs come from breeders or pet stores.

Regarding whether or not we are all responsible for the death of shelter animals- we cannot realistically save all animals, but we *can* choose to adopt, or choose to continue the cycle of breeding and exploitation. By creating a demand for a bred animal, we are indeed taking away one home for a shelter animal.

I am criticizing dog breeding and exploitation, not criticizing any person. I cannot *not* say something about this issue though. One of my dogs was going to be put to sleep because no one wanted him (he was also physically abused), and the other is a purebred rescue. So I do know what it's like to want a certain breed of dog, etc.

I feel like you think I am being awful to Jessica and I am simply not. I don't know her personally. I don't know you personally. I feel I have not been out of line.

What constitutes a "good" breeder? Is it being nice when forcing the breeding bitch to get raped and pregnant? Is it making her more comfortable during her unwanted and unconsented labor?

Ummm... It's probably not a good idea to call breeding dogs "rape" for at least three reasons:

1) How in god's name do you know that the bitch didn't consent? It's kind of hard to find out with the limited inter-species communication we possess.

2) Ethics (I refuse to call it morality) is almost certainly unique between species. What constitutes a breach of elemental social rules (which is essentially what ethics is) in one species is par for the course in another.

3) It minimizes rape of women and serious animal rights issues. To the general public, I can almost guarantee that you sound like the stereotypical "bra-burner" that the "Christian-Right" has warned us about and one of those "people hating PETA nuts" that we've been told about.

I am referring more to the breeder's forcing the dog to be put in that position and be made to have multiple pregnancies and births as the definition of rape moreso than a male dog forcing a female dog to have sex. (Rape does happen often in the animal kingdom and we can't really put our values on them..but we can decide whether or not to be responsible and have our animals spayed/neutered so they do not have unwelcome trauma put on their bodies.)
It clearly fits several of the dictionary definitions of rape.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rape

Call me what you want. I don't hate most people. In fact, there are about 2 people I hate and both hold office in the US.

I am not trivializing rape in the least. (By you saying this, I could say that you are being speciest, if we are talking about trivializing, because you could be trivializing the treatment of breeding bitches.)

I really think you're conflating puppy mills and breeders here, for one thing, and perhaps are just not familiar with how bitches in heat act. Basically, they're in heat, they're receptive, they find a dog they like, they put out. They may only be able to find one dog, if that's the only option presented because that's who the breeder wants her to breed with, but it doesn't change the basic equation: a bitch in heat will mate because she wants to, and with whomever she happens to feel like mating with (or at least whoever's nearby).

So, yes, I do think you're trivializing rape.

lest we not forget I am also a feminist and feminist issues matter to me. Please read my last post. I do hope this clarifies things.

So basically, you're saying that if you have a woman who really, really wants to have sex and doesn't care who it's with, it's rape to give her access to men? I'm sorry, but that's really silly.

As for the "we can't really put our values on them" crap, you're putting values on them the second you call it rape. Rape is, by definition, unethical.

"So basically, you're saying that if you have a woman who really, really wants to have sex and doesn't care who it's with, it's rape to give her access to men? I'm sorry, but that's really silly."

Damn right that's silly. And that is not at all what I am saying. That's absolute rubbish.

For the 3rd..4th? time, I am saying exploitation of a female dog and her reproductive cycle (for making money or just because you want a cute dog) is a feminist/ethical issue and we have the choice to contribute to it or not. If you'd like to pick apart and misconstrue my posts to fit some sort of anti-human idea of me then that's fine. But I honestly feel you know exactly what I am saying and are just trying to change the original and common ideas of my posts.

Once again, the information about shelter dogs is there, and available online and I do not apologize for bringing it up here.

Hey Pamela, I dont want to make it sound like I have a huge problem with what youre saying, because I dont. I think I see what youre trying to put across, and I think its good. However I do have 2 beefs I just want to mention.

There IS something wrong with getting a dog from a breeder- you are *directly* responsible for the death of a shelter dog.

