Why are people who don't like animals treated like freaks?

William Collins11 said:Hmm... I see this thread has expanded into areas I hadn't quite intended—though, honestly, I'm glad. It’s helpful to see such a wide spectrum of perspectives; it really helps me gauge the social climate.

When I mentioned my dislike for animals, I was specifically referring to pets. I simply don't care for having them near me—in my own apartment, at least. I can tolerate them perfectly well at someone else's place, provided they aren't being intrusive and I don't have to spend my entire evening fussing over how "precious" or "sweet" they are.

Broadly speaking, I have nothing against animals themselves. I've only ever been to a zoo once in my life, and I can't imagine ever going back. Personally, I don't think anyone should have to live like that—confined to a cage.

It isn't as if I grew up without animals nearby; back at my grandmother's place out in the countryside, there were plenty of cats roaming around, though we never actually kept a pet. They were just local strays you'd toss some food to—not "pets" in the sense of buying them cans of tuna, letting them sleep in your bed, or constantly kissing their noses. My family never had pets like that. Perhaps that's where my indifference stems from.

I actually started this discussion because I was once labeled "selfish" just for stating that I didn't want pets in my home—specifically because I can't stand the hair and the smells. This came from a couple I knew from college—they were living in a tiny 300-square-foot studio with three dogs. We were having a general conversation about animals, and they ended up targeting me personally for my views, which apparently are unacceptable to most people.

I suspect your views actually represent the "majority"—certainly not those people whose apartments are overflowing with animals.

But honestly, calling someone out for how they choose to live and what their priorities are seems pretty irrational to me.

I guess I have to ask, Austin Hill6—how did you even defend yourself? You shouldn't have to. If you don't want pet hair everywhere, that's just that. Period.☕

And he’s claiming that’s some kind of defense mechanism. 🤷

Robin Hayes2 said:I love animals. Especially when they're served on a dinner plate. 😁

(for the record, I don't particularly care for animals, nor do I hate them. I've never owned a pet and frankly, I couldn't care less. boo hoo)

Definitely the most useful and fragrant kind of animal out there... 🙂

The animals I actually have some respect for are service dogs for the blind and those hero pups that pull people out of the wreckage after an avalanche or an earthquake... 🙂
Totally blanked on the ones sniffing out drugs at the border, though. 😬

Austin Hill6 said:Honestly, forget what they said. People just love to act morally superior, don't they? Personally, I think spending an entire day stuck inside an apartment just waiting for an owner to take you for a walk sounds like a miserable way for any animal to live.

I have nothing but respect for people who rescue animals and save them from sickness, hunger, or death in some local shelter. That’s noble and truly humane, but regardless of that, I don't think anyone has the right to label you a freak or call you selfish simply because you don't want pets.

Not everyone is built for everything, and most people really ought to question their actual motives before getting a pet—instead of picking one up and then dumping it on the street whenever they decide to head to the beach or go on vacation.

So, how did you handle their accusations?

To be honest—I didn't even bother much with a defense—I just told them I don't consider myself selfish; I simply have no desire to share my personal space or my time with animals, nor do I feel the need to care for them. (The conversation drifted toward how they both live in such a tiny apartment, yet somehow find enough room and time for three dogs.)

I didn't say this out loud to them—though perhaps I should have—but to me, it seems far more selfish to cram three dogs into a small living space just to satisfy one's own desire for companionship or whatever else.

William Collins11 said:To be honest—I didn't even bother much with a defense—I just told them I don't consider myself selfish; I simply have no desire to share my personal space or my time with animals, nor do I feel the need to care for them. (The conversation drifted toward how they both live in such a tiny apartment, yet somehow find enough room and time for three dogs.)

I didn't say this out loud to them—though perhaps I should have—but to me, it seems far more selfish to cram three dogs into a small living space just to satisfy one's own desire for companionship or whatever else.

