Brutal Cat and dog owners are the most prolific animal abusers of all time

[ANTAGONIST]

Think about it. They removed an animal from their natural habitat, used dysgenics (reverse eugenics) to make them weak and cute (weak), now they are jesters and slaves (in some cases sexslaves #dogpill) for narcissistic human slavemasters.

Pethavers feed their furslaves slop (in the wilderness, they would hunt other animals and consume their raw meat) and many force them (talking about cats mostly) to be inside all day. Most importantly, they often FORCE their furslaves to be INCELS. Millions of cats and dogs are involuntarily celibate. They barely have any human connection animal connection. Cats and dogs are often forced to be lonely and LDAR all day (especially cats). But, it gets worse, many of them are CASTRATED, their reproductive system is mutilated by abusive humans. How is this acceptable? Not only do you enslave an animal, force it to eat slop, lock it up, keep it in a prison, force it to be an incel but you also turn it into a troon. Brutal.

Domesticated animals are sub5 animals. Wild cats and wolves are chads, pet cats and dogs are emasculated mutant versions of them. Your animals don't love you, they are dependent on you. They are enslaved by you. You are the welfare state for them.

What is even more haunting is the fact that we are also pets to the bourgeoisie (mostly jooish). We are domesticated the same way as these animals and we are being enslaved more and more. We are fed slop, we are imprisoned and getting lonelier by the day. We may be castrated by our owners soon enough (are you ready for ze new world order?)

OvER for petcels and humancels.

 

[deleted dude]

Humans are evil who would have thought

 

[Tšuudi]

OvER for petcels and humancels.

 

[AtrociousCitizen]

Beyond that — there is an alarming number of pet owners whose sense of morality has been compromised due to their maladaptive "relationships" with their pets; these are individuals who would unironically value the life of an animal over that of a human, especially an unattractive male. They are mostly concerned with what evokes feelings of affection and appears neotenous, which cute, furry little creatures seem to do quite well, especially since our perception of these animals is likely influenced by the inherent propensity to view infants as cute.

A woman will literally cry over a stray cat with a "precious" face while stepping over a homeless, sub-5 man in the street without a second thought. Aside from what this tells us about women's inherent depravity, it is also argued these pets have highjacked their maternal instincts and are treated as a substitute for having children. They would rather spend thousands on life-saving surgery for a cat than give an unattractive man a single glance. It proves that "empathy" is just a status-signal that only applies to things they find cute. If you aren't furry and tiny or a 6-foot Chad, your life has zero value to them.

If a building was on fire and a woman had to choose between saving her "fur-baby" and a sub-5 man, she’d save the cat and get 1 million likes on TikTok for her "bravery." We are the only demographic on earth that ranks lower than domestic animals.

 

[ANTAGONIST]

Beyond that — there is an alarming number of pet owners whose sense of morality has been compromised due to their maladaptive "relationships" with their pets; these are individuals who would unironically value the life of an animal over that of a human, especially an unattractive male. They are mostly concerned with what evokes feelings of affection and appears neotenous, which cute, furry little creatures seem to do quite well, especially since our perception of these animals is likely influenced by the inherent propensity to view infants as cute.

A woman will literally cry over a stray cat with a "precious" face while stepping over a homeless, sub-5 man in the street without a second thought. Aside from what this tells us about women's inherent depravity, it is also argued these pets have highjacked their maternal instincts and are treated as a substitute for having children. They would rather spend thousands on life-saving surgery for a cat than give an unattractive man a single glance. It proves that "empathy" is just a status-signal that only applies to things they find cute. If you aren't furry and tiny or a 6-foot Chad, your life has zero value to them.

If a building was on fire and a woman had to choose between saving her "fur-baby" and a sub-5 man, she’d save the cat and get 1 million likes on TikTok for her "bravery." We are the only demographic on earth that ranks lower than domestic animals.

You get it, it's exactly what i have been thinking.

A really good example of this is true crime videos on jewtube, if the case talked about involves a person who killed animals and a human (or multiple), them you will notice that more foid commenters will talk about the poor innocent kitterinos than the sub-chad male who was killed.

Regarding, the baby substitute thing, you're again spot on. Always those "single" foids have some furslave as a way to surpress their maternal instinct. It's absolute insanity, they would rather waste their money on taking care of a furslave who's gonna die out after 10 years than continue their own bloodline. Then, they will say that they aren't "ready" for children and that they don't have enough resources. While having a child, the government can give you money to help with that, while having a furslave, you have to pay out of your own pocket to keep it alive. It's just lunacy. If we banned pets, maybe there would be more births.

When it comes to cuteness, it's really a blackpill. Notice how animal fans never care about uglier lifeforms like bugs? Vegans don't care about the bugs who die, but the cute lambs and piglets need our love. It's all about feels, no rational thinking exists.

 

[AtrociousCitizen]

You get it, it's exactly what i have been thinking.

A really good example of this is true crime videos on jewtube, if the case talked about involves a person who killed animals and a human (or multiple), them you will notice that more foid commenters will talk about the poor innocent kitterinos than the sub-chad male who was killed.

Yep. This phenomenon has become increasingly common today, which is not necessarily a significant surprise, for it is sensible to assume that if we live in a gynocentric order, its ethical values will reflect those of females — hence, disregard for those they deem unattractive and the inflation of the moral value of neoteny have become prevalent. This is also a result of Hollywood desensitizing people to the murder of humans, especially men who are portrayed as cannon fodder, while every death of a dog is treated as an unforgivable tragedy; that is unironically the premise of the original John Wick movie, for example, which started a popular series of movies. Of course, these movies and their contents are merely a reflection of already present human biases, but they have no doubt exacerbated this distorted perception. The same goes for other, somewhat unrelated things that are portrayed in such media, like rape, which is considered the utmost moral transgression because of feminist propaganda in spite of it being a rather mild violation in comparison to other ones.

Regarding, the baby substitute thing, you're again spot on. Always those "single" foids have some furslave as a way to surpress their maternal instinct. It's absolute insanity, they would rather waste their money on taking care of a furslave who's gonna die out after 10 years than continue their own bloodline. Then, they will say that they aren't "ready" for children and that they don't have enough resources. While having a child, the government can give you money to help with that, while having a furslave, you have to pay out of your own pocket to keep it alive. It's just lunacy. If we banned pets, maybe there would be more births.

Yeah, it's completely idiotic and egregious.

When it comes to cuteness, it's really a blackpill. Notice how animal fans never care about uglier lifeforms like bugs? Vegans don't care about the bugs who die, but the cute lambs and piglets need our love. It's all about feels, no rational thinking exists.

Exactly. Many of them are solely concerned with the feelings the sight of the creatures evokes in them, not any adherence to consistent principles.

 

[Lonly ghost]

Our ancestors did a big mistake by domesticating animals and causing deforestation.

 

[Brainy]

Abolish pet ownership

 

[fokusin]

Abolish pet ownership

 

[yeetbender_]

They will FORCEFULLY CASTRATE an animal and tell you that YOU'RE the bad guy somehow.

Epstein was right about the goyim.

THESE SAME GOYIM will act as if they give a shit about muh "consent" when it's time to deprive you of foids, but when sodomites, jew gates, or the vetranarians have their way, they're all suddenly quiet about everything.

 

[yeetbender_]

It's a degenerate, talmudic practice if you actually stop to think about it.

 

[luninyt]

Dude I already knew this, but my parents don’t listen to me not to castrate the animals