Okay, Ill take your word that breeders can be a very bad thing, because Im not it any position to refute that. However, I do know people who have had bad experiences with animals (dogs included) from shelters. The kind of bad experiences I have heard aboutare because whatever problems forced the animal into the shelter now means it wants little or nothing to do with its new owner. Sometimes even outright hostile to them. Now maybe, since Im guessing were in different countries, the experiences would be different. However, I just thought Id put out an opinion that animal shelters arent always perfect, and I think if youre going to look after an animal, you also have the right to make sure you have an animal its easier to live with.

Rape does happen often in the animal kingdom and we can't really put our values on them..but we can decide whether or not to be responsible and have our animals spayed/neutered so they do not have unwelcome trauma put on their bodies.

I can see the logic in that in some ways, but Im also confused. Because I would have thought that taking away an animals ability to reproduce, would have been somewhere along the same lines as abusing that animals ability to reproduce. Or taking an animal away from its mother to early. Just a though really, and perhaps a misunderstanding, but like I said, those were the two beefs I came out with from otherwise getting the impression you care deeply about animals.

Just to say, I don't know how/why Jessica is getting her dog, but just to continue the above discussion...

As a feminist and animal rights activist, I do see a correlation between the two causes. When you BUY a dog that has been designed over decades of breeding (often to the detriment of its health and personality), you are supporting the commodification of another being. All these itsy-bitsy, non-threatening, cutsy dogs are being bought up by similar women. Dogs as accessories.

I work in nonprofit development at a SPCA, and I see so many wonderful dogs of all sizes and shapes that are just languishing in the kennels. I don't know if I agree with Pamela's argument that buying a dog leads to the death of a shelter dog, because you cannot logically make the correlation (anymore than letting your un-neutered dogs run around breeding directly leads to the death of their puppies).

However, I absolutely agree that buying a dog, no matter from what source, supports an industry that prevents shelter dogs from being adopted. Breeders, whether so-called "responsible" breeders, backyard breeders, or puppy mill breeders, promote the myth that dogs in shelters are damaged goods and that only a purebred puppy will make a good pet. Actually, all the best dogs I know were or are shelter dogs:) As I write this, my hound-mix is curled up under my desk-- he's a non-barking, friendly, loving, pound puppy. He was at the pound for months before I adopted him.

If anyone is in Philly, go check out the Puppies are Biodegradable art exhibit at F.U.E.L. Here's the url: http://www.puppiesarebiodegradable.com

I think that dog breeding directly ties into our culture of commodification the desire for a banal physical perfection. So many of these dogs end up sick, nuerotic, and with deformities. Ah, the pressure to be beautiful!

BTW-- another myth: small dogs are actually really hard to keep in an apartment. Big dogs, ironically, don't need as much space-- just a couple of long walks every day. If you have ever been in a small room with a Jack Russell, you'll know what I mean!

Just to say, I don't know how/why Jessica is getting her dog, but just to continue the above discussion...

As a feminist and animal rights activist, I do see a correlation between the two causes. When you BUY a dog that has been designed over decades of breeding (often to the detriment of its health and personality), you are supporting the commodification of another being. All these itsy-bitsy, non-threatening, cutsy dogs are being bought up by similar women. Dogs as accessories.

I work in nonprofit development at a SPCA, and I see so many wonderful dogs of all sizes and shapes that are just languishing in the kennels. I don't know if I agree with Pamela's argument that buying a dog leads to the death of a shelter dog, because you cannot logically make the correlation (anymore than letting your un-neutered dogs run around breeding directly leads to the death of their puppies).

However, I absolutely agree that buying a dog, no matter from what source, supports an industry that prevents shelter dogs from being adopted. Breeders, whether so-called "responsible" breeders, backyard breeders, or puppy mill breeders, promote the myth that dogs in shelters are damaged goods and that only a purebred puppy will make a good pet. Actually, all the best dogs I know were or are shelter dogs:) As I write this, my hound-mix is curled up under my desk-- he's a non-barking, friendly, loving, pound puppy. He was at the pound for months before I adopted him.

If anyone is in Philly, go check out the Puppies are Biodegradable art exhibit at F.U.E.L. Here's the url: http://www.puppiesarebiodegradable.com

I think that dog breeding directly ties into our culture of commodification the desire for a banal physical perfection. So many of these dogs end up sick, nuerotic, and with deformities. Ah, the pressure to be beautiful!

