Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 40 41

Original poster

Animals vs humans round 2

1002 replies

livingzuid · 02/11/2013 20:00

I was enjoying our previous debate started by Fifi. Not sure if we were done!

AIBU to think if faced with choosing a pet over a human (even if a stranger), you should choose the human?

The idea was brought up in another thread and put in life or death situation. Building on fire contains your pet and a stranger. You could only save one, who would it be?

I had a dog, Ralph, I cried my heart out when he died 3 years ago. The only dog I wasn't scared of! But I can't imagine leaving a person to die instead, no matter how my heart would break.

OP posts:

OutragedFromLeeds · 02/11/2013 22:57

The 40% thing kind of goes against the 'it goes against human instinct'/ 'there's one right answer' doesn't it?

Ivyfairy · 02/11/2013 23:15

Is that the same article Maid (think it was Maid) linked to in the first thread? In that 60%, the majority, would save human.

OutragedFromLeeds · 02/11/2013 23:21

I think that's the same one. 40% said dog, 60% said human. That goes against the human nature argument doesn't it? For that you'd need 95% vs 5% or something.

OutragedFromLeeds · 02/11/2013 23:22

40% is a lot of dogs for Culew to kill. She'll have to give up her day job!

OrmirianResurgam · 02/11/2013 23:26

Stranger v my dog, my dog wins. Strange dog v strange human, human wins.

Latara · 02/11/2013 23:30

A certain bitchy woman at work vs my cat - easy, my cat wins!

Ivyfairy · 02/11/2013 23:32

60% doesn't seem like a big majority to me, certainly

MrTumblesBavarianFanbase · 02/11/2013 23:32

We have a dog. Really wanted a dog... She's a rescue... We've had her 2 months... she is very different to the dog I thought she was when we committed to take her.. so far she has made every day of the last 2 months infinitely more stressful and unpleasant than life was before we had her. I have 3 young DC but the dog has increased the stress explosively, unbelievably, more than any one of the DC did... so far the rewards, on every level, are far more merge than the stress factor.

I'd save any human, aside from rapists and murderers, before my own dog(or the rabbits, who I like fine, but they are rabbits...) let alone any other... Maybe my opinion will change in time... but I don't think so!

My sister judges her very little foster son negatively because he dislikes her nippy half grown lurcher... I feel awful for the little boy and little for the admittedly fun loving but none the less toothy young dog...

MrTumblesBavarianFanbase · 02/11/2013 23:35

*meagre - the rewards of rescue dog ownership are meagre, not merge. It is not easy, and the DC are suffering for it, I feel bad about it, and better disposed toward people than stressful, barkey, demanding canines...

OutragedFromLeeds · 02/11/2013 23:39

I don't think 60% is anywhere near enough to argue that it's 'human instinct'. There clearly isn't a massive consensus, we can see that from this thread. The 'anyone who would save the dog is mental' brigade need to take a look at their viewpoint imo. Strongly disagree with the dog-savers sure, but there are too many to argue that they're mentally ill/don't have 'normal' human instincts.

Obviously we don't what anyone would actually do in that situation.

Weirdly, the easiest for me to answer of all the hypothetical questions was the bus one because there it's absolutely split second decision, no room whatsoever to think logically.

Original poster

livingzuid · 03/11/2013 01:43

Fifi check you out as a thought leader and philosopher :)

Tumbles I am sorry it's not working out with the rescue. It can be so rewarding to rehome them but as you say sometimes challenges surface that you can't anticipate until you get home. I have to say beloved as my dog is at the first sign of teeth against a child in play or not it's to the trainer. And if it persists then I'd have to rehome. The dog not the child just to be clear!

Fortunately dog is so good with little ones so o don't have that worry! but I don't understand people that keep pets that aren't compatible with the kids. SIL keeps two of the fuzziest cats despite DN having asthma.

Rambling back onto topic I think we're going good at 40%. And Outraged your comment made me laugh! She'll be busy for a while!

OP posts:

Original poster

livingzuid · 03/11/2013 02:08

Alis how is my heart in the wrong place hypothetically for choosing my pet over a stranger? All that says is you think you're better than me and I have a heart made of stone for choosing something I love and value over something that I have no knowledge or attachment to.

Everlong as I said to you in the previous thread it seems perfectly acceptable for some to insult others based on nothing more than an imaginary scenario on an internet forum. Seeing yours and others comments hasn't really changed that opinion and also shows that my dog really is more considerate then some of these supposed marvellous humans. Is it therefore surprising that I'd pick my dog every time over a species that is so free to abuse total strangers based on nothing at all.

When will people realise that you need to be nice to others if you want to persuade them to your point of view rather than rude and aggressive? Nothing like getting people to dig their heels in like insulting them!

OP posts:

Original poster

livingzuid · 03/11/2013 02:11

And Ty to the human savers who provided intelligent debate :) hasn't all been negative! Right really must sleep now.