With those "friends" of yours, you could pretty much say: people who "love" animals too much probably don't care for kids... ☕
And honestly, why are you even hanging out with people like that anyway...😕

It’s honestly such a shame—really, a genuine waste—that a topic with this much potential has devolved into this messy cocktail of shallow trolling and aggressive finger-pointing at pet owners by people who clearly don't get it (not to mention the occasional dramatic confession of deep-seated phobias masquerading as a simple dislike of animals). I suppose trying to debunk every single misconception posted here would just be pouring gasoline on an already raging fire, so I'll stick to one point: the square footage of someone's living space has absolutely zero bearing on the quality of a dog's life. If they have a decent owner, a dog could live in a tiny studio apartment in Manhattan and still thrive; besides, it is fundamentally wrong—and frankly, quite unfair—to blame the animals for the sheer stupidity of certain owners.

The core issue, if we're being honest, starts with how we categorize ourselves: there are those who love animals, those who "actively dislike" them, and then there's that middle ground of people who are mostly indifferent. If we use that framework, I'll admit that those of us in the "actively dislike" camp—meaning people who are bothered simply by the mere presence of animals nearby—are, well, strange. We aren't necessarily "weirdos" (defined as someone who lives differently than the masses, someone acting out of character or being an eccentric), but we are certainly odd (someone who deviates unexpectedly from the norm, someone who surprises others by being different from what is customary; peculiar)).

For instance, some animals are—quite simply—beautiful. They are beautiful in their appearance, they are beautiful in their "behavior" (I think my meaning is clear enough without getting bogged down in specifics), and they are beautiful just by existing—and that beauty exists independently of anything else. I find it difficult to wrap my head around how someone who isn't otherwise repelled by beauty in any other form can find the mere existence of animal beauty so incredibly bothersome.

Nicholas King said:It’s honestly such a shame—really, a genuine waste—that a topic with this much potential has devolved into this messy cocktail of shallow trolling and aggressive finger-pointing at pet owners by people who clearly don't get it (not to mention the occasional dramatic confession of deep-seated phobias masquerading as a simple dislike of animals). I suppose trying to debunk every single misconception posted here would just be pouring gasoline on an already raging fire, so I'll stick to one point: the square footage of someone's living space has absolutely zero bearing on the quality of a dog's life. If they have a decent owner, a dog could live in a tiny studio apartment in Manhattan and still thrive; besides, it is fundamentally wrong—and frankly, quite unfair—to blame the animals for the sheer stupidity of certain owners.

The core issue, if we're being honest, starts with how we categorize ourselves: there are those who love animals, those who "actively dislike" them, and then there's that middle ground of people who are mostly indifferent. If we use that framework, I'll admit that those of us in the "actively dislike" camp—meaning people who are bothered simply by the mere presence of animals nearby—are, well, strange. We aren't necessarily "weirdos" (defined as someone who lives differently than the masses, someone acting out of character or being an eccentric), but we are certainly odd (someone who deviates unexpectedly from the norm, someone who surprises others by being different from what is customary; peculiar)).

For instance, some animals are—quite simply—beautiful. They are beautiful in their appearance, they are beautiful in their "behavior" (I think my meaning is clear enough without getting bogged down in specifics), and they are beautiful just by existing—and that beauty exists independently of anything else. I find it difficult to wrap my head around how someone who isn't otherwise repelled by beauty in any other form can find the mere existence of animal beauty so incredibly bothersome.

You didn't mention the global destruction caused by poaching, smuggling, and reselling endangered species because of fake animal lovers wanting to keep them in cages, aquariums, or terrariums. 😉
For example, a large tropical parrot in Washington, D.C. goes for 15 $0.00. These fake animal lovers, along with the resellers and poachers, are the biggest haters and enemies of these creatures, ☕
You want to talk about the beauty of animals? Watch an antelope on TV right before a lion or a crocodile grabs it and devours it. Nature is brutal and doesn't have a sentimental worldview like people who hold unnatural attitudes toward flora and fauna. We should be preserving nature, not cramming it into our apartments.
Take that show on TBS about pets, for example. All those people on the show have houses in the suburbs with big yards and don't bother anyone. Probably because in Germany, the laws regarding pet ownership and care are crystal clear. 😛

electricdriver33 said:You didn't mention the global destruction caused by poaching, smuggling, and reselling endangered species because of fake animal lovers wanting to keep them in cages, aquariums, or terrariums. 😉
For example, a large tropical parrot in Washington, D.C. goes for 15 $0.00. These fake animal lovers, along with the resellers and poachers, are the biggest haters and enemies of these creatures, ☕
You want to talk about the beauty of animals? Watch an antelope on TV right before a lion or a crocodile grabs it and devours it. Nature is brutal and doesn't have a sentimental worldview like people who hold unnatural attitudes toward flora and fauna. We should be preserving nature, not cramming it into our apartments.
Take that show on TBS about pets, for example. All those people on the show have houses in the suburbs with big yards and don't bother anyone. Probably because in Germany, the laws regarding pet ownership and care are crystal clear. 😛

These "lovers" who imprison animals are nothing more than pretenders; in reality, they are suffocators and jailers.

