Sign In
Close
Kittens, pain, and violence. by Zrcalo
(no. this isnt anything scary or gorey. dont fret)
I got into an interesting moral discussion with a person on craigslist (o lordy) about free kittens vs $20 kittens.
To start, the idea of adding a price to a pet to deter hostile buyers isnt new. Or unwarranted. A person who is hell bent on punting kittens might see "free" as "opportunity".
Now, there's another idea.
Moral penance.
The action of someone buying something and the money they give for it, as a sacrifice for forgiveness. Forgiveness usually for themselves. "I paid for it. I can do anything I want to it. It's mine. I bought it with my own sweat. It has my mark. an exchange has been made", etc.
It could go in two directions...
I have given my dues and earned this money from society, therefore I am entitled to the things my dues have given me.
or
the person selling the object is only interested in the money the object was holding.
one places the moral obligation on the buyer, the other places the moral obligation on the seller.
One is about the buyer paying his dues for the abuse he is about to give. (it's mine. I can do what I want with it now)
The other has emotions drawn out towards the person who sold the object. (they didnt want it. its mine now. It's their bad for selling it)
The first is marked with the distinct "I did it". While the former is marked with the distinct "they did it".
If it's a person who is about to do malicious acts to an animal, the former is a way to distance themselves from what they are about to do. While the first one is still a distancing act, but with more self awareness. "I know what I did." vs "they enabled me to do it".
These things can be transferred to many different situations, but the whole "moral penance" still is fascinating to me.
what started all of this was my roomate coming into my room with a small kitten. He found it in the front yard, and I was given the task of finding it a home. Which, I listed it up on craigslist for free, which in return led a person to send me a message about that.
I do not know whether or not to expect a civil discussion, but the overall idea of "rehoming fee" vs "no rehoming fee" is an interesting one. I do not think either prevents evil from happening.
Here's part of the letter I sent to them.
"anyone can abuse an animal. Doesnt matter if they passed a million screening processes or adopted from the aspca.
the only thing that concerns me is if the person who wants the kitten will get it fixed, or will they dump the cat outside.
which is something that can never be screened or promised.
If a person wants something, even if they want it with their whole heart, it doesnt mean they wont drop it as soon as they got it.
every person has the capability to be terrible, at the same time-- every person has the capability to be amazing.
I would much rather not ask for money, as money has no bearing on morality and cuts out people who may actually care.
If anything, a terrible person would much rather purchase a pet out of convenience, bookkeeping, moral penance (free means obligations, bought means obligation-free, as the dues have already been paid to society via transference of labor.), or have no preference at all. apathy and lack of empathy is a non-detectable trait. Even with daily interactions, we roll a dice.
The whole thing is a very interesting concept to think about in its entirety, particularly the use of money as moral penance. to pay for wrong deeds, makes the buyer feel less moral obligation. That is why you have people buying dogs for thousands of dollars and neglecting them. It was never about the dog. It was the object and idea of the dog and the money. A high quality object-- purchased and obtained."
On another note, I am in copius amounts of pain. It's funny to me because when I went to the hospital they offered me percocet, vicodin, etc... and I turned them all down and asked for ibuprofen. Well, when you ask for ibuprofen they give you a LOT of ibuprofen.
Journal Information
- Views:
- 228
- Comments:
- 22
- Favorites:
- 0
- Rating:
- General
Comments
-
-
thats how I feel. If a bad person wanted to do bad things, it doesnt matter if it has a price tag or not. It could be $5 or $5000, they're still going to do what they're going to do.
I've found so many loving people who take in free kittens. I've not had a bad experience yet. Most of these people are the ones who cant afford to spend $20 on a kitten. Or ones who prefer to adopt the neediest little fluffballs. I even had a guy come and pick up a kitten while crying because it looked like his childhood cat. He also drove like.. two hours.. to pick the cat up.
I've even DRIVEN kittens to peoples' homes.Most of the kittens I've found were 100% feral though, so they needed a bunch of work before I found them homes.
I am also so glad that ibuprofen works good on me. I just learned I cant take it at the same time as my meds. Or I get super SUPER loopy.
-
-
A high adoption fee might deter good people, they might make them think you're profiting from selling the animal. A modest fee makes it look less skeezy. If the animal comes with all shots and fixed, $100 is reasonable. A kitten without so much as a feline hiv test, personally I don't think I would pay the $20 "homing fee".
Just my two cents.-
thats exactly how I feel about it. $20 for a kitten is rather steep, and even borders on milling them. Thats $100 for 5 kittens. (if you could even sell them for that price anyway) Not only that, but they probably dont have a vet check, and who knows if they're full of parasites.
