Advertise here: Contact FM.

Cry "Havoc!" and let slip the uninvited guest
December 13, 2007 9:23 AM Subscribe

Who invited the dog? People who think their pets are people vs. people who don't.
posted by dersins (149 comments total) 2 users marked this as a favorite

I love dogs, and I treat them with a high degree of respect. There's an interesting discussion to be had around this, but this article is beyond asinine.
posted by Alex404 at 9:28 AM on December 13, 2007 [4 favorites]

Yeah, this is pretty thin.
posted by cashman at 9:29 AM on December 13, 2007

this article is beyond asinine

Because it profiles people who are beyond asinine, or for other reasons?
posted by dersins at 9:29 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

I can imagine myself jokingly referring to my parents as my dog's grandparents. Using the term habitually and, apparently, in all seriousness, however, is either creepy or extremely depressing.
posted by shakespeherian at 9:30 AM on December 13, 2007

I'm just about 100% certain that, if you removed dogs from the equation entirely, the kind of people who bring an unwanted nuisance dog as an unexpected guest would find some other way of making a nuisance of themselves when they come to visit.
posted by Wolfdog at 9:32 AM on December 13, 2007 [5 favorites]

Exactly what Alex404 said. Rich topic, poor article.

Me, I keep finding it really, really interesting to compare the way my wife and I deal with our 2-year old German Shepherd with the way some of our friends deal with their 2-year-old kids. Lots of interesting parallels, but I get freaked out by people who claim it's the same thing. It's not. You can't put kids in a crate for a while when they're too wound up, for one thing.
posted by COBRA! at 9:33 AM on December 13, 2007

Her name is Elisabeth Montoya.

You killed her father. Prepare to die.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:34 AM on December 13, 2007 [26 favorites]

...which is, perhaps, why people are saying the article is "thin". It amounts to, "Thoughtless people: they sure are thoughtless!"
posted by Wolfdog at 9:34 AM on December 13, 2007

I agree. My mom calls my two dogs her "grandpuppies," and when they start to tussle, we tend to yell "Boys!" or "Children!" The use is habitual, but far from "serious."

But, if it becomes necessary, I will put one or both down. The same would not be true if they were my actual children.
posted by absalom at 9:36 AM on December 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

I had a guest bring their dog to a party (at my third-floor, two-cat-housing apartment) without asking. It was cute and everyone had fun, but I won't deny that in the back of my head I was incredibly aware that they had committed a major faux pas.
posted by hermitosis at 9:38 AM on December 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

I think this article ignores the larger concept that people who personify and baby their pets in such a fashion will probably end up being awful parents too.
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 9:38 AM on December 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

I have both a cat and a baby and I am benchmarking them against each other. The baby definitely has a better range of facial expressions and sounds. But the cat still beats her hands down when it comes to jumping six feet in the air.

But I would never take my cat to someone else's house. That's just being a pain in the in the arse. I'd take the baby though. Apparently leaving the cat to look after the baby is in fact illegal. Even though the cat is 18 in human years.
posted by rhymer at 9:38 AM on December 13, 2007 [19 favorites]

I wonder if the people who think it's appropriate to bring their dogs along would approve if you showed up for their dinner party with a pet boa constrictor.
posted by JaredSeth at 9:44 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

I think Wolfdog sums it up pretty well. The dogs in that article are really not behaving very well.

My mom had a dog she was really attached to. She often referred to him as the "only person around" when all the kids were off at college. A ex-boyfriend noticed this attachment and dotted on the dog. When we broke up my mom drove me nuts with continually saying: but he was so nice to Bruiser..." and therefore I should have found some way to stay with this person with whom I was romantically miss-matched.

I don't know. It's something about those deep sad doe eyes dogs look at you with. Their figuring out how to control us humans. They really are.
posted by dog food sugar at 9:45 AM on December 13, 2007

That's the thing about these articles. There's no good story to be found in a "Bluishorange, 29, brings her dog to her parents' house for Thanksgiving after making sure it's okay with them in advance, and everything goes fine" type of situation, so they go out and find the people who will make all dog owners look insane, and write about them instead.
posted by bluishorange at 9:45 AM on December 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

But, if it becomes necessary, I will put one or both down. The same would not be true if they were my actual children.

Really? I treat animals and children the same way, in that respect. Though I guess I'm just really egalitarian like that.
posted by Alex404 at 9:46 AM on December 13, 2007

Dogs do not crave and require cooing affection so much as they crave and require discipline and authority. In that way, they are closer to members of the BDSM community than they are to children.
posted by Astro Zombie at 9:46 AM on December 13, 2007 [12 favorites]

I'm sorry, but referring to your parents as your dog's grandparents can't even hold a candle to dreaming up the term "stinky boom boom" and allowing yourself to be quoted using that term in the New York Times.

Well, I'm sorry, but being quoted using the term "stinky boom boom" can't hold a candle to freely admitting to the New York Times that you make a habit of wiping your cat's ass every time it unleashes a stinky boom boom.
posted by gompa at 9:46 AM on December 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

Ah, that article was bad.

I don't mind people bringing their dogs on trips, but to talk about how traumatic it was for them to drive their dog 1,200 miles without first checking to make sure it would be OK to bring the dog, and that no one was allergic to it, is just idiotic.

It reeks of pseudo adults assuming that they're little fluffy is amazing and can go anywhere. To be honest, I don't see how the things described here are any different than people who bring their wonderful little Billy to a restaurant who then spends the entire time kicking and screaming.
posted by mrzarquon at 9:47 AM on December 13, 2007 [4 favorites]

Cats have their own ass-wiper. It's called their tongue.
posted by hermitosis at 9:52 AM on December 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

You can't put kids in a crate for a while when they're too wound up, for one thing.

You DSS assholes are all the same. Give me a Valium prescription for little Tonya if you're going to be so uptight. Her mom and I can't very well take her to the bar with us, now can we?
posted by Mayor Curley at 9:56 AM on December 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

I love (most) dogs. Okay, some dogs. I think a good dog needs to be able to be left alone over a weekend and to be able to sit politely when taken along as a guest. If your dog can't do either of these things, you're in over your head with him.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 9:57 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

The day the New York Times Style section doesn't suck will be a sign of the Apocalypse.
posted by kuujjuarapik at 10:05 AM on December 13, 2007 [7 favorites]

I loved my dog, but I had a fairly realistic assessment of our relationship, and his relationship with others. The people in the article need to grow up. They are like children with a doll they are attached to.
posted by lordrunningclam at 10:10 AM on December 13, 2007

You can't put kids in a crate for a while when they're too wound up, for one thing.

"No mom, playpen and baby cage are not like toe-may-toe toe-mah-toe."
posted by absalom at 10:11 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

AV: You ever owned a hound?
posted by absalom at 10:12 AM on December 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

I think the biggest problem is that a lot of people are so busy treating their pets like "people" that they don't train them or have them under any control. And just like with spoiled children, it sucks to open your home to a pet with no manners and then have their owner going on about how adorable they are as they pee on your rug. Some people are just so clueless at how insanely rude they've taught their little darlings to be.

In places like Austria, dogs are preferred to kids in restaurants. You see them in the subways, in the parks, everywhere. In the subways people must put muzzles on their dogs, and everyone knows it doesn't hurt them, the dogs are used to them, it's just a precaution that you do so that you can take your dog on public transportation. They're DOGS. The dogs are calm and well-trained, they're just happy to be hanging out with their owners. You barely notice them, they're so well behaved. (MUCH better behaved than the kids on the subway.)

I love my dog, and unlike my dad, I have worked really hard trying to train her to behave well in social situations. I don't like to leave her alone for super long periods (and she's fun company) so sometimes I will try to take her along with me. Last weekend I brought her to Carmel and I got a discount on the hotel room because they liked her so much. And I've even been able to bring her into a few museums because she was so good. But sometimes I'll tell people in advance that I have her with me and they'll ask me to leave her in the car because they're expecting the worst thanks to people like the ones in that article. Or when I tell people I've got my dog they'll immediately wonder if I'm the type who's dresses my dog up in outfits and wiping her stinky boom booms. Which, no.

