Dogs VS Cats, A REALLY old debate

They're all the same.

Every cat i've ever known has been ****ing evil.

You must be from, like, Evil Cat Land, or something.

Cat person here. I do like both cats and dogs, but I like cats the most. Cats are my most favorite of all animals. With a cat, you don't have to worry about them that much cause they can take care of their selves.

This is one of the most gosh-dang ridiculous statements I've read in weeks.

Almost no cat I've ever seen does anything remotely like that - and I've seen (and owned) a LOT of cats. Non-friendly cats just slink away rather than act mean normally, and if someone goes up to pet a cat and it hisses and scratches, that means it's never interacted with friendly people before or has had a lot of bad experiences; it's called FEAR. A dog that's experienced the same thing will almost certainly growl, try to bite, or do something similar that's "anti-social" (or more accurately, defensive).


I don't know if you unconsciously try to torture a cat every time you get near one, or if you live in a ghetto or something where cats are always getting mistreated and kicked and pelted with objects and stuff throughout their lives, or what. But seriously.

fixed

I live in a fine neighborhood thank you very much... and i've never seen cats out side..

And i don't even go near one if i do, I attempt to place my hand softly on their back and move my hand across their back in a petting motion.

I've mostly seen cats outside. And they still tend to either be nice or just avoid people in the first place.

I don't ever remember an indoor cat I've encountered that was nasty.


So obviously there's some major unaccounted-for variable in your situation, or the cat-owning people you visit are really mean to or neglectful of their cats, or you're just incredibly unlucky about what cats you encounter.

In any case, your statement was still ignorant, because it should have been plain just from several of the posts in this topic that your silly generalization about all cats being assholes was wrong.

Cats.

Because they don't lick me and give me massive rashes with their nasty saliva. Affection is sometimes not wanted, seriously.

Just like those dirty Mexicans, eh? <-- parallel statement; no intended claim of Mexican uncleanliness

It's pretty ignorant of you to insist on such a thing -- you probably just live in a neighborhood filled with stray / mistreated cats.

I love how you jump on what I said and not the people who said essentially the same thing in reverse.

@Draco: It's a Rationalized conclusion when 99.9% of cats I have met were all the same in that respect.. so.

This post has been edited by Purple on Jul 22 2008, 12:32 AM

It's probably because the way you word things makes you sound like an arrogant idiot moreso than similar points raised by others.

I'm not so sure about Grant, but in my case, it's that I didn't notice anyone else say it. I can only reply to posts that I have read.

It is never a rational conclusion to state that an entire group shares a trait when it is only common among a fraction of that group, regardless of the size, particularly considering that the fraction you are exposed to exists in the same relatively small area (compared to the entire world, filled with cats, that is.)

This post has been edited by Draco Icebane on Jul 22 2008, 12:34 AM

I'm just a Lazy typist... I could go into more detail as to why I like/dislike something but I decide not to and just type it out simply and efficiently.


@draco's 2nd statement: I could really give two ****s honestly.

This post has been edited by Purple on Jul 22 2008, 12:34 AM

OR!

You could simply say, "I don't like cats," and not try to defend everything you say, since you don't have to.

Then don't post here!

If you're talking about me not reacting to MTC's post, which contained a statement similar to yours, (1) I'd kind of missed that part of that post at the time, and (2) he wasn't saying ALL cats did the attacking-for-no-reason thing. I will, say, however, that it was not a very intelligent comment either, since it's not "most" cats that do that.


If you're talking about me not reacting to Dr. Light's "fixed" post, I was just about to do so, because he's repeating the same nonsense that you stated, even after it was clearly shown that cats aren't all or mostly like that.


If you're talking about people who said they hated/disliked dogs, I'm pretty sure I don't recall anyone, except for one person (Mason), attributing negative behavior to dogs that is really far from a characteristic of all of them.

What I see said by all the other people who dislike dogs:

• People saying they don't care for the way dogs express affection (which is different because they're not accusing the dogs of being assholes)
• Saying they're disgusting (an opinion, not an ill-grounded accusation of a certain behavior)
• Listing common annoying things about dogs (not actually an implication that ALL dogs are like that, but instead more of a comparison of cats vs. dogs, since NO (or almost no) cats, as opposed to SOME dogs, do the things listed
• Saying dogs are "butt-kissers", which, although a generalization, is at least more typical of dogs than a generally assholish personality is to cats. Besides, it's still not the same, since "butt-kissing" isn't as "bad" for an animal as attacking people is. I still don't see anyone going "dogs are jerkish animals that tend to bite people for no reason" (which would be a statement equal in irrationality with yours).

In other words, you have nothing to complain about regarding my lack of a reaction to most of the anti-dog posts. There's only Mason's left, but I know that part of why I didn't react to his post was because (1) some of what he said actually was stuff that dogs did a lot or that distinguished some dogs from cats, (2) your post somehow struck me as more "black-and-white" than his ("cats are the mean, nasty ones, and dogs are all good and nice! ^_^"), and (3) you in general have an irritatingly blunt way of saying things, especially when you're completely wrong.



As for the "rationalized" part: give me a break! You've already been shown that you're wrong, and you're still acting like you're the most rational person around in the topic. Seriously, come on.

... as strongly as I feel about Purple's statement ... I don't see a need to write that much about it. Now, if you were standing next to her and she was saying it and you were just crying over your dead kitty, I could understand making a speech in immediate response, but seriously ...

Isn't that a bit much? If she didn't care when it was shorter, she won't care when it's a screen long!

Hackers are more likely to have cats than dogs.

But, I prefer not to have a pets.

[IP address logged: 24.207.61.48]

If she doesn't read it out of disdain, that's just her being irrational again, because she'll be closing her ears to refutation of her ignorant statement. Therefore I'm not too concerned about it.

But ... you wrote all of that out for nothing. You basically allowed her to steal like ten minutes of your time. (It would have taken me one minute and ten seconds to write all that.)

I'm bored and procrastinating on work. I'd probably be playing Solitaire or something if I weren't posting here anyway.