BTW-- another myth: small dogs are actually really hard to keep in an apartment. Big dogs, ironically, don't need as much space-- just a couple of long walks every day. If you have ever been in a small room with a Jack Russell, you'll know what I mean!

Just to say, I don't know how/why Jessica is getting her dog, but just to continue the above discussion...

As a feminist and animal rights activist, I do see a correlation between the two causes. When you BUY a dog that has been designed over decades of breeding (often to the detriment of its health and personality), you are supporting the commodification of another being. All these itsy-bitsy, non-threatening, cutsy dogs are being bought up by similar women. Dogs as accessories.

I work in nonprofit development at a SPCA, and I see so many wonderful dogs of all sizes and shapes that are just languishing in the kennels. I don't know if I agree with Pamela's argument that buying a dog leads to the death of a shelter dog, because you cannot logically make the correlation (anymore than letting your un-neutered dogs run around breeding directly leads to the death of their puppies).

However, I absolutely agree that buying a dog, no matter from what source, supports an industry that prevents shelter dogs from being adopted. Breeders, whether so-called "responsible" breeders, backyard breeders, or puppy mill breeders, promote the myth that dogs in shelters are damaged goods and that only a purebred puppy will make a good pet. Actually, all the best dogs I know were or are shelter dogs:) As I write this, my hound-mix is curled up under my desk-- he's a non-barking, friendly, loving, pound puppy. He was at the pound for months before I adopted him.

If anyone is in Philly, go check out the Puppies are Biodegradable art exhibit at F.U.E.L. Here's the url: http://www.puppiesarebiodegradable.com

I think that dog breeding directly ties into our culture of commodification, the desire for a banal physical perfection. So many of these dogs end up sick, nuerotic, and with deformities. Ah, the pressure to be beautiful!

BTW-- another myth: small dogs are actually really hard to keep in an apartment. Big dogs, ironically, don't need as much space-- just a couple of long walks every day. If you have ever been in a small room with a Jack Russell, you'll know what I mean!

sorry for the triple post-- my computer froze (and i am the idiot that kept hitting "post").

But Jessica - feminists are supposed to have cats! Didn't you know? While you're at it you should really make more of an effort to be overweight and miserable...

Kelly G-

What constitutes a "good" breeder?

Whoah, whoah, whoah, Pamela - I think you meant to address that comment to Faerylore, NOT me.

But you should also be able to get the type of dog you want without getting harrassed by people who think they're cooler than you because yes they have a mutt.

Yeah, we're all just "harassing" Jessica because we think we're "cooler" than her. Way to be dismissive.

(And, just to be clear, none of what I'm about to say is directed at Jessica personally, because I have no clue whether the pup in question is adopted or not. From here on out, I'm talking generalities.)

All five of my purebreds are rescue dogs - I have 1 dachshund and 4 rat terriers, from 4 different rescue orgs, ranging from the pound to a national, breed-specific foster/rescue program. So no, I don't have a problem with people who want purebreds, but I do hate that people think that if they want a purebred, they have to buy one. Just about any type of animal under the sun is up for adoption, somewhere - dogs, cats, ferrets, pigs, llamas, horses, cows, goats, chickens, you name it, there's probably a surplus of it. That goes for purebred dogs, too.

And there is not anything wrong with getting a dog or a cat from a reputable breeder.

Yeah, except for every newly bred dog that's bought, one already-existing-yet-unwanted dog dies.

Maybe we should stop scolding people on where they get their dogs, and focus upon how all these unowned dogs (and cats) are getting that way, and work towards prevention.

Yeah, and part of how "unowned" dogs are getting that way is by breeding dogs when we already have such a huge surplus.

Look, I used to moderate a freecycle group, and even though we didn't allow animals, people tried to give 'em away all the time. If I had a buck for every "sob story" that involved a kid (or adult!) no longer being interested in a dog since it had outgrown puppyhood, or not realizing what a big responsibility a pup is, etc. etc., I could almost cover the adoption fees for my "cooler-than-thou" rescue dogs.