Those people really do give good dog owners/dogs a bad name. And so that article kind of sucked.
posted by miss lynnster at 10:15 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

I think a good dog needs to be able to be left alone over a weekend and to be able to sit politely when taken along as a guest. If your dog can't do either of these things, you're in over your head with him.

Try as I might, I can't perfect the ass-mounted poop-teleportation device that would allow a dog to be left alone for a weekend.
posted by COBRA! at 10:17 AM on December 13, 2007 [6 favorites]

BTW, when people say to leave her in the car, I usually just leave her home. I don't expect her to be welcome. I'm cool with that. What I'm not cool with is when people expect every person who has a dog with them is going to be like stinky boom boom guy or my dad with his crazy biting half-Dingo dog.
posted by miss lynnster at 10:20 AM on December 13, 2007

As a cat owner, I really don't understand the desire that some dog owners have to take their dog everywhere. I had dogs and taking them on walks was fun, just as bringing them to a cabin as well. But why a restaurant or store?

I'm curious, why do people get from it?
posted by drezdn at 10:21 AM on December 13, 2007

I've run into these people before and they mystify me. I have dogs and, hey, I don't take them everywhere. There are many, many places I go without either my dogs (or, for that matter, my kids) and other people's homes, unless they're specifically invited, are on the top of the list. There's a certain strange self righteous quality to the "My dog goes everywhere, including your living room" crowd that I just don't get: why on earth would you think that your relationship with your dog precludes basic good manners? But I've had people show up for parties with dogs in tow even when I've specifically asked for no dogs and even in places, like bars, where dogs are not allowed. And then the people get all huffy.

I love my dogs: they go hiking and camping and to the park with me; for walks around the neighborhood and someday, I swear I'm going to take them to the beach to see how they react. I don't take them to parties or the bar or the greenmarket or the museum (sorry, but that's fairly ridiculous and as a museum employee, no, no, please, do not want) or to the arts fair where it's crowded and loud and they would be miserable. They stay home. They have a big yard and a doggy door and they like being there where they can do their job - destroying the couch inch by inch. No, I wouldn't leave my dogs alone for the weekend, but that's why the gods invented pet sitters, kennels and long suffering similarly dog afflicted friends.
posted by mygothlaundry at 10:27 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Miss Lynnster, let's give dog owners some credit. Stinky boom boom guy is a cat owner.
posted by emelenjr at 10:33 AM on December 13, 2007

As a home owner, I don't understand the desire that some pet owners have to take their pet everywhere. Do I have a pet? (I don't) Don't you think that if I wanted a pet in my home I'm perfectly capable of going and getting a pet? (I am)

I feel like the same people who can't see how inappropriate it is to show up with a pet are also the same people who think it is acceptable to give a surprize pet as a gift.

To be fair, I base most of this belief on my sister-in-law, who not only drags her drooling, massive, shaggy beast wherever she goes but also sprung a high-strung, special-needs pound-kitty with issues on her parents one Christmas and who gets hurt whenever anyone tries to explain that either action is inappropriate.
posted by Pollomacho at 10:35 AM on December 13, 2007

Why do they do it?

or

What do people get from it?

(I'm not trying to be snarky, I'm really curious why people do this)
posted by drezdn at 10:35 AM on December 13, 2007

I have people bring their dogs into my store all the time, and that includes big you-could-ride-them-if-you-were-a-little-shorter dogs. I understand that some businesses allow you to bring your dog inside, but it always seems a little ridiculous to assume that ALL businesses will allow you to bring your dog inside, especially when your dog is the size of a pony.
posted by shakespeherian at 10:36 AM on December 13, 2007

Okay, before everyone piles on me. I take her with me after I've taken her to Fort Funston for a run. If I go somewhere with her and it's more than a half hour from my house, sometimes I just need to run some errands in the City without going home and then driving back to the City and then driving home again. I leave her in the car quite often. But sometimes there are places here that ARE DOG FRIENDLY so I take her with me to those places, and she behaves well and people like seeing her. Carmel is an entirely dog-friendly place so that's specifically why I went there last weekend. If I leave for a weekend WITHOUT my dog, it costs me a lot more money because I have to pay someone to either take care of her or I have to board her.

When I went to museums, I had no intention of bringing her in. I was walking her through Balboa Park. I walked by the Museum of Man. The security guard said, "Oh, she's great. You can bring her in." Then for the heck of it, I walked by the Photography Museum, they let me in too. People were petting her and very happy.

Don't get all "let's pile up on Miss Lynnster, she's a dog freak"... because that's not how I roll.
posted by miss lynnster at 10:38 AM on December 13, 2007

absalom: nope, nor would I want to, unless I lived on a ranch perhaps. Some dogs are not bred to make good housepets.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 10:38 AM on December 13, 2007

But I would never take my cat to someone else's house. That's just being a pain in the in the arse. I'd take the baby though.

Miss Manners says them both home unless one or the other is requested by your hosts. And. I agree.

As a cat owner, I really don't understand the desire that some dog owners have to take their dog everywhere. I had dogs and taking them on walks was fun, just as bringing them to a cabin as well. But why a restaurant or store?

Dogs, unlike cats, are social pack animals. Leaving dogs alone too much literally makes them insane and creates serious health problems. People who do not grasp this don't want companions or pets. They want props or robots that worship them and depend on them. While I don't understand the drag the around the poor dog in your purse thing, leaving your dog alone indoors for more than five or six hours at a time is quite cruel.

I wouldn't own a dog if I could not bring him to work with me. Since I own my own business I can. Since I walk to work. So does he. Since I sometimes stop for coffee on the way. So does he.

For years around our neighborhood there used to be a number of dog-friendly cafes and bars we could go to after our family walks. It was nice to stop for a quick drink or coffee where one could bring the dog and he would happily and quietly lay under the table.

If I have to explain why it is utterly satisfying to sit in your neighborhood cafe with a coffee or glass of wine in the company of your entire family... well then... you will never understand the fundamental benefits of civilization, I guess.

Sadly because of a minority assholes who don't train their animals, and still other complaining assholes who can't abide not controlling everything around them, we can no longer do this simple, remarkable, civilized activity. And the world is a worse place for it.
posted by tkchrist at 10:40 AM on December 13, 2007 [8 favorites]

I realized I fell into the "pets are not people" side when I hosted an epic disaster of a baby shower for a friend. Her sister showed up with three Golden Retrievers and the assumption that she could put them into my backyard for the duration of the party. However, the party was pool-side (the invites made that clear to everyone but Sis) and her effing dogs quickly went to work belly-flopping into the pool, jumping out, and shaking doggie wetness in every direction, driving all the guests indoors. Astonishingly, when I asked the woman to control her dogs, she told me "They had a long drive and need to cool off." The dogs stayed in the pool for the duration of the day, so I guess that was some long hot ride.

Meanwhile, my two dogs were at the kennel where I had sent them the day before in order to be able to host a party without dogs underfoot.

I was left with two weeks of cleaning long blonde fur out of the pool filter and a lifetime of no sympathy for inconsiderate pet-owner-related behavior.
posted by jamaro at 10:42 AM on December 13, 2007

Thanks for the explanation tkchrist.
posted by drezdn at 10:46 AM on December 13, 2007

My parents have owned at least three and at times as many as 5 dogs at one time for as long as I've been alive and for years before I was born as well. They act, at times, like the dogs are children, and sometimes treat them like people. They certainly spoil them and they're less well trained than they probably should be. But my parents have never once brought them to someone else's party or anything like that. Why?

Because they're fucking dogs.
posted by shmegegge at 10:48 AM on December 13, 2007 [5 favorites]

showed up with three Golden Retrievers and the assumption that she could put them into my backyard for the duration of the party

That's like showing up uninvited with three drunk and homeless skate punks and expecting it to be okay. Jesus. Some people.
posted by tkchrist at 10:49 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

I'm with tkchrist 100% here. When my dog is alone too much, her entire personality changes. She gets severely depressed and lonely and bored and starts to act out. She NEEDS social interaction, she's just a social animal. When dogs are constantly left alone, ignored, and not getting exercised they end up being nightmares to own. What I've learned is that a tired, well-socialized dog is a good dog.