I'm not sure about asking for a rehoming fee for a kitten I literally picked up off the street.
also this kitten keeps crawling all over me.
He is as clingy as tuna.
-
-
alot and the 500mg stuff too I bet . Hope you feel better soon!
As for the fees I'm mixed but I still view CL as a sort of underbelly, so I'm more guarded on there. I've rehomed fish on there and I did ask a small fee, just as a deterrent to people who didn't know what they were getting in to. It was my 6" Yoyo loach who was becoming aggressive in my female betta tank. They normally ain't aggressive but he was chasing someone every moment he was awake. so I was asking $5 and got a few replies. I selected a chick that had a 75gal full on semi aggressive cichlids and other loaches over the others that had too small of tanks or peaceful fish and still though it would have been a good addition.
But all I had to go on was their words, she could have been lying to me and throw him in the canals for all I know, BUT that $5 was being hoping that someone willing to spend money on something would view it in higher reguard then something gotten for free.Also alot of people up in arms about high fees on CL are aimed towards back yard breeders. Theres a difference between $20 for a kitten and $150 (assuming no shots/fixed in either case). Reasonable fees ok, trying to profit off the animal, no. Least in my book.
Also I love the guys at KUPD for all the work with the humane society that they do. But I am reminded for a time they posted a picture of a dog that was on death row on their FB to try and save it (someone did) but in the comments there was a guy complaining to high hell about the fact that the adoption fee was $50 (Fixed/shots/ care package) and one of the guys from the station simply replied, "if $50 is to rich for your blood, you shouldn't own a dog" and that's pretty spot on in my book of pessimism and thinking about possible vet visits and worst case scenarios.
My 2 cents
-
I'm still tired - I meant to make the point of playing the ratios, Yes bad people are going to do what they want, but all you can do is try and play the numbers in such a way that limits that possibility.
-
Makes complete sense. It's on par with having the right seive. Make sure you're letting people through while blocking others.
Dogs are definitely high maintenance animals, so asking $50 for one is not unreasonable.I remember looking for kittens with my mom. We had all the supplies and the money to have a cat fixed, but we were still only looking for free kittens. I dont even know exactly the reason behind it either. But I remember her scoffing at the fact that some people were asking as much as $25 each for them. (which, I guess in 1994 was a lot more than now)
-
oh speak of the devil - if you still need it http://www.azhumane.org/blog/2014/05/09/precious-parents-20-puppy-kitten-spayneuter-services/
-
lol thats the place I set his appointment through. except I'm only having to pay $15.
-
-
-
-
-
I have never even thought about this stuff before. I have no experience on selling animals to even have a ground to tell if this all sounds legit or not.
-
Also no CL experience to know how things work over on that "community," if it counts as a community. I suppose it does.
-
I always sit there and think about intent. Good or bad, and how much I trust people on certain levels. I trust everyone on one level, then as the levels increase and contact becomes more intimate (in its most neutral term), my scrutiny increases. I always try to piece together processes of other human beings. Most of the time, its piecing together the thought process behind possible bad altercations.
Craigslist is an interesting place. Particularly the pet section. People arent allowed to "sell" pets. They can only ask for a rehoming fee. Generally this only affects dogs and cats, as parrots and other animals are usually listed slightly below MSRP. What a "rehoming fee" is, is up to anyone's guess.
-
" I always try to piece together processes of other human beings. Most of the time, its piecing together the thought process behind possible bad altercations."
How do you know that the exchange or the lack of exchange of money has these effect amongst would be abusers? That is not worded well but I am not sure how to ask. Basically how do you know what you said above in the journal? Because I have like, no intuition for that. I mean, if I were going to be a dick to an animal like -- I write some sadistic shit okay -- it doesn't matter if money is involved or not just the mental effects on a creature are all that matters. If that were a real instance of abuse I don't know what I'd be thinking. I don't know what someone that collects animals to be a dick to thinks.
-
Like, if paying for an animal somehow alleviates guilt and there were some sort of studies on this or something that would be fascinating. Abuser mindsets would be fascinating to study.
-
most of it comes from my own head and a lot of it comes from experience.
one of my close friends rescues dogs. She's seen soooo many instances where money equals entitlement to neglect in animals. I guess it's hard to explain the mindset... I guess it goes hand in hand with viewing the animal (or human, from my personal experience) as an object that was bought to be flashy. if it isnt flashy, then it gets beaten and blamed for not being flashy or people looking up to the person and accepting their status. money equals entitlement.if you are given something by someone, you would feel guilty for selling it or giving it back.
if you bought something from someone, you wouldnt feel guilty for selling it or asking for a refund.