Romanticizing puppyhood contributes to the problem. You might have less of a blank slate when you adopt an adult dog, but so what? We (meaning the general "we") created this overpopulation problem (by treating animals like disposable commodities), and it's our responsibility to fix it. Being flexible as far as breed and age go when bringing a dog into the family is really the least we can do. Or, if you're really set on a certain breed/age, you do your research, find a rescue group, and wait until they get your dream dog in. Many of 'em are even willing to transport. (By car, not plane - what Elaine said.)

I'm all for examining some of the other issues you mentioned - landlords and cities/towns aren't very animal-friendly; BSL sucks, because as the saying goes, you should punish the deed (and usually the human behind it), not the breed; and the local/state governments need to pass more spay/neuter legislation - and then FUND IT. But as long as there's such a huge surplus of unwanted animals, ANY breeding (be it puppy mills, backyard/hobby breeders, or professional breeders) is irresponsible.

Woops, Kelly, you are right! I keep thinking the posts are by the name above them, instead of below. Sorry!

Although we can compare treatment of animals with treatment of humans (not just dog-breeding but a plethora of things) I will leave that to people better-versed in this type of thing than I: check out The Dreaded Comparison or The Sexual Politics of Meat.

Regarding Phlegmatic's post about shelter dogs not always being good..I agree. Some of these dogs come in from severe neglect or abuse. Luckily for us, there are many to choose from so you can make sure you're compatible.
Also, my little guy is a chihuahua-jack russel ;). Each one's different but he's pretty good and doesn't fit the "yappy jerk dog" stereotype. We had to work with him to be nice to other dogs but he's a big fat baby.

I don't want anyone to be put off my original message by semantics/personal belief that they view as insulting. I really genuinely only care that animals get out of shelters/rescues and into homes. I am so against breeding because I have volunteered and seen these animals die in shelters. I really want anyone reading this to read the last sentence. These animals die in a cold place with absolutely no one in the world to say goodbye. The only love they get is from shelter workers/volunteers. I work with a public animal rescue/rights/welfare group and the sheer volume killed every year is overwhelming. I take it personally because we try so hard to let people know adoption is an option. It's very heartbreaking and I applaud shelter workers. I do not think I could work in a shelter.

For more info or to find a friend, please go
http://petfinder.com/

or search for "(your city/state/country) animal shelter" or "(your city/state/country) dog/cat rescue".

Also, many places have low-cost or free spaying and neutering. The procedure doesn't take long and your animals will be in better health for it. Be sure to get pain medicine for them, as not all vets offer them.

Re. Allergies to pets
"nobody is actually allergic to kids!"

If you say people shouldn't be allowed to bring their dogs to places because people might be allergic, you must also be willing to say people shouldn't be allowed to:
1. Wear perfume in public places
2. Wear shoes they've worn out hiking or in the park
3. Wear certain types of clothing
4. Sell flowers in public places
I could go on...

Doesn't it make more sense to modify the public place to accommodate people with allergies (such as using an air purifier) than to make all people change in order to accommodate people with allergies?
Just a thought...

Pamela is over eager to pass judgement. And she doesn't know anything about responsible breeders who are trying to breed good canine citizens. Is she going to jump down my throat for breeding service dogs? Breeding is rape but forcible neutering is OK? Sheesh. Passionate ignorance and a willingness to order others around? Not what I expect from folks here.

For the record, 25% of shelter dogs are purebreds. They just don't come with papers.

I have an adorable little 12 pound bichon or cocka-poo I adopted from a shelter. He's the best dog, ever!

He was given up because he sleeps too much, not because he has physical or behavioral problems.

People are fickle. They throw away their dogs because they don't match the furniture or their new boyfriend thinks the dog's ugly. LOTS of shelter dogs are perfectly fine dogs, they just need a second chance.

Regarding temperament:
There are some breed trends, but that's all they are, TRENDS. You cannot be certain that a particular breed of dog will have a particular personality. The only way to know is to get to know the dog. The only way to get to know the dog is to spend time with him/her. Shipping an unknown dog from another state is not getting to know a dog.

wow, I didn't mean to start such a shit-storm. I volunteer at a shelter, love my rescued dog and have intense feelings about animal welfare and rescue. However, all I was trying to say was what Faerylore and others have said so eloquently- bringing up issues is fine, but being judgemental with massively incomplete information may rub people the wrong way.
Jessica's made a wonderful addition to her life- congratulations are all that's in order.