And seriously, why would I not want this furry thing curled up beside me quietly chewing a bone if it was okay with the other people around me and the dog is well mannered and properly trained? (Those caveats being the rules I always try to follow.)
posted by miss lynnster at 10:50 AM on December 13, 2007

"They had a long drive and need to cool off."

When I have kids, I am going to train them to go shit in an annoying neighbour's lawn and then tell them "Hey, they've been holding it in all day, they need to get it out".
posted by meehawl at 10:50 AM on December 13, 2007

Dog, cat, and kid owners all need to understand one thing: Your dog/cat/kid is not as well behaved and as adorable as you think he/she is.*

I once led a backpacking trip where the co-leader brought her dog without telling anyone she was going to do so.

“Oh, he won’t be any trouble! And my widdle Falconer (or whatever the hell stupid name it had) is so kee-yute. Yes he is! Yes he is!”

The thing was constantly getting lost, he had to be lifted up parts of the mountain by angry trip participants, he chased anything that moved, and he constantly jumped on people and slobbered all over them. He was also, apparently, epileptic and needed constant attention. We were also in a designated wilderness area where dogs weren’t allowed but this didn’t seem to matter to her because, in her eyes, this was No Ordinary Dog.

She was oblivious to it all. No matter how obvious we made our annoyance, she was blind to it. How could anybody possibly see this dog as anything but Super Awesome?

I don’t blame the dog. The dog is what he is. He is, after all, a dog. The owner, however, should spend some time in prison for her offense.

After the trip she confided in me that if there was a safety issue where she needed to choose between the safety of a participant or her dog, the dog would win. Needless to say I never led another trip with her. I can understand a pet owner being more attached to their pet than a stranger, but that person has no business leading people into the woods where she’s responsible for their safety.

I am not anti-dog. I’m very pro-dog as well as pro-child. But I do feel owning a pet or a child should require a license and a mandatory competency course.

*The sole exception being my perfect and adorable child.
posted by bondcliff at 10:51 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

also, i am against people bringing their babies over to parties or other social functions. but that's me. I like quiet. Also I like people who don't constantly talk about being required by law to look after tiny people.
posted by shmegegge at 10:53 AM on December 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

Because they're fucking dogs.

Well, if they're doing that, then they probably wouldn't be interested in going to a party anyhow.
posted by miss lynnster at 10:54 AM on December 13, 2007 [4 favorites]

AV: Heh, I only ask because I decided to personalize your previous comment. I have two dogs, and even though my Beagle is one of the better trained dogs I've encountered, no amount of training has been able to break him of his desire to jump up and greet someone when they appear. Luckily, he calms down once he gets a good smell in and goes back to being un-obnoxious.

Mostly, as to the article, I think it's much more people just being rude. I had a friend in grad school who got a puppy and took it everywhere with her. To the dive bar, to parties, etc. He was an awesome dog, sweet and nice and well behaved. (I like to think that was my influence.) However, I still thought it was really, really odd that people would even consider taking their dog to, say, see a band play.
posted by absalom at 10:57 AM on December 13, 2007

Who brought the wolfdog?

Oh snap!
posted by Mister_A at 10:57 AM on December 13, 2007

I always tell people I don't really want kids because dogs are like kids, except you can put them in a cage when they are bad. As much as my girlfriend and I love our dogs and (half-jokingly) refer to them as our "kids", I would never bring them out in public without explicit permission. I mean, my own rescue dog barely likes to leave his perch on the couch to go for a walk, much less go to an awkward social situation uninvited. Some people are crazy.
posted by bradbane at 11:03 AM on December 13, 2007

The only rationale I can think of for taking your dog around with you when it's possible (and I certainly don't mean imposing on people's hospitality, going into no-dogs-allowed places, or otherwise rudely assuming the known universe revolves around you and Fido, you big boor) is that dogs don't naturally, voluntarily spend long periods of time away from their pack leaders, especially alone.

There's a basic tendency to personify and infantilize any animal, I guess, particularly the warm-blooded furry ones, and I have my "who's a boo-boo puppy? who's Mama's puppy?" moments now and then -- but it's not healthy or happy for dogs to be babied or treated like humans or, god forbid, peers. I can't imagine being able to manage my pack of five large unruly mongrels if I were so reckless as to let them think we were equals or give them lavish unearned affection. It might give the human a kick, but it just makes the dog uneasy or overexcited, which unfortunately looks like enjoyment to people who don't know better.

My bigger problem is, when I'm out walking one or a few of the canine horde, preventing other people from petting and cooing and making a fuss and generally implying, "Hi dog! I'm submissive to you! You run the world! Please misbehave!" It's gotten to the point where if someone won't heed my "Please ignore the dogs; they're in training" request, I just about face the group and stride off briskly.
posted by FelliniBlank at 11:05 AM on December 13, 2007

Dude, you can totally put kids in cages. Duct tape works too.
posted by Mister_A at 11:06 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Because they're fucking dogs.

I agree. But. There are extremes to that sentiment. Some people use that "just dogs" as an excuse for serious neglect and under-training. Dogs NEED social interaction. They need training. They want it.

My dog is a border collie. People told us to never get a border collie unless we had a ranch. They could not have been more wrong. He is the best city dog I have ever owned.

While like me he is moody and slightly depressed by the stupidity that surrounds him all the time. Unlike me this is justified as he is actually very smart. Too smart. So he adapts very well.

Unless there are sheep or rodents present he remains unmoved and underwhelmed. So he is not hyped. And frankly he is not all that impressed by humans. he can take them or leave them.
Other than my wife. Who is his mother-god.

He is well adjusted and has no behavioral disorders for one reason: We know he is a dog. A working breed dog. His desire to DO is programmed in his genes. Operating on this simple fact we can predict his needs and desires with 90 percent accuracy. He needs exercise and social and intellectual stimulation.

So he has a job. His job is to escort people in and out of the office and to fetch job bags. Also, and most important, to keep the Squirrel Menace in check.

Since he is with us 80% of the time he is not a insecure anxiety ridden wreck like most city dogs.
posted by tkchrist at 11:07 AM on December 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

drezdn : But why a restaurant or store?

I wouldn't bring my dogs to a restaurant, but I have brought my dogs to the pet store with me many times. It gives them the opportunity to be around people who are often going to be excited to see them, and occasionally offer them praise for being well behaved or sweet. All while being in an environment that is amenable to their presence (the dog park is also good for this).

As to the article; I can't imagine bringing either dog to a person's residence where I didn't have their express permission beforehand. It just isn't done.

There are far too many chances that someone will be allergic, or afraid, or maybe have other pets that aren't dog-social.
posted by quin at 11:08 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Kidding aside, tkchrist and felliniblank sound like a couple of that rarest of breeds, responsible, knowledgeable dog owners.
posted by Mister_A at 11:10 AM on December 13, 2007

Some dogs are not bred to make good housepets.

True, but all chicken make lousy housepet.
posted by Pollomacho at 11:11 AM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Excellent title, by the way.

Over thanksgiving my husband's grandmother's little dog came to dinner, because she was worried he would chew on stuff or go in the house if she left him too long. So he came over and peed in the house at least three times (when he was caught) and begged shamelessly. My mother-in-law was not amused.

In the meantime, our dog slept peacefully on a blanket in my father-in-law's woodshop like a nice doggy angel. (He bit the little dog a couple of Easters ago after 24 hours straight of being humped, so they're not allowed to "play" anymore. Just as well for all concerned.)

I think a lot of this dog-cat stuff comes out because people have boundary issues, not because they love their pets. I would never bring my dog anywhere uninvited. (Although before the city made them stop, I used to bring him to Cumberland Farms, that was because they love dogs and gave him biscuits.)
posted by miss tea at 11:12 AM on December 13, 2007

leaving your dog alone indoors for more than five or six hours at a time is quite cruel.

Absolutely. Which is why (most, maybe not toy) dogs should have access to outdoor space and, ideally, a doggy friend. Leaving two dogs in an adequate yard all day or, I daresay for two days, isn't cruel. If your dog depends on you taking it for a walk to get outdoors, or depends on you for companionship, you're cursing yourself and your dog to codependency. Having a dog in an urban setting is a real challenge to begin with, and should sometimes just be disregarded as a possibility for everyone's sake.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 11:15 AM on December 13, 2007

I can't stand it when people refer to themselves as their pets' "Mom" or "Dad". They're not your children; they are animals. That's all.