My cat, on the other hand, is a free spirit... he gets his meals, he has shelter when it rains, he has access to a warm room when the temperature drops... some days he stays indoors, other days he spends the entire day outside... he is entirely free to come and go as he pleases...

I consider myself someone who loves animals, though certainly not in that pathological, suffocating manner in which many of their owners claim to "love" them...

feralranger said:These "lovers" who imprison animals are nothing more than pretenders; in reality, they are suffocators and jailers.

My cat, on the other hand, is a free spirit... he gets his meals, he has shelter when it rains, he has access to a warm room when the temperature drops... some days he stays indoors, other days he spends the entire day outside... he is entirely free to come and go as he pleases...

I consider myself someone who loves animals, though certainly not in that pathological, suffocating manner in which many of their owners claim to "love" them...

that's how I treat my cat, too. I actually respect her instincts and that wild side she still has 👍

Those people with the controlling tendencies clearly don't grasp animal psychology or basic nature; honestly, they’re just thinking about themselves.
And those who let their pets run wild and bother everyone else? They don't care to understand—or even try to empathize with other people if they aren't already narrow-minded.
Actually, I suspect it's intentional. It’s just more selfishness and looking at everything through a self-centered lens.😠

Nicholas King said:It’s honestly such a shame—really, a genuine waste—that a topic with this much potential has devolved into this messy cocktail of shallow trolling and aggressive finger-pointing at pet owners by people who clearly don't get it (not to mention the occasional dramatic confession of deep-seated phobias masquerading as a simple dislike of animals). I suppose trying to debunk every single misconception posted here would just be pouring gasoline on an already raging fire, so I'll stick to one point: the square footage of someone's living space has absolutely zero bearing on the quality of a dog's life. If they have a decent owner, a dog could live in a tiny studio apartment in Manhattan and still thrive; besides, it is fundamentally wrong—and frankly, quite unfair—to blame the animals for the sheer stupidity of certain owners.

The core issue, if we're being honest, starts with how we categorize ourselves: there are those who love animals, those who "actively dislike" them, and then there's that middle ground of people who are mostly indifferent. If we use that framework, I'll admit that those of us in the "actively dislike" camp—meaning people who are bothered simply by the mere presence of animals nearby—are, well, strange. We aren't necessarily "weirdos" (defined as someone who lives differently than the masses, someone acting out of character or being an eccentric), but we are certainly odd (someone who deviates unexpectedly from the norm, someone who surprises others by being different from what is customary; peculiar)).

For instance, some animals are—quite simply—beautiful. They are beautiful in their appearance, they are beautiful in their "behavior" (I think my meaning is clear enough without getting bogged down in specifics), and they are beautiful just by existing—and that beauty exists independently of anything else. I find it difficult to wrap my head around how someone who isn't otherwise repelled by beauty in any other form can find the mere existence of animal beauty so incredibly bothersome.

I don't quite follow. Beauty is such a subjective concept—whether we are talking about people or animals. For example, I find snakes to be stunning creatures. I wouldn't want one as a pet, of course, but they are magnificent—their appearance and their natural habits truly fascinate me. It's the same with bees and ants; their social structures are a marvel of nature, and I find them beautiful because of that—it just inspires a sense of awe in me.

I am a bit confused about which animals are considered "beautiful in behavior"—after all, pets are trained; we teach them how to act.

I doubt anyone is actually offended by the beauty of animals (whatever that entails)—for me personally, it's the smell and the shedding that I can't stand, and I simply don't want that in my home. And yes, it does bother me when people judge me as selfish or cold because of those preferences.

@William Collins11 — those are just people I knew back in college. We saw each other every day for five years, so we’d chat over coffee about things outside of class, but I wouldn't exactly put them on my list of true friends.