"Maybe we should stop scolding people on where they get their dogs, and focus upon how all these unowned dogs (and cats) are getting that way, and work towards prevention."

Where people get their dogs and how the homeless dog population grows are related. As the demand for puppies and purebreds grows, the over-population continues.

Moreover, one can simultaneously work towards educating the public about dog overpopulation and encourage people to adopt from shelters and rescue groups rather than breeders.

"That means encouraging and providing education for dog training. That means making it easier for renters to find places to live with their pets. That means supporting more urban/suburban/rural dog parks, so that not having a yard doesn't limit your pup's quality of life (not to mention, what a great socialization tool!!! And it's fun. enough said), that means getting cities like Paso Robles, CA to let its residents to walk their dogs in the public parks, that means making castration and spaying more affordable, and it means getting rid of useless and pointless breed restrictions..."

Those are absolutely necessary. We agree. But working towards those ends does not prohibit someone from working towards other ends. We need to stop pretending that there are bright-line differences between causes.

Compassion and justice are not limited. They don't end where your sense of etiquette does, they continue.

As Carol Adams wrote in the intro to The Sexual Politics of Meat, "...we have to stop fragmenting activism; we cannot polarize human and animal suffering since they are interrelated."

Consciousness raising can be uncomfortable. And the people who help raise your consciousness can be perceived as rude. Oh well.

Jessica chose to make this announcement on a feminist blog, not on a personal blog. The etiquette rules, I believe, differ.

Scolding is never good etiquette, Elaine.

And consciousness can be raised without resort to guilt-tripping.

Elaine, Pamela, etc. -- while you are right to draw attention to these issues (and Lord knows I certainly love most dogs more than most people), I think you are kind of needlessly stirring up strife.

You say your purpose was to educate people about the dangers of overbreeding and the awesomeness of shelter dogs (which, again, I could not agree with more, being the proud mommy of one such abandoned dog, who is the BEST DOG in the WORLD (sorry Jessica ;))). For that I applaud you. More light does need to be shed on these issues. So you've done that. You've accomplished your purpose, so good on you.

What I don't understand is the point of carrying on past making that point. I can only conclude that you are criticizing Jessica's decision to adopt this adorable little puppy. I don't understand the point of this. Are you trying to change her mind? Should she "cancel" the puppy? The little guy has already been born, so the fact of the matter is that he needs a home, period. Jessica can provide him a GOOD one. Would you rather this living, breathing, adorable little animal be left to the forces of fate and maybe end up with an abusive or neglectful owner? Is he any less deserving of a good home simply because he doesn't come from a shelter? Should every dog have to go through the horror of abuse or abandonment before he's worthy of lasting love? I LOVE my little guy and I WISH he had not had to go through whatever he went through before I got him. I sob when I take him to the vet for uncomfortable tests. It HURTS me to think about my baby experiencing any pain, and I would not wish a sad life on ANY dog. I'm not accusing you of doing this -- but think about what would happen if people did as you suggest, and did NOT buy dogs from any breeders, but only adopted them from shelters. Necessarily every dog would have to wind up in a shelter before getting adopted. And that's just illogical.

The systemic problems you identify are REAL and NEED to be addressed. But acting as though Jessica is causing the problem is beyond unfair. It's like criticizing women who sacrifice their careers to some extent for their children. No, the tradeoff SHOULD NOT EXIST. But what are these women supposed to do when their jobs (and, sadly, sometimes even their families) are unyielding brick walls of sexism? Should they ignore their kids in the name of feminism? The kids are already THERE -- a responsible person does what's gotta be done. We live in a real world -- we cannot expect every single individual to solve every systemic problem. That's what LAWS are for.

So if you want to advocate changing laws to crack down on puppy mills and such, I will be five billion percent behind you. But I can't get behind these rude comments against Jessica. Jessica has decided to become a puppy-mommy. Wherever her puppy came from, all I wish for her and the puppy is love and happiness.

Jessica - I've had two Aussies, and they are just wonderful dogs. Make sure you get a bunch of soft frisbees, it is a great way to wear out an Australian Shepherd, and you will be amazed at how high they can jump.

On scolding and rudeness: I'm sorry if anyone has been offended by anything I say. I try very hard to choose my words carefully and I try not to offend people.