I have a dog I borrow to take for walks once a week or so. She's awesome. I'd like to have a dog myself, but I'm at work all day, and live in an apartment. So it goes.
posted by jokeefe at 11:17 AM on December 13, 2007

Also, this thread is useless without audio.
posted by meehawl at 11:19 AM on December 13, 2007

He is well adjusted and has no behavioral disorders for one reason: We know he is a dog. A working breed dog. His desire to DO is programmed in his genes. Operating on this simple fact we can predict his needs and desires with 90 percent accuracy. He needs exercise and social and intellectual stimulation.

So he has a job. His job is to escort people in and out of the office and to fetch job bags. Also, and most important, to keep the Squirrel Menace in check.

That sounds like an excellent job! I think most dogs, even those that already get plenty of exercise and discipline, would be so much happier if they had breed-appropriate jobs. Man, you stick a backpack on any of my dogs, and they immediately act like, "OK, time to stop goofing around; there's work to be done!" Now that Squirrel Patrol season has ended, my main border collie mix helps out by herding the other dogs and making sure the cats get along, but I'm thinking she might like therapy dog training next spring. Unfortunately, we don't have any of those farms/ranches around that offer recreational herding day-camps.
posted by FelliniBlank at 11:24 AM on December 13, 2007

Dogs smell. Dogs slobber. Dogs pee on your furniture and carpet.

I know, I know. I've heard it all - just last week. My Dad came down with his stinking dog, and assured me that there would be no accidents. He pissed twice on my carpet.
posted by bradth27 at 11:25 AM on December 13, 2007

My Boston Terrier thinks her job is humping the cat. The cat disagrees.
posted by Mister_A at 11:25 AM on December 13, 2007 [6 favorites]

bradth27-your dad pissed on your carpet? Twice??
posted by Mister_A at 11:26 AM on December 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

you know, tkchrist is being awfully sensible in this thread. there is this one phrase though, early on:

Sadly because of a minority assholes who don't train their animals

maybe it's my experience but i tend to believe that the people who don't properly train their animals (especially for being in public) are in the majority and that responsible sensible pet owners like tkchrist are in an overwhelming minority.
posted by shmegegge at 11:26 AM on December 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

bradth27-your dad pissed on your carpet? Twice??

How could his dog have been so insensitive to have brought him along without checking first?
posted by Pollomacho at 11:33 AM on December 13, 2007

maybe it's my experience but i tend to believe that the people who don't properly train their animals (especially for being in public) are in the majority and that responsible sensible pet owners like tkchrist are in an overwhelming minority.

I was being charitable.

The serious problems of dogs attacking people for instance, are very rare. And it's that level of neglect and under training that meant. It's usually that kind of thing that grabs the headlines and most effect policies.
posted by tkchrist at 11:35 AM on December 13, 2007

And I have never heard of anyone dying from simple proximity to dog dander

I agree with your point, but to nitpick a bit I should mention that I personally know people who are fatally allergic to dogs and/or cats. for instance, my mother has been rushed to the emergency room multiple times because her throat closed up due to being too near a cat for too long.
posted by shmegegge at 11:38 AM on December 13, 2007

I've never been at a party where someone's turned up with an uninvited dog*, but I have been nearly run off the sidewalk by one of these puppies.

(* Okay, full disclosure, my mother is one of those crazy purse-dog people and has been known to spring a dog out of her purse in supermarkets, department stores, places of worship... Bringing a dog to a party definitely sounds like something she would do.)
posted by mothershock at 11:39 AM on December 13, 2007

Putting a dog in a stroller is so wrong. You are supposed to WALK THE DAMN DOG!
posted by Mister_A at 11:44 AM on December 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

Do people with severe allergies fall into the "can't abide not controlling everything around them" category? Does the "depressed, bored" dog's right to be entertained trump the fears of people who are deathly afraid of dogs? The world is a worse place because you can't bring your animal into places patronized by other people, who may not want (or may not be able) to be around your pet?!? A pet store, sure...but a cafe?

I'm with tkchrist on all of this. 100%. And just because you have your dog with you doesn't mean you are in disagreement with ANY of what you've just said above. NOBODY should bring a dog to a person's house uninvited (I have people bring their children to my house uninvited quite often and unless I REALLY like your kid you shouldn't do that either). NOBODY should push their dog on anyone! Ever! Especially since there are people who are scared and allergic. (And likewise, my dog is terrified of little children who run up to her screaming "Weiner dog!" and flailing their arms at her face, and I try to tell people you shouldn't let your kid run crazy at any strange dog.) And NOBODY should have a dog if they are not willing to spend the time and money it takes to train them to obey commands and be under total control.

But the joy of having a dog isn't having them caged up in the house all day, either. I work at home a lot so she's my coworker. I take her running on the beach at least once a week but for about 5 hours a day I leave my dog at home. She's home whenever I'm at client's offices, shopping, or in school. But when I have free time, as tkchrist put it so well, sometimes it's wonderful to be able to relax with your furry friend by your side. Admittedly, California is a more dog-friendly place than many other areas of America, so you find out where dogs are welcome very easily. Sometimes I'll be having lunch at a patio cafe and see dogs lying by their owners feet and wish my dog was at mine. Because having a dog is fun. Plus I'm always trying to better train her when we're out. She has to stay. She has to listen. When I take her out, she is my companion but I believe a truly well behaved dog is not the focus of attention (unless it's for being cute) so I'm trying my best to train her to be almost invisible. That's what I consider polite. I'll sit and read or eat and talk to a friend while my dog is curled up at my feet chewing a bone. That is a far cry from wanting to terrorize anyone.
posted by miss lynnster at 11:45 AM on December 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

Who are these people who ALLOW unwanted pets in their stores and at their parties? I'm sure these folks would have no problem asking someone who lights up a cigarette to leave a no-smoking establishment. What's the difference? Someone shows up at my door with an unwanted "guest," they're going to be turned around pronto.
posted by desjardins at 11:45 AM on December 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

Would a person allergic to peanuts...blah blah blah... etc.

You're not really that stupid, are you tkchrist? A person with a peanut allergy knows to avoid Thai restaurants because they know that Thai food contains peanuts.

A person with a dog allergy doesn't know to avoid Cafe Whatever it's called. It may be "well known" to you that the cafe in question permits dogs, but, unless its name is "Cafe We Love Dogs Please Bring Your Dogs Into Our Cafe," people have a reasonable expectation of finding the premises dog-free.

And I say this as someone who has no problem with dogs in bars or cafes (provided they are well-behaved.) What I do have a problem with is your specious argument.
posted by dersins at 11:46 AM on December 13, 2007 [4 favorites]

I agree with your point, but to nitpick a bit I should mention that I personally know people who are fatally allergic to dogs and/or cats. for instance, my mother has been rushed to the emergency room multiple times because her throat closed up due to being too near a cat for too long.

So I take it that knowing her serious health issue she would have the wisdom to avoid a Dog Friendly Cafe?

Reminds me of my uncle who had one of those early pacemakers in the 1970s.

The doctors told him that it could be effected by Microwave ovens. I'm not sure HOW seriously. But he was supersticious of the technology anyway. It would make your babies born blind, he said.

His problem was that he always stopped at the ONLY 7-11 between his ranch and town for his coffee every morning. They had a bank of 7-11 in heavy use for all the truck drivers. Now did he insist that all 7-11's remove their microwaves? Or even THIS one?

No. He would stand outside and ask people to take his money and buy him a coffee. Which would lead to his explaining about the pacemaker. And opening the flannel shirt and showing the scar. And then if heard the "ding" of a microwave inside he would fake a heart attack.
posted by tkchrist at 11:51 AM on December 13, 2007

When my youngest daughter was a teenager, her friend came over to spend the night. Friend's mom dropped her off WITH HER DOG. First, at that time we were renting, second, I do NOT have dogs in my house, period. DO NOT.