-
-
-
-
-
-
So to make sure I understand the ethical dilemma, it forks off with two options:
1. We can give away a kitten for free, and it's the Buyer's actions that's morally unjust. (/Summarized)
2. We can place an arbitrary high price on the kitten, the imperative is on the Seller to not give a kitten a ride to puntsvile for $20.There's two frameworks I can see expanding on this, but let's say I'll accept the dilemma as described (assuming I've grasped it accurately) the first is that the price serves as a disincentive so it'll deter some malign bidders but not all, but as the price increases so does the malign bidder's self-serving justification for beating kittens as it costs them more to acquire the 'opportunity'. There would have to be a limit in the selling price so that at least one Buyer could acquire it, but the value would discentinize all buyers not just malignant ones. So even if we found Buyer who'd want the kitten for a $1million is no guarantee the kitten won't end up as tenderized dogfood.
Another approach I can see is that we reject the notion of pet ownership and use one closer to an ideal of prescriptive stewardship. That is the Kitten's welfare is everyone's responsibility, and any grievous suffering incurred is at the fault of who administered it. A few resources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stewardship_%28theology%28
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_prescriptivismBut neither of these are 'helpful', the first just points out that adding a price doesn't deter malice (And may actually worsen it) while the second raises the question of how do you sell a kitten you don't own but take care of anyway? Even accepting that it's a universal responsibility to take care of animals, I think you'd have a hard time convincing the neighborhood to take care of your cat! Wait, that's just the cat you take care of, not the one you own because you don't. I think Kant got off easy on this one saying everyone is there own moral agent, so the guilt of Kitten Punting is on the Person irrespective of their position in the transaction.
Insofar as we can infer, I think the best solution is to offer the kitten for free, should a person pass an interview.
The good news is that as the advert is placed we can skewer the information to be asymmetrical; that is we know things they don't, so we've space to cause a bit of obfuscation. A line I've got is that we'll agree they can see the kitten 'first' but they can't receive it until the actual owner comes in (of which you deliberately avoid describing yourself as, which can infer that the kitten is not yours to give At this time) once in sight with them and the kitten, we may ask questions in a casual manner as well as gauge their character visually and through responses.To take care of a Pet, I'd say you would need specialized knowledge that would be motivated by empathy to learn, and unless the buyer is prepared to look after the kitten I'd be inclined to turn anyone else away. The most obvious downside to this, is not that the Buyer is malicious and smart, but that the Seller is selling the kitten because they don't know how to look after the kitten. We can't save all the kittens all the time.
-
I have come to really enjoy the ethical considerations of theoretical kitten punting.
You've hit the finer points of the ethical dilemma head on. Sometime's its hard to convey what I actually mean without having to say it differently multiple times. durr.
Its interesting to me, because these kittens were born feral to an abandoned mother cat. Except the neighbours would lure the cats and pet them and hold them, so they became friendly but guarded. I would also feed the mother occasionally and play with the kittens (they wouldnt let me touch them). So essentially the cats were raised by the community (albeit a small community), and are owned by no-one.
which doubles back to the idea of selling something that's not even yours. Which is also compounded by --do we even /own/ animals, and it's own ethical dilemmas.I, for one, do not believe I should be charging a fee. Let alone an exorbitant one. But neither prevent a person from wanting to punt a kitten.
Another thing to think about is craigslist in and of itself. If you cannot "sell" an animal on there, but only ask for a "rehoming fee", then asking as many people as possible to put a fee on their animal creates a market. Telling people that "bad people" will take free puppies and kittens and do horrible things to them if they dont sell their brood for a nominal price seems very skeevy to me.then again, depending on what kind of pet it is, it probably deters resellers, and encourages people to purchase that pet right away. ie; if I had a macaw, and it was worth $500. I would put it up for $350 to find a quick home and to probably deter resellers. But even then, that wouldnt deter them all. Just the ones who dont see it as an opportunity towards quick cash if I sold it for $50.
anyway, back to the matter at hand. got a bit off track.
the best way is to word the ad in just the right manner, which I completely agree on. On my ads, I like to be vague, and give the animal to the person who asks the most questions. As, the more they ask, the more they're invested in an animal that would work for them, which connotates they actually care.
It allows me to screen people in a removed and anonymous manner. If I recieve a text or e-mail that simply says "want kitten. where u at." I am less inclined to give the kitten to that person versus "What color is the kitten you have? what's it's gender? does it have a name? how old is it?" It also allows me to actually find a good home that would be compatible. No surprise kitty pregnancies!
-
Link
Devin
Ibuprofen does wonders for me. But other people not so well. Depends on how your body uses it.
And totally agree on the Main subject matter. Would rather put a free price tag on a kitten or puppy and take a chance that a good person, without a lot of money would take good care of the animal.
A bad person is going to be a bad person whether there's a price tag or not.