To me, rudeness is a display of a lack of respect for a person, not an idea. I respect Jessica very much. I think her blog and her book are great. From what I saw of her on Colbert I think she's probably a smart, nice person, too. But I don't respect her ideas about buying a puppy.

I don't mean to scold or offend, but sometimes new or different ideas can feel offensive. And all too often diverse voices are stifled or censored by the criticism that they are "being rude." Etiquette is used as a tool to maintain the status-quo more often than as a tool to promote respect.

"Should she "cancel" the puppy?"

My comments are more for the benefit of someone on the fence, someone who hasn't already entered into a contract to purchase a puppy, someone who is thinking about whether to adopt from a shelter or buy from a breeder, than literally for Jessica.

But, since you asked, there are more options than just the one you suggested:

1. Jessica could tell the breeder she's uncomfortable purchasing a living being, that love and companionship shouldn't have a price, and that dogs are not commodities. She could say she'd happily donate the "cost" of the dog to a shelter of the breeder's choice rather than actually buying the puppy.

2. She could balance her decision to buy the puppy with a commitment to volunteer at an animal shelter or make a donation... Sort of like how movie-makers are off-setting their production carbon footprints by planting trees or sponsoring mass transit.

3. At the very least, she could go down there and visit the dog, get to know him, and make sure he's appropriate for her. Then she could transport him back to NY herself, rather than have him shipped. He's not a book from Amazon, he's a living, breathing puppy. (Not saying she isn't planning on doing this already. Maybe she is, I don't know. Florida isn't all that far away...)

4. She could vow that her next dog comes from a shelter, not a breeder.

5. She could steal the dog and donate the money she would have spent on buying him to a shelter. If that idea makes you uncomfortable, think about why it does. Are animals really, truly property? Particularly animals, like cats, who science has revealed domesticated themselves? No, they are living beings and living beings are not commodities.

"...think about what would happen if people did as you suggest, and did NOT buy dogs from any breeders, but only adopted them from shelters."

Breeders would go out of business. Dogs would not be commodities. Organizations that rescued stray dogs or dogs from unfit homes would supply the human desire for dog companionship.

Okay. So. In the ideal world of some people all pet owners would spay or neuter their pets and all breeders and puppy mills (never mind that the two are not the same thing) would go out of business.

Where would the new puppies come from?

Very well put, Elaine!

Kimmy- It isn't an ideal world. Change happens gradually. There will always be rescues..for a very long time. We will probably not live to see the end of animals as commodities. Asking the question you asked is a legitimate question, but it's also akin to "what would happen to the cows if everyone went vegetarian?". Supply and demand. Breeders wouldn't breed as many puppies if they had to take care of them and didn't make money off of them. (Just as there will never be a large group of cows prancing around a shut-down slaughterhouse. It's gradual.

Okay, so it's gradual. Doesn't answer my question, though. If you wish for there to still be puppies even when your ideal world comes to pass, somebody's going to have to have something to do with breeding them.

Kimmy-

Like I said, we will probably not see the end of animals as commodities. People a few hundred years from now can cross that bridge when they get to it. The future hypothetical problem you bring up does not help the situation for shelters animals now. We can be responsible for our actions now.

Kimmy,

First, the stray and feral populations won't go away for a very long time. There will always be plenty of puppies within our lifetimes and probably at least for the next few generations.

Second, your assumption that there just MUST be puppies is a little odd. Why must there be puppies? They have no natural habitat. They're not wild animals; they're domesticated animals.

It's like asking, where the genetically engineered extra large pigs, who can't stand up on their own legs because they've been bred to be so large their legs can't handle the weight will come from when everyone stops eating pig. It's ridiculous. The world does not *need* genetically engineered animals like humungous pigs or Toy Poodles or Pomeranians...

You're talking about dogs bred to be human companions. When we've outgrown our idea that animals are property whose sole purposes are for our enjoyment, well then, we'll help develop a world more suitable for all creatures, not just the cute, little furry ones with seriously limiting genes.

I want that puppy...

So, Elaine thinks it's okay to just let dogs die out simply because they've been bred as pets. Interesting. Personally, I love dogs too much to ever want to imagine a world without them. Cats, too. And hamsters, and gerbils, and all the other fuzzy little creatures who make life so wonderful.