I put the dog in my neighbor's fenced yard with her yorkies.

If anyone brought a dog to my house, I don't care if it was the Pope, that dog does NOT come inside.
posted by konolia at 11:52 AM on December 13, 2007

drsins since you started with "You're not really that stupid, are you tkchrist?" I will not dignify it with a response. That is just needlessly rude.
posted by tkchrist at 11:53 AM on December 13, 2007

Usually dog friendly restaurants only allow dogs on the patios. There is generally seating inside. So they can sit inside if there are dogs. Just like they could if there was a kid running around the patio and they hated kids.
posted by miss lynnster at 11:53 AM on December 13, 2007

So I take it that knowing her serious health issue she would have the wisdom to avoid a Dog Friendly Cafe?

woah, there. i'm on your side. no, she would have avoided any Cat Friendly Cafe's she knew about. and if someone brought a cat in, she'd leave. although now she's got medication for it so it's not that bad. i was just nitpicking.
posted by shmegegge at 11:55 AM on December 13, 2007

there really should be restaurants that you're not allowed to bring children into. we'd have a new class of restaurants with that characteristic. we'd call them "nice restaurants."
posted by shmegegge at 11:56 AM on December 13, 2007 [7 favorites]

Which is why (most, maybe not toy) dogs should have access to outdoor space and, ideally, a doggy friend. Leaving two dogs in an adequate yard all day or, I daresay for two days, isn't cruel. If your dog depends on you taking it for a walk to get outdoors, or depends on you for companionship, you're cursing yourself and your dog to codependency. Having a dog in an urban setting is a real challenge to begin with, and should sometimes just be disregarded as a possibility for everyone's sake.

I (as a city-dwelling owner of a large dog) respectfully disagree. Certainly there are some circumstances and breeds where a solution like that would work, but for many it would not. I would hope that dog owners would know their dog and their circumstances and be able to judge for themselves, of course, but I can't just let the suggestion go without putting in my two cents. :)

1. Not all breeds require that much exercise. Example: I do have a small backyard, and when we spend a weekend afternoon out there, my dog runs around for about 5 minutes, them promptly goes to sleep on the grass for the rest of the day. It is the nature of her lazy, lazy breed.
2. Not all breeds can handle the sometimes unpredictable weather changes that would affect them if they were left outside alone for long periods of time. Example: My dog is a greyhound, with very short hair and practically no body fat. If it were to unexpectedly get cold and rainy (or even too hot and sunny), leaving her alone in an outdoor setting could kill her.
3. In some neighborhoods, leaving your dog alone in a yard is an invitation for unscrupulous types to steal him/her for nefarious uses, like bait for training fighting dogs. Or just to turn around and sell it for a quick buck.
4. Leaving an animal unattended in a yard is inviting problems. Say a neighborhood kid loses his baseball in your yard - he could either accidentally let the dog out, or even worse, get bitten by the dog when he entered the yard to get his ball.
5. This is purely opinion, but I would say that my dog has a very happy, healthy urban life. This includes being home alone for 8 hours while I'm at work, while she does exactly the same thing she does when we are home on weekends - sleep. But it also includes four walks around the neighborhood every day, meeting other people and doggy friends and enjoying all the sights and sounds of the neighborhood. She is happy, well-adjusted, well-behaved, and according to my vet, so healthy that it's almost impossible to tell she is nine years old.

As a more general response to this thread, my opinion is that it comes down to people making the right choices. First, you have to decide if you are willing to make the sacrifices it takes to be a dog owner. This may mean staying home instead of going out on a weeknight to be with your dog if it was alone all day. This may mean budgeting for boarding or pet-sitters when you go on vacations. Tough decisions and financial responsibility are required. Second, if you've decided you can make that committment, it's important to find the right breed for you. Surprisingly, small dogs may not make good apartment pets because they may require lots of exercise and be very barky, while larger lazy breeds like greyhounds might be perfect. Third, train your dog and don't bring it places where it is not explicitly invited! This is not just for the benefit of people - I once saw an idiot bring a dog into a crowded, noisy, smoky bar. The dog was very clearly *terrified* - hiding between his owner's legs, cowering every time someone shouted. And he was small enough that I bet several patrons didn't even notice him - which was just asking for the poor guy to get stepped on. All because his jerk ass owner needed a beer and couldn't bring the dog home first.
posted by misskaz at 11:58 AM on December 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

That is just needlessly rude.

Nonsense. It's a compliment. I said you aren't that stupid.

On the other hand, someone who routinely refers to others as "assholes" turning around and accusing me of needless rudeness? Now that's stupid.
posted by dersins at 11:59 AM on December 13, 2007

woah, there. i'm on your side. no, she would have avoided any Cat Friendly Cafe's she knew about. and if someone brought a cat in, she'd leave. although now she's got medication for it so it's not that bad. i was just nitpicking.

Sorry. You misunderstand. I wasn't picking on your mom, but addressing the larger point. I am declaring your mother to HAVE this wisdom. Knowing her condition and all.

And that point was that both the cafe's in my neighborhood WERE well know "dog owner" places. Both had "Dogs Welcome" on the door AND in their ads. Plus a big jar of dog treats on the bar.

So your mom, or anybody else with deathly pet allergies, couldn't be surprised.

It's not as if ninja dogs unexpectedly repel down the walls in the middle of her Latte and attempt to kill her like some people seem to imagine here.
posted by tkchrist at 12:02 PM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Nonsense. It's a compliment. I said you aren't that stupid.

Okay.

Then dersins since you certainly aren't a rude condescending asshole and complete passive aggressive fuck head or anything you would realize that personalizing an insult to somebody you are directly addressing in conversation is completely different than relating an opinion about a general anonymous group via an anecdote about something that has happened in the past.

And further you are wrong. Both restaurant I was talking about WERE well know dog friendly places. Good thing your not a hysterical over reactive douche or anything. That's a compliment, BTW.
posted by tkchrist at 12:07 PM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

tkchrist: O RLY?
posted by Mister_A at 12:10 PM on December 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

tkchrist: O RLY?

AAAAAAARGH! I stand corrected. shmegegge! Tell your mom to get out of there! It's a trap!
posted by tkchrist at 12:13 PM on December 13, 2007

Who are these people who ALLOW unwanted pets in their stores and at their parties?

In my case, the person who brought her dogs was the only sister of the guest of honor and had to travel 250 miles to come to the party. Anyone else without that connection I would have thrown out on his or her ear.

None the less, she still should have left her fucking dogs at home.
posted by jamaro at 12:22 PM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

misskaz, before I continue to debate you on this, let me say that I don't want my perspective to offend you personally w/r/t dog ownership practices, and I'm not a dog hater. I am a breed snob, though.

1. Not all breeds require that much exercise.
Fair enough. This should be considered when committing to dog ownership. As I said about toy dogs, some dongs are OK mostly indoors, and some dogs aren't but are kept there anyhow.

2. Not all breeds can handle the sometimes unpredictable weather changes that would affect them if they were left outside alone for long periods of time.
Is it really inappropriate to ask that people choose a pet that can live comfortably in their climate, if it is to be an outdoor pet? Reputable zoos certainly abide by this principle.

3. In some neighborhoods, leaving your dog alone in a yard is an invitation for unscrupulous types to steal him/her.
4. Leaving an animal unattended in a yard is inviting problems. Say a neighborhood kid loses his baseball in your yard - he could either accidentally let the dog out, or even worse, get bitten by the dog when he entered the yard to get his ball.
Wow. Yeah, that could happen. Crimes are often committed in the world. I had a pet poisoned once On the other hand, the dog's presence could deter a burglar. There could be an earthquake and if the dog were indoors it could be killed. There are endless hypotheticals here, and I doubt any of them contribute to deciding what's best for the dog.

5. This is purely opinion, but I would say that my dog has a very happy, healthy urban life.
Sounds that way to me, but many dogs, including the nearest and dearest one to me, a sheltie, are not meant for simple companionship, palling around town with the owner. There are companion breeds which are. Nuture and nature ar bothe important, but dog breeds are horribly trendy, and that's a bad thing.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 12:23 PM on December 13, 2007

I remember the time that a tattooed and pierced twit dismissed complaints about her dog barking all night at the campground by claiming the complainers went camping in order to get closer to nature and dogs are part of nature. Apparently the twit could sleep thru her dog's barking.
posted by wrapper at 12:26 PM on December 13, 2007

...some dongs are OK mostly indoors...