William Collins11 said:I don't quite follow. Beauty is such a subjective concept—whether we are talking about people or animals. For example, I find snakes to be stunning creatures. I wouldn't want one as a pet, of course, but they are magnificent—their appearance and their natural habits truly fascinate me. It's the same with bees and ants; their social structures are a marvel of nature, and I find them beautiful because of that—it just inspires a sense of awe in me.

I am a bit confused about which animals are considered "beautiful in behavior"—after all, pets are trained; we teach them how to act.

I doubt anyone is actually offended by the beauty of animals (whatever that entails)—for me personally, it's the smell and the shedding that I can't stand, and I simply don't want that in my home. And yes, it does bother me when people judge me as selfish or cold because of those preferences.

@William Collins11 — those are just people I knew back in college. We saw each other every day for five years, so we’d chat over coffee about things outside of class, but I wouldn't exactly put them on my list of true friends.

ERM, or maybe I just misunderstood you or Byron, but I think you were actually referring to "beauty" in terms of their structure in your first point.

(you know, like being fascinating, organized, useful, complex...)

Though, honestly, I might have totally misread the situation.

William Collins11 said:I don't quite follow. Beauty is such a subjective concept—whether we are talking about people or animals. For example, I find snakes to be stunning creatures. I wouldn't want one as a pet, of course, but they are magnificent—their appearance and their natural habits truly fascinate me. It's the same with bees and ants; their social structures are a marvel of nature, and I find them beautiful because of that—it just inspires a sense of awe in me.

I am a bit confused about which animals are considered "beautiful in behavior"—after all, pets are trained; we teach them how to act.

I doubt anyone is actually offended by the beauty of animals (whatever that entails)—for me personally, it's the smell and the shedding that I can't stand, and I simply don't want that in my home. And yes, it does bother me when people judge me as selfish or cold because of those preferences.

@William Collins11 — those are just people I knew back in college. We saw each other every day for five years, so we’d chat over coffee about things outside of class, but I wouldn't exactly put them on my list of true friends.

If those statements were intended as a direct rebuttal to what I wrote, then you have quite frankly twisted my words 🙂.

My point was specifically about "active dislike" toward animals—meaning the idea that some people are genuinely bothered by the mere existence of others' pets—rather than a simple lack of desire to keep a pet in one's own apartment, which—given the mention of aesthetics—falls much more into the category of being indifferent...

Nicholas King said:If those statements were intended as a direct rebuttal to what I wrote, then you have quite frankly twisted my words 🙂.

My point was specifically about "active dislike" toward animals—meaning the idea that some people are genuinely bothered by the mere existence of others' pets—rather than a simple lack of desire to keep a pet in one's own apartment, which—given the mention of aesthetics—falls much more into the category of being indifferent...

Well, I am certainly not an "active hater" of animals; I think that’s pretty obvious from my previous posts—as if I wanted to wipe out every living thing except humans. Other people's pets don't bother me, provided they aren't constantly invading my space... It's fine to grab coffee with a friend who brings their dog along, as long as that dog isn't jumping all over me or licking me. I don't find that cute or intentional or anything... it's just gross.

I don't "love" animals in the sense that they trigger any desire for closeness or petting—which, I assume, is why most people keep pets in the first place.

@Almost Rosey — I think I may have interpreted the concept of "beauty" too purely from an aesthetic standpoint in my last example. In other words, I can admire animals and be fascinated by them without feeling any need for companionship, ownership, or physical contact.

William Collins11 said:Well, I am certainly not an "active hater" of animals; I think that’s pretty obvious from my previous posts—as if I wanted to wipe out every living thing except humans. Other people's pets don't bother me, provided they aren't constantly invading my space... It's fine to grab coffee with a friend who brings their dog along, as long as that dog isn't jumping all over me or licking me. I don't find that cute or intentional or anything... it's just gross.

I don't "love" animals in the sense that they trigger any desire for closeness or petting—which, I assume, is why most people keep pets in the first place.

@Almost Rosey — I think I may have interpreted the concept of "beauty" too purely from an aesthetic standpoint in my last example. In other words, I can admire animals and be fascinated by them without feeling any need for companionship, ownership, or physical contact.