Kimmy, make whose life wonderful?

I like to think that my cat and I make each other's lives wonderful. She brings me joy, and I bring her joy. She's certainly affectionate enough for me to think that I'm making her happy. I can't ask her, of course, but by all indicators we're a happy couple (so to speak). The dog I had growing up was the same way.

Wow, Elaine, there's a whole lot of self-flagellation you want Jessica to go through to be worthy of your approval.

But something tells me that nothing she can do will meet with your approval.

Elaine, this is getting a little weird for me...

Look, I love dogs. Love them like I cannot describe. I sometimes get bummed when I read about people getting hurt. I get a little mad when I read about children getting hurt. I SOB, big, wet tears, when I read about dogs getting hurt. Others might criticize my emotional priorities, but there are my cards for all to see.

But I'm also a rational person and I recognize that dogs are NOT people. They're not the same. This does not mean they aren't living, sentient creatures worthy of decency and love. But they aren't the same as PEOPLE. They offer things that people can't, and people offer things that they can't. And I'm sure you understand this, because you urge spaying and neutering (which I agree with), and I'm sure you wouldn't urge the same thing for humans.

And I agree that dogs are wrongly commodified by our society to the point of cruelty, and it's an issue we need to address. BUT I don't go as far as saying that we can't have dogs as pets. In a sense, dogs are like severely retarded, loving, furry children (really not meaning to be offensive here by using the word "retarded"). If you want to call them something other than pets, that's fine -- I have no problem changing our relationship with dogs such that we recognize the reason we have authority over them, legally, is because they NEED our care, not because we are "higher" than or morally superior to them. But to say, as you seem to be suggesting, that the ultimate goal should be not to have dogs as human companions, seems to me a bit like saying that people should abort severely retarded children. And I just can't get on board with the idea that people should be told what kinds of dependents they "ought" to care for. If someone wants to take on the HUGE responsibility of pet ownership, she or he should have that option. It ISN'T cruel to dogs, period. Dogs love their owners as much as (sadly, in many cases more than) their owners love them. When I'm in a bad mood, my little Cujo can tell -- and it makes him sad. When I'm happy, he is happy. He knows I love him, and I know he loves me back. Sometimes it's downright erie how well he seems to understand me, almost like he can read my mind. He's never tried to escape, and he constantly seeks my approval. If I'm mad at him for doing something bad (like, um chewing up my Loius Vuitton wallet, which the little punk actually did a couple months ago), he feels HORRIBLE. Would you feel horrible to pissing me off if you didn't like me at least a little? Having a good home and a good owner makes dogs HAPPY. It's ridiculous to treat pet ownership like there's something "bad" about it, or like there's something "wrong" with wanting a dog.

As for the question about how to keep dogs around after mandatory spay/neuter laws, I would not be opposed to some sort of licensing system that is open to CHARITABLE organizations (I would almost suggest having them run by the government, but I don't much trust the government these days) and that ensures sufficient genetic diversity that designer dogs, while they might still exist, don't result in deformities that cause the animals pain. I don't see anything inherently wrong with specifically wanting a small, furry dog, or a big, slobbery one. And I don't see anything inherently wrong with breeding for certain characteristics (to some extent we humans do this to ourselves as well, by selecting partners with character traits we find appealing), as long as you're ensuring that doing so won't cause harm to innocent animals.

I would also ban all dog shows. They're like pageants only even crueler because the animals have no say in the matter.

LawFairy-

I can't speak for her, but I think she was talking about in the future, since a future hypothetical situation was brought up to redirect the subject away the actual problem today. I think she meant in the future, if all shelter dogs were out of shelters, how it may not be ethical to keep breeding animals just so we can have them as our own.

As for me..I agree animals are a large part of my life and my quality of life wouldn't be as great without them. I don't view them as property, though. I view my "pets" as my kids. I share my home with them because they don't have one.