Ha! But seriously, good comment.

lol dongs
posted by Mister_A at 12:26 PM on December 13, 2007

Ambrosia Voyeur, I appreciate the respectful tone of your reply. I think we agree more than we disagree.

I certainly think it is reasonable to have people chose a pet that can live in their climate, if it is to be an outdoor pet. I just also think it is appropriate to chose a pet that can live comfortably only as an indoor pet, if the owner understands the sacrifices that entails and the dog can be healthy and happy as an indoor pet.

I completely agree with you on the trouble with the trendiness of dog breeds. There were a pair of shelties in my old neighborhood that (from a non-sheltie-familiar observer's point of view) seemed pretty unhappy with their lives. They would go completely crazy every time they saw another dog, yelping hysterically and jumping and pulling at their leashes. I tried to feel sorry for them and not hate them because I know it was not their fault.

I know my hypotheticals are probably a little overboard, but I will fully admit I am an over-protective dog owner. Living in a city means that my dog faces more dangers - cars, bad-natured folks, etc - than dogs in less urban settings. The density of cities means that we encounter a lot more people, good, bad, and indifferent, than a suburban or rural dog and owner would. Personally, I can't take the chance that the guy coming out to read our electric or gas meter could accidentally let my dog out of the yard - she has no street smarts and no good "homing" skills and would quickly get lost and/or injured. While the chance of it happening may be small, the potential consequences if it did happen are too great to risk it. Especially given that my dog would rather be lazing about on our queen-sized bed anyway. :)
posted by misskaz at 12:43 PM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Who are these people who ALLOW unwanted pets in their stores and at their parties?

desjardins, I'm not picking on you-- but sometimes the staff in the store don't know what the heck to do when someone does something so incredibly, obviously wrong for that setting, that you haven't yet made a rule about it.

At my library we had a dude strip naked in the bathroom and give himself a sponge bath in the middle of the day. No one really knew how to handle it-- we'd just expected that, you know, no one would ever think of doing such a thing in a public restroom, so why would we need to make a rule about it, or think about how to handle such a totally weird thing in advance? As a result he got about half-way through his bath before the higher-ups could get together and create a "no nudity or bathing in the restroom" rule.
posted by holyrood at 12:49 PM on December 13, 2007

I just don't even understand letting the dog in the house. If I was throwing a party, and an invited human guest brought an uninvited dog with them, I wouldn't let them in the door. I'd ask them politely to come back without the dog, or maybe lookup a day kennel for them on the Internet if they came too far.

Period.

It's beyond rude to bring an animal into someone else's home uninvited. I can't even imagine it. Yuck.

They're animals. Pets. Leave them home. I grew up in a house with a dog, and we left her home all day by herself and she was fine.

Get over yourselves, people, they're *dogs*. The whole idea is repulsive to me.
posted by MythMaker at 12:50 PM on December 13, 2007

They have restaurants that allow pets? The Board of Health allows that? That's disgusting!
posted by MythMaker at 12:53 PM on December 13, 2007

Get over yourselves, people, they're *dogs*. The whole idea is repulsive to me.
Sure. Get over your own hangups a little in exchange.
posted by Wolfdog at 12:53 PM on December 13, 2007

It's not a hangup, it's hygiene. We're talking about animals that eat their own feces. You want an uninvited, strange one of these in your house? Not me.
posted by MythMaker at 12:54 PM on December 13, 2007

MythMaker, not every dog eats their own feces. Only one of mine eats poop and it is never his own. He already knows what that tastes like.
posted by onhazier at 12:59 PM on December 13, 2007

tkchrist : It's not as if ninja dogs unexpectedly repel down the walls in the middle of her Latte and attempt to kill her like some people seem to imagine here.

I have an Australian Cattle dog. They are crazy smart; when she was a puppy, and in our house for less than a week, she could sit, lay down, stay, and was just beginning to understand the idea of roll over.

As she has gotten older, we have sort of run out of tricks to have her learn. But reading your comment, I think it's time to start her on a regime of rope work, specifically rappelling and covert infiltration, as well as the secret arts of ninja assassination.

I mean, if no one expects it, then it's the perfect tool.
posted by quin at 1:00 PM on December 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

Get over yourselves, people, they're *dogs*. The whole idea is repulsive to me.
posted by MythMaker at 2:50 PM on December 13

The thing I love most about my dog is that she's too busy thinking about the joys of eating cat food (having graduated upwards from her own poop) to get all bent out of shape over what strangers allow into their homes.
posted by COBRA! at 1:02 PM on December 13, 2007

I'm not talking about strangers - more power to 'em. I'm just saying that if someone showed up at my house with *any* kind of pet, and hadn't cleared it with before hand, I would consider that the height of rudeness. I would feel disrespected and insulted. I would never consider doing something that rude to others (and I've had pets), and for someone to be that clueless and narcissistic is amazing to me. The idea of bringing a dirty animal into a public eatery, I was under the impression that this was illegal for public health reasons, unless it was a seeing eye dog.

Let me know what cities' Boards of Health allow dogs or cats legally into restaurants so that I can avoid eating in those cities in the future. Ewww.
posted by MythMaker at 1:06 PM on December 13, 2007

Some people have let Paris Hilton into their bed. I mean, personally, I think this has got to be cleaner. But each to their own.
posted by Wolfdog at 1:10 PM on December 13, 2007 [2 favorites]

What, exactly, do you think the dog's going to do to your cafe au lait at a cafe? Unless it's one of the aforementioned rappelling ninja dogs it'll probably be on the ground, sleeping.
posted by miss tea at 1:11 PM on December 13, 2007

I don't think it's wise to allow dogs inside restaurants for various reasons (sidewalk areas seem less problematic), but anybody who thinks that the average well-cared-for decently groomed dog is any dirtier than the average human restaurant patron OR the average restaurant kitchen or bathroom is living in dreamland.
posted by FelliniBlank at 1:14 PM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

I think when the rubber hits the road, we pretty much agree- it's rude to take a pet to someone's house uninvited.

And I guess I agree about restaurants, although with lots of little instance-specific caveats that probably aren't worth getting into (I don't think it's the end of the world when there are dogs sitting on the ground at outdoor-seated bars/eateries, and this is a pretty common sight in Minneapolis in the warm-weather months)
posted by COBRA! at 1:14 PM on December 13, 2007

miss tea and FelliniBlank raised my caveats for me...
posted by COBRA! at 1:15 PM on December 13, 2007

I suspect you're far more likely to catch a disease from a child (or and adult for that matter) than from a dog. As long as the dogs aren't preparing the food, I doubt it's that big of an issue.
posted by Pyry at 1:32 PM on December 13, 2007

Dogs are closer to the ground, they interact with garbage and dirt. Having them around food is dangerous to public health standards.

According to this article,

the FDA prohibits live animals (except fish in tanks) in retail establishments where food is served. Health concerns include pets going to the bathroom on the floor or “people, including restaurant employees, petting them and not washing their hands,” says Lawrence Pong, manager of training and food-borne illness outbreak investigation for the San Francisco Department of Public Health.

So, it sounds like it's federal. There shouldn't be live animals in restaurants *anywhere*.
posted by MythMaker at 1:39 PM on December 13, 2007

Oh wow! Now that I know there a rule against it, and from the FDA no less, my mind is completely clear! Thanks! I always feel so much better when I don't make assessments for myself.
posted by miss tea at 1:54 PM on December 13, 2007

It's for the same reason why people working in a restaurant have a rule about washing their hand after taking out the garbage or using the bathroom - there should be no personal assessments.

This is about public health.
posted by MythMaker at 1:56 PM on December 13, 2007

Yes, miss tea, the FDA does not make mistakes. You are wise to trust them. Here, have a Vioxx®.
posted by Mister_A at 1:57 PM on December 13, 2007

MythMaker writes "So, it sounds like it's federal. There shouldn't be live animals in restaurants *anywhere*."