OP posts:

SkinnedAlive · 03/11/2013 02:59

I find it odd that some people have such an amazingly high level of self importance, that they believe they should have the right to kill me because I value my own family (and hence my own needs) above theirs. In an emergency my cats would go into their cat carrier leaving one hand free which I would use to drag out/carry anyone else I could.

I would not dream of being angry at someone who put their family or needs above mine. I would expect them to. If someone left the fire with their baby under one arm and a bag of jewelry in the other, and therefore saved valuables instead of getting my cats, it wouldn't occur to me to kill them for it even though some have said they would want to kill me in the same situation. I would probably be one of the people helping them out, even if by their own admission they left my family screaming and burning. But if I applied their thinking, then yes I should have the same right to kill them, never mind helping them.

Selfish is not a bad thing. Selfish = self care in many respects. My cats mean everything to me. More than a stranger ever would. They are my family and necessary for my health and happiness and no-one else has the right to expect me to sacrifice my life and happiness for theirs.

I would always put other humans and animals over valuables. For the people that put humans over pets, do you also put valuables over pets? Do your own valuables come above other peoples pets? If you expected to kill a person who put their pet over your family member, would you accept they should kill you of you put your valuables above their pet?

TirAnna · 03/11/2013 04:28

Regardless of where anyone stands in the debate, I'm not really buying the whole 'it's only hypothetical so it doesn't matter' argument - if people were saying things like 'I'd save a child who was intelligent over one who wasn't because they'll make more of their life' or 'I'd save a boy over a girl because I like boys better' or something, should no-one be condemning their point of view because there's no actual fire and no-one's really dying?

2tiredtoScare · 03/11/2013 06:56

I don't see pets as family members and for that reason I don't have any, it truly wouldn't occur to me to save your pet, sorry but I'm guessing that's the way some of you feel about kids?

pianodoodle · 03/11/2013 07:47

If someone left the fire with their baby under one arm and a bag of jewelry in the other, and therefore saved valuables instead of getting my cats, it wouldn't occur to me to kill them for it even though some have said they would want to kill me in the same situation.

Leaving a cat behind is not quite the same as leaving a baby behind (although no doubt I'll be asked to explain why )

I'm sure you love your cat, but...it's a cat.

Original poster

livingzuid · 03/11/2013 07:54

Tiranna for me I'm not condemning anyone :) But I find it bizarre that people would be so verbally violent to total strangers just because they believe something different. If you'd be that insulting to a stranger then am I truly to believe you'd risk your own hide to save one? What if that stranger were one of the pet camp?! I'm not judging you (you in the global sense not personally) because you'd save a stranger - you are far braver than me - but I'll judge you if you are rude about it at the same time!

We're privileged in our society to never really have to even contemplate the scenarios you describe but in many countries that's not the case. I don't judge or condemn those parents for the decisions they make - because I don't know them! Everyone does what they feel they have to burning buildings and all.

2tired for some, yes I think you are right. What about people who don't have children and dogs are their main or only companion? Or cats? My dog isn't that but he's my faithful friend who has saved me on more occasions than I care to remember. But I can understand that's not the way you see things and that's fair enough :) just clear a path on your way out for the pet to escape that's all I ask!

Skinned - well put :) I simply can't see why I would have to put something that is more import to someone else ahead of what's important to me if I'm going to risk my life rushing into a burning building. Why should I? On the things I'd be gutted at having to spend £185 on a passport again but that's what insurance is for I guess! I certainly wouldn't put objects above life. I couldn't shoot someone for appearing with the family jewels above a critter or person but I'd be hard pushed not to punch them....

OP posts:

Original poster

livingzuid · 03/11/2013 07:58

The cat vs baby is to be expected piano but that's not what she said. she was talking about something replaceable being saved over something irreplaceable ie the cat. If I had a choice with my spare arm it would be the cat not the jewellery :)

OP posts:

pianodoodle · 03/11/2013 09:20

I wouldn't take either.

Getting the baby out would be more than enough!

2tiredtoScare · 03/11/2013 09:33

I'll look out for pets next time I'm in a burning building but leave my child to burn and I'll get all Curlew on your ass

SharpLily · 03/11/2013 09:34

"We're privileged in our society to never really have to even contemplate the scenarios you describe but in many countries that's not the case. I don't judge or condemn those parents for the decisions they make - because I don't know them!"

Quite. Furthermore Western culture has fetishised children in a way that is not automatic in other cultures.

2tiredtoScare · 03/11/2013 09:51

It has also fetishised pets as well

SharpLily · 03/11/2013 10:08

Really? Not that I had noticed - after all about 60% are apparently happy to see them burn.

pianodoodle · 03/11/2013 10:16

Lol sharplily not happy to see a pet burn just less happy to see a human burn

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 40 41

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In

This thread is not accepting new messages.

Swipe left for the next trending thread