Pamela, agreed re not seeing dogs as property. My dog is my baby, not some commodity. I'd sacrfice my (very expensive) big-screen TV WAY before I'd sacrifice him -- and he cost me 25 bucks for vet fees. Because he isn't property, like you say. He's my furry child :)

And I understood Elaine to be talking about the future. I'm just saying I don't agree that the ideal has to be not having dogs as pets. You and I both see our pets as kids -- so in a sense, isn't it a little bit like telling people the ultimate goal is not to have kids (putting aside for the moment the perpetuation-of-species issue)?

LawFairy-

I do not feel it is the same because we aren't talking about a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body, but millions of animals dying because of the choices of where we get our fur-kids, and how those choices affect female (woman) animals as well. If you mean in the future, as far as never having dogs...this is where the complete animal liberation debate comes into play but I do not see that in our lifetimes. Sorry if it seems overly-talkative, I just want to clarify.

I thought he was an Aussie - so cute.

What is wrong with this breeder/rescue argument is that YOU ALL HIJACKED THE CUTE PUPPY THREAD! Geez - take it somewhere else and post a link for those who are interested.

Law Fairy et al:
I think you misread my post. I was responding to the question "What if no one bought puppies from breeders?"

I never said "the ideal is not to have dogs as pets." I said that the ideal is not to treat animals as property. To that end. we shouldn't breed specialized dogs to make them dependent on us.

I think animal companionship is fine. In fact, there is scientific evidence that cats domesticated themselves. They LIKE people and they CHOSE to live with people.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6251434.stm

Likewise, most dogs seem to love people. In fact, they seem to like nothing more than to please humans. So, it's very likely we'll continue to have animal companions like cats and dogs forever. We just don't need the specialized breeds.

To Zuzu et al:
I know this is very hard for some of your to understand. You're so used to the idea that animals are property that to think of them as individuals upsets your worldview. I'm sorry it's upsetting you.

Jessica doesn't need my approval to live her life.
But we're not talking about my approval. We're talking about the ethical implications of treating animals as property. Jessica can and will do whatever she wants. I have no doubt about that. But she posted her announcement on a feminist blog, not a personal, private blog. I owe her no "congratulations" for a choice I believe she made in error.

If I posted my wedding announcement on a feminist blog, should I expect not to be criticized for it? Should I expect only congratulations and proper etiquette? No, I should expect it to ignite a discussion.

Again, Jessica doesn't need my approval.

If I posted my wedding announcement on a feminist blog, should I expect not to be criticized for it? Should I expect only congratulations and proper etiquette?

Yes. You should. Politics is not a license to be nasty. If you have internet relations with people, and have good news to share about your life, you get to do so, and people who are nasty about it are being gratuitously rude.

Further, while you may see animal rights and women's rights as inextricably linked, many of us do not; it is by no means a necessary assumption. Therefore, posting about getting a dog on a feminist blog is really not the same thing at all as posting about getting married. Posting about getting a dog on an animal-rights blog might be. But then, that's not what Jessica did, is it?

I owe her no "congratulations" for a choice I believe she made in error.

What happened to acknowledging that you have no idea whatsoever about how Jessica chose to obtain this dog? That you don't know if it's a breeder or a rescue service that took in a pregnant dog or the puppy of a friend's dog that got knocked up because the friend thought the dog was spayed? That you don't know all the reasons that someone might look for a certain breed--temperamental, allergy issues, etc.?

I know this is very hard for some of your to understand. You're so used to the idea that animals are property that to think of them as individuals upsets your worldview. I'm sorry it's upsetting you.

Oh, do knock off the condescending tone. People aren't having a hard time understanding you. They're disagreeing with you and objecting to your snotty, holier-than-thou tone.

I echo what others have said about using "rape" to describe the impregnation of animals. I also object to using the term "woman" to include female animals. I can think of few less feminist linguistic turns of phrase.

Jeeze, EG. Talk about nasty! I think you just ventured from somewhat-reasonable discussion to rude personal attack. Difference in opinion doesn't equal holier-than-thou. You are the only one being gratuitously rude with that last post.

I reread my comment, Pamela, and I just don't see a personal attack on Elaine in it. I said nothing about her as a human being, or even her as a feminist. The tone was hostile, but I would say that it's no more hostile than Elaine's has been, and that if you're going to dish it out, you have to be prepared to get it back. Having read Elaine's screeds on this thread, especially her list of what actions Jessica could ta