It's not prohibited if the tables are outside. Calm down.
posted by krinklyfig at 1:58 PM on December 13, 2007

They have restaurants that allow pets?

Yeah -- South Korea allows dogs.
posted by ericb at 2:05 PM on December 13, 2007 [3 favorites]

~~Dogs~~ Children are closer to the ground, they interact with garbage and dirt. Having them around food is dangerous to public health standards.
posted by Wolfdog at 2:09 PM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

I live in downtown Chicago. My building and others near it are filled with dogs.

Dog piss in the elevators. Dog stank in the elevators. Dogs barking at each other, straining at their leashes, in the lobby.

That's the other thing about these dog-friendly cafés. I have no problem with hygeine. It's that dogs can behave themselves when alone or with people. But throw another dog in the mix and the agressive (or playful) behavior starts up, and suddenly there's a dog-ruckus in the middle of your lunch hour. Dog friendly café? That means there might be more than ONE dog there...

I don't hate dogs. But I come very close to hating dogs.
posted by jeff-o-matic at 2:46 PM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Yeah, but children have a better lobby, so the FDA is powerless to ban them from public places. Damn shame.
posted by darksasami at 2:49 PM on December 13, 2007

Dogs Children are closer to the ground, they interact with garbage and dirt. Having them around food is dangerous to public health standards.

I don't think children should be allowed to run around the ground in restaurants, either.
posted by MythMaker at 2:49 PM on December 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

I found the specific FDA guideline here. It's from a PDF, but here it is:

6-501.115 Prohibiting Animals.*
(A) Except as specified in ¶¶ (B) and (C) of this section, live
animals may not be allowed on the PREMISES of a FOOD
ESTABLISHMENT.
(B) Live animals may be allowed in the following situations if the
contamination of FOOD; clean EQUIPMENT, UTENSILS, and LINENS;
and unwrapped SINGLE-SERVICE and SINGLE-USE ARTICLES can not
result:
(1) Edible FISH or decorative FISH in aquariums, shellfish or
crustacea on ice or under refrigeration, and shellfish and
crustacea in display tank systems;
(2) Patrol dogs accompanying police or security officers in
offices and dining, sales, and storage areas, and sentry dogs
running loose in outside fenced areas;
(3) In areas that are not used for FOOD preparation and that
are usually open for customers, such as dining and sales
areas, SERVICE ANIMALS that are controlled by the disabled
EMPLOYEE or PERSON, if a health or safety HAZARD will not
result from the presence or activities of the SERVICE ANIMAL;
(4) Pets in the common dining areas of institutional care
facilities such as nursing homes, assisted living facilities,
group homes, or residential care facilities at times other than
during meals if:
(a) Effective partitioning and self-closing doors separate
the common dining areas from FOOD storage or FOOD
preparation areas,
(b) Condiments, EQUIPMENT, and UTENSILS are stored in
enclosed cabinets or removed from the common dining
areas when pets are present, and
(c) Dining areas including tables, countertops, and similar
surfaces are effectively cleaned before the next meal
service; and
(5) In areas that are not used for FOOD preparation, storage,
sales, display, or dining, in which there are caged animals or
animals that are similarly confined, such as in a variety store
that sells pets or a tourist park that displays animals.

It sounds to me like 6-501.115 section 4a is why they allow animals in outside areas - because of effective partitioning and self-closing doors.
posted by MythMaker at 2:58 PM on December 13, 2007

Personally, I can't take the chance that the guy coming out to read our electric or gas meter could accidentally let my dog out of the yard - she has no street smarts and no good "homing" skills and would quickly get lost and/or injured. While the chance of it happening may be small, the potential consequences if it did happen are too great to risk it.

Just happened to us last week, probably at the hand of a gardener or a meter reader. We were lucky to have alert neighbors who were kind enough to phone and let us know that our dogs had been let out, and we were able to round them up without consequence.
posted by blucevalo at 4:19 PM on December 13, 2007

MythMaker-
While I commend you on your search for this information, I think you can relax about the presence of dogs in the dining part of a casual restaurant.

I would think if you were to randomly sample a selection of dog friendly food establishments vs no dogs allowed places, you would not find any difference in health standards. And by sampling I mean taking food samples, petri dishes, going to the lab and testing everything sort of way. I say this coming from a background that has spent time in professional kitchens, and having worked with people who run restaurants and catering companies. The quality and health of your meal / food has more to do with the staff preparing it in the kitchen than if there are dogs allowed in the dining area. I would be more concerned that their fridge is below 40 degrees f, their meats properly separated, and their dishwasher running hot enough to sterilize their plates, than pet dander.

And trust me, the kitchen staff touch your food, work with it and handle it, they have to. If they don't wash their hands before handling your food after petting a dog, they probably weren't going to wash their hands if they came in from emptying the garbage / having a smoke break / going to the bathroom, because they aren't good kitchen staff.
posted by mrzarquon at 4:30 PM on December 13, 2007

(also I wouldn't be surprised if the dog friendly places were *cleaner* as they knew they would be under closer scrutiny by the local health inspector).
posted by mrzarquon at 4:32 PM on December 13, 2007

According to my vet most dogs can find their way home on their own eventually. It's well intentioned people that tend to fuck them up or spook them into getting lost.
posted by tkchrist at 4:38 PM on December 13, 2007

Go get Busy Bee!
posted by Kinbote at 4:41 PM on December 13, 2007

I'm a cat person, and always have been. I don't always feel comfortable around dogs. We didn't have pets when my kids were little, and my oldest son was frightened badly by a strange dog, as big as he was at the time, jumping up on him, so he became very wary of dogs. I've made it a point to befriend my friends' dogs, show him that all dogs aren't evil. My son is still wary, but he enjoys going to the homes with 'good dogs'. Good dogs have responsible owners who don't let them get out of hand.

Unfortunately, I also know a couple who 'couldn't bear' to go through an obedience class with their dogs because they didn't like reprimanding them (golden retrievers) in any way, and it's obvious from their dogs' behavior. Of course, this is also the couple who thinks everyone finds their dogs a joy to be around and who bring them, uninvited, to social gatherings. They have children, too, and a similar attitude towards them. I won't even get into how that situation has turned out.

It all boils down to responsibility. If you are going to bring your pet somewhere, you need to be responsible, just as a parent needs to be responsible with children. When someone says a gathering is for adults, you don't bring the kids and assume the rules don't apply. If someone doesn't have a pet, you don't assume they will just love yours, either. You can't let your pets or your kids run around unchecked in a public place. You can't let them spread diseases--yes, kids do this, too; you have to remind your kids to cover their mouths when they cough, wash their hands, etc..

I'm not above reprimanding other people's children or letting the parents know they are misbehaving when they are in a public place and the parents aren't taking responsibility because, to my mind, they are opening themselves up to that by making us all play babysitter. If a pet was going nuts , I would call the owners on that, too.

But then, I have a big mouth. ;)
posted by misha at 5:10 PM on December 13, 2007

My dog was a runaway with no name when I got her, and she loves loves loves to run so at first she had a tendency to take off at top speed in no particular direction the second she could get free (I now take her to a remote beach and let her loose to get it out of her system). On one hand I know it's often people who keep dogs when they're lost and make it so they don't return home (probably the reason I own her now instead of the people she must've lived with as a puppy), but on the other hand it's hard to find your way home if you've been flattened by a UPS truck. Which is what my dog was about 2" away from being when she got loose right after I got her, before I had her properly trained to stay with me. It's a horrible visual I will never get out of my mind. City traffic is dangerous for a disoriented dog.
posted by miss lynnster at 5:15 PM on December 13, 2007

Reading about the stinky boom boom dude and anecdotes like this one:

“The first time we brought Diego to my mom’s house was a disaster,” Ms. Montoya said. “He walked straight to the white-carpeted living room and proceeded to lift up his tail.”

The dog dragged himself perhaps 6 to 8 feet. “He left a noticeable brown streak in his wake. Horrifying.”

has left me roaring with laughter.

Thanks, dersins. I really needed that today.
posted by jason's_planet at 5:21 PM on December 13, 2007

Actually, re-reading the FDA rule, the exception I found seems to refer specifically to institutions, not restaurants.