It was perfectly clear—you only seem to care as long as you aren't replying directly to me to disagree with my point 🙂.

Nicholas King said:It was perfectly clear—you only seem to care as long as you aren't replying directly to me to disagree with my point 🙂.

I’m not sure where I disagreed with your post😕—I simply mentioned that I don't quite grasp the concept of beauty when applied to animals, specifically this idea of "animals that are beautiful in their behavior."🙂

Austin Hill6 said:I actually have more respect for people who don't care for animals and choose not to own them at all:
- than I do for those who buy parrots and directly fuel the breeding industry, forcing these creatures to live in cages their entire lives under the thin guise of "loving animals,"
- or those who get a dog only to keep it tethered on a chain constantly,
- or cat owners who refuse to spay or neuter their pets, effectively killing off the offspring,
- or people who treat animals as mere props to attract attention or a romantic interest, yet wouldn't even bother to feed them if someone else wasn't doing it for them,
- or those who visit the zoo claiming they "love nature," when a zoo isn't nature—it's just captivity,
- or anyone buying any kind of pet (excluding insects, spiders, or reptiles—though I'm not thrilled about those either),
and frankly, everyone else who claims to "love" animals.

Animals are living beings that deserve to have their own peace and their own lives.

Well said! 👍

I know plenty of idiots who are terrified of snakes and start panicking every time they see one, screaming that every single snake needs to be wiped out.

Agreed.

I’m with you on that. Totally sign my name to what was said above.

I honestly don't get how those big-box stores can just sell parrots, turtles, lizards, and all that stuff to basically anyone walking through the door😲. If I were in charge, I'd shut the whole thing down—it's just wrong. I don't see why wild animals even belong in a retail store being sold like candy, but if they *are* going to do it, there should at least be some kind of background check on the people trying to buy them.🙂

Like, turtles look tiny and cute in a Petco, but they grow pretty fast and end up getting over 8 inches long, needing actual space and proper food. When they're small, people just grab some cheap little plastic tub that isn't even enough room for a tiny turtle, let alone a grown one. It's gross. Honestly. Then people end up releasing them into our local ponds where they multiply and take over because they're more aggressive than the native species...
I guess anything goes around here, though I suppose it's the same everywhere... It's all just about the money, I guess.🙄🙂 Total disaster.

And don't even get me started on the parrots. Every time I see them stuck in those cages, I feel like crying. Especially the big ones, like the macaws. Man, I'd love to just adopt one, give it the best habitat ever, and then tell the store to stop ordering them altogether.😢

Maybe this is a bit off-topic, but I just had to say it.

Austin Hill6 said:I actually have more respect for people who don't care for animals and choose not to own them at all:
- than I do for those who buy parrots and directly fuel the breeding industry, forcing these creatures to live in cages their entire lives under the thin guise of "loving animals,"
- or those who get a dog only to keep it tethered on a chain constantly,
- or cat owners who refuse to spay or neuter their pets, effectively killing off the offspring,
- or people who treat animals as mere props to attract attention or a romantic interest, yet wouldn't even bother to feed them if someone else wasn't doing it for them,
- or those who visit the zoo claiming they "love nature," when a zoo isn't nature—it's just captivity,
- or anyone buying any kind of pet (excluding insects, spiders, or reptiles—though I'm not thrilled about those either),
and frankly, everyone else who claims to "love" animals.

Animals are living beings that deserve to have their own peace and their own lives.

Well said! 👍

I know plenty of idiots who are terrified of snakes and start panicking every time they see one, screaming that every single snake needs to be wiped out.

Hands down, the best post in this whole thread. These self-proclaimed "animal lovers" and activists are mostly just obsessed with dogs and cats, especially since everything else smells bad. Like, when I mentioned how gross it is seeing some woman obsessively petting a dog, it’s purely because from a hygiene standpoint, it’s nasty. And half the time, these people are carrying their dogs around in designer handbags 🤦 just so they can show them off like they're little kids or something. Most animal lovers are really just cat and dog people acting out of pure selfishness—they’re looking for a substitute for actual human connection, while the animals just see them as a walking vending machine for food, and they use it to pretend they're "humane."

I find it honestly a bit unsettling when people feel zero urge to keep houseplants. In my view, every single person ought to have at least one plant in their home.
What’s your take on that?