I don't see a loophole that would allow restaurants to legally allow pets at all. Reading it again, it looks like it only allows service animals, per B3.

Am I reading it wrong? Why do restaurants allow pets if the FDA has outlawed it?
posted by MythMaker at 5:51 PM on December 13, 2007

stinky boom boom.

Sounds like a particularly nerdy boxer. Or somethin'.
posted by jason's_planet at 5:53 PM on December 13, 2007

every restaurant should have a series of soundproof, padded booths for small children/dogs. ones that slowly inject a sedative into the air.
posted by tehloki at 5:55 PM on December 13, 2007

every restaurant should have a series of soundproof, padded booths for small children

They sort of do. In many restaurants, I've noticed where I'm seated varies if I'm accompanied by my son or not. Without son: table on the quiet end of the place. With son, out on the patio or near the kitchen with the rest of the parents.
posted by jamaro at 7:22 PM on December 13, 2007

Why do restaurants allow pets if the FDA has outlawed it?

The FDA generally does not inspect restaurants. Sometimes they don't even inspect food processing plants, but they do set guidelines for state and local health departments to follow. Most restaurant inspection is left to city governments.

But more to the point: "Live animals may be allowed in the following situations if the
contamination of FOOD; clean EQUIPMENT, UTENSILS, and LINENS;
and unwrapped SINGLE-SERVICE and SINGLE-USE ARTICLES can not
result" certainly doesn't outlaw having a dog on your patio.
posted by kuujjuarapik at 8:09 PM on December 13, 2007

According to my vet most dogs can find their way home on their own eventually. It's well intentioned people that tend to fuck them up or spook them into getting lost.

I don't disagree. Some of our neighbors were trying to corral our "lost" dogs and -- well-intentioned though they were -- may have also ended up freaking them out more than they already were.
posted by blucevalo at 8:24 PM on December 13, 2007

Reading this article, it seems that some of the behavior described as bad dog behavior -- not absolving the dogs -- was even more describable as bad owner behavior. One owner let her dog wreak havoc in a friend's house and then sent a greeting card asking the friend to let bygones be bygones. Another owner explained her dog jumping off the porch and biting a passerby by saying that she'd always babied the dog too much, as though that were an excuse.

Sorry for the errant double comment above.
posted by blucevalo at 8:31 PM on December 13, 2007

Christ. If someone shows up at your door with an uninvited dog, shoot the dog. If they so much as look like they're going to scream, shoot the owner. Shoot to maim the latter; to kill, the former (no need to be cruel to the pet).
posted by Eideteker at 8:45 PM on December 13, 2007

We have an English Bulldog. We take him with us wherever we can. Important part of that phrase being "can." (As our vet put it, they're "beat me, bore me, just don't ignore me" dogs. Not to mention that they're an oft-stolen breed. And he's just a hell of a lot of fun to be around.) When he's with us, we only eat at establishments that are expressly dog friendly, not just anywhere with a patio. We don't take him inside stores unless we have management's permission. We do our homework before we travel and figure out where we can stay and what we can do with him in whatever town we're visiting, as well as boarding kennels we can use.

That's why people who don't understand the boundaries concerning pets really upset us. If dogs are not allowed, then they are not allowed, and your Puddingkins doesn't get an exception because he's just soooo special. A little courtesy and asking permission goes a long way. If they're allowed with conditions, respect and follow those conditions. There's places that have stopped allowing dogs because people wouldn't follow the rules - including one cafe where people kept taking their dogs inside from the patio "just for a second" to refill their drink or order a dessert. If your dog isn't well-behaved, it's a big problem. Those of us that follow the rules and try to set a good example so that dog-friendly places stay that way keep getting overshadowed by the doofuses that think the rules do not apply to them or their dog.

He's a lot of fun to take out in public. We meet so many people that way, and it has helped my wife get more comfortable speaking with people. (We do get that many people asking about the breed. Every time we take him out.) But we know when to leave him home.
posted by azpenguin at 12:07 AM on December 14, 2007

I blame Snoopy Come Home for this modern attitude. Up your Charles Schultz!
posted by Pollomacho at 4:52 AM on December 14, 2007

But at least we got some great Thurl Ravenscroft vocals out of it.

No dogs a-

LLOOOOOOOOOWED.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:13 AM on December 14, 2007

OMG, what is with some pet owners? It seems they think because THEY HAVE CHOOSEN to have a pet, the rest of us have to deal with THEIR CHOICE!

My next door neighbors have two little dogs and they seemed to think (I set them straight) they could just walk their dogs down the sidewalk and let them piss on our mailbox post. I finally had to inform them that I HAVE CHOOSEN to NOT have a pet because I didn't want to impose on my neighbors by having them endure my choice if I did decide to CHOOSE to have a pet. I had to point out that I did not spend $260,00.00 to buy and maintain my house and property so their dogs could use it as a bathroom. I asked the woman "How would you like it if I came over and pissed in your yard?"

My passion is firearms. I don't ask my neighbors to endure my choices in life by letting me target practice in my back yard, but for some reason, I have to endure their dogs in my back yard barking at 4:00 a.m. or 11:00 p.m., or just about any other time of the day.

I wish I could think of a catchy acronym for an organization that could be formed, comprised of enough fed up non-pet owners, that could actually have some political clout (like MADD - Mothers Against Drunk Drivers) and could FORCE pet owners to be responsible for THEIR CHOICE to have a pet. Ideas anyone?

If pet owners could somehow be forced to be responsible for THEIR CHOICE, maybe the rest of us wouldn't have to be held hostage by all those poor little puppy doggies and kitty cats in the animal shelter.
posted by LowDog at 3:16 PM on December 14, 2007 [3 favorites]

wow, hi.
posted by shmegegge at 3:17 PM on December 14, 2007

You should really talk to the owner of those squirrels and birds and stuff. They're pissing all over your yard too.

CHOOSEN? Gah! I think you've grammatically pissed on my eyeballs!
posted by miss lynnster at 3:54 PM on December 14, 2007

Simmer down, Beavis.
posted by Snyder at 3:59 PM on December 14, 2007

OMG, what is with some pet owners?

I think it's that they change the laws to suit their cause.
posted by dersins at 4:18 PM on December 14, 2007 [3 favorites]

LowDog... ya got me curious, so I looked at your profile and I noticed that all you say there to introduce yourself is this: "Get a life dickhead so you can be doing something other than criticizing other peoples comments!"

So now I'm kinda wondering if you're always that cranky. 'Cuz if so, people might just be letting their dogs piss on your lawn on purpose.

*(Please don't shoot me.)*
posted by miss lynnster at 5:32 PM on December 14, 2007

If I could change my Metafilter name, I would SO change it to Stinky Boom Boom right now.
posted by Ostara at 10:35 PM on December 14, 2007

Cranky boom boom.
posted by kuujjuarapik at 8:20 AM on December 15, 2007

Lowdog has every right NOT to own a pet, and to want to keep his lawn free of mess. So do others who do not own pets and actually might want to go barefoot in their own lawns, but can't because of pet owners' selfishness and irresponsibility. As long as we are all responsible, pet owners and pet-free people should get along just fine.

miss lynnster, I like your comments on here generally, but there's no rationale for people using their neighbor's lawns for their own latrines.
posted by misha at 12:38 PM on December 16, 2007

misha? I WAS JOKING.

Wow. You guys are awfully uptight. Maybe you need a cuddly pet or something to soften your crankiness a little.
posted by miss lynnster at 6:16 PM on December 16, 2007

Oh, I know you were joking, but I felt LowDog needed his point underscored, since the immediacy of the snarky joke overshadowed it.

I have a cute, fluffy kitten curled up on my legs right now, 'helping' me type.
posted by misha at 10:15 AM on December 17, 2007

« Older Bob: "______________” Charlotte (Johansson): “Okay... | The ultimate in gag gifts.... Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments

Cry "Havoc!" and let slip the uninvited guest December 13, 2007 9:23 AM Subscribe

Cry "Havoc!" and let slip the uninvited guest
December 13, 2007 9:23 AM Subscribe