March 10th, 2005, 02:23 PM
I was searching on google for something tottally unrelated to animal adoption and stumbled accross this classified ad, I couldnt believe that amount of ppl on there giving away "free" unnuetered cats! are these people really that "Stupid" (There you go I changed it ;) ) I mean even I know thats a kitten mill heaven!!! I wonder if there is a way we can post on there to say "hey you stupid Idiots do you not care??" or maybe something a little nicer?
Check it out
March 10th, 2005, 02:38 PM
There are 2 categories these people fall under:
People who don't know, but would care if they did.
People who DO know, but still don't care.
If any of them are in the 1st category, you can ask them if they wish to be responsible for this:
Two uncontrolled breeding cats create two litters per year at a survival rate of 2.8 kittens per litter. With continued breeding, they create:
Year 1 = 12 cats
Year 2 = 66 cats
Year 3 = 2,201 cats
Year 4 = 3,822 cats
Year 5 = 12,680 cats
Year 10 = 80,399,780 cats
March 10th, 2005, 03:17 PM
This is what I wrote to all of the ones offering free cats, one lady was giving away a free cat who just had a litter, and she hadnt even spayed her can you belive that. what a nice advert for a breeder!!!
Please do not offer your cat free of charge to people. this only attracts the likes of kitten mills who will only use your cat to breed, and they will live a very sad and lonely life. Please ask for an adoption fee or at least screen prospective adopters and make them sign an agreement to get them fixed. Especially as i see she has already had one litter! A cat can produce over 80,000 cats in a ten year period and there are already so many unwanted cats at shelters already, being euthanised just because they dont have the space to keep them.
I wonder if any of them will listen???
March 10th, 2005, 03:23 PM
That's 80,000,000... not 80,000! :eek:
March 10th, 2005, 03:33 PM
80 million holy cow!!! well anyways they should get the picture, probably think im some old spinster with nothing better to do!!! But they really are dumbasses.
March 10th, 2005, 03:36 PM
Hold on a sec I am an old spinster with nothing better to do, LOL :p
March 10th, 2005, 04:21 PM
I absolutely agree about "free to good home". I was just concerned about your use of the term "borderline retarded ". The term utilized now is intellectually challenged. I hate to sound picky or even pc but I am active in a disability rights organization and while we have changed so much in society, it seems we have a way to go with altering the ideas people have abnout the diabled, especially people with mental challenges.
For the record, I know a young woman who has an intellectual disability and she cares for her dog better than most people I know! And she'd never give away free kittens.
March 10th, 2005, 04:46 PM
I looked at that site and it just made me so angry. There is someone selling Siamese kittens for $300 and you just know they are not registered. And they write: "Payment in advance only Seller accepts:
· Cash "
Of course they accept cash and I wonder what the contract looks like! :sad:
There was even an eight year old declawed cat - free to a good home. What better cat for a buncher than that. Labs would love a cat with no claws. And they will deliver the cat by car. Aaaaargggggggghhhhhhh!! (I should maybe say laboratory - the first time I saw the word "lab" here I thought of my favourite chocloate lab, lol
What monster gives away an eight yr old family member? This is so sad!!!!
March 11th, 2005, 09:38 AM
CyberKitten, I dont know how old you are, but I guess ive picked that saying up from todays youth culture. and im sorry if you found it offensive but I think you were a little off the mark with how you interpreted it. the saying "borderline retarded' is used rather like the saying "phat" with a PH. its not supposed to be insultive to people who are mentally challenged as the word retarded is not even used in that context anymore. It was meant to emphasise how stupid these people really are. Its a little like the word dumb was once thought of as insulting. Or how they keep changing the definition of how we address African americans, is it african americans or is it blacks now??
As for your friend who is mentally challenged I have no doubt that she is an excellent pet owner, I dont recall saying anywhere that mentallly challenged people should not own pets. Todays society is so worried about being politically correct to all creeds, races, and ethnicities that they distract from the subject in hand. Do we not all need to take the stick out of our bums and let it go? I apologise if you took my post as offensive and if it bothers you that much i shall change it. However I do think you were a little quick to jump on the soap box with regards to your challenge that I was calling all mentally challenged people bad pet owners. :sorry:
March 11th, 2005, 11:39 AM
Re: CyberKitten, I dont know how old you are, but I guess ive picked that saying up from todays youth culture. and im sorry if you found it offensive but I think you were a little off the mark with how you interpreted it. the saying "borderline retarded' is used rather like the saying "phat" with a PH. its not supposed to be insultive to people who are mentally challenged as the word retarded is not even used in that context anymore. It was meant to emphasise how stupid these people really are. Its a little like the word dumb was once thought of as insulting. Or how they keep changing the definition of how we address African americans, is it african americans or is it blacks now??
What does my age have to do with this? I am sorry but that in itself is somewhat insulting. Are you suggesting I don't get it because I am over the hill, lol I doubt chronological age has anything to do with how someone thinks. Kindness, sensitivity to the needs of others and awareness of what is hurtful and what it not AND treating people with respect knows no age restriction.
I interact with people of all ages - my university students and my younger patients (though some can be 19) and I hardly think "borderline retarded" is in any way comprable to the use of ph - which I myself utilize at times. It may not supposed to be insulting but it most definitely is. It just boggles my mind that we struggle for years to change offensive terminology and some people continue to use it. I know many people with intellectual chllenges - I used the one person as an example - and would urge you to use less discriminatory language in the future. This is a public forum where one expects proper behaviour and respect. And I do not concur that showing disrespect is something seen as kewl by certain generations, if that is what you are implying.
I like to think we have progressed as a society but the kind of comment you made shows that either you lack knowledge about that issue - in which case you have time to learn if you are young - or that you approve of such language which I hope is incorrect.
I know some people see it as just being pc but how we refer to others, especially those some would relegate to life's margins, is very important. How we relate to others and the words we use - is indicitive of our background, education and ability to show respect for others. One of the Board members of the association I serve on refuses even to use the term "special needs" students because he belives it is derogatory. I think he is a little too pc but I do not utilize the term to respect his wishes.
I did not mean to hijack the thread over this term but as an active campaigner for human rights (which is why I serve with Doctors without Borders), I was loathe to not comment on that sad and outdated term.
March 11th, 2005, 01:58 PM
Woowww back up a little here would you, I was merely apologising.
Now I had written a long explanation for my post back to you, however I feel that it would be both useless, and as you put it distracting away from the initial thread.
I would have normally given you an explanation to my post for which you are not understanding, however this is the second time you have come down on me for expressing my freedom of speech which as you will know being an advocate of this, is part of my human rights. and thankfully I live in a society where I am free to express myself.
However I feel that you are a little over sensitive and what ever I write in the explanation im sure you will have a come back for, I do not believe that there is any way to please you so im not going to try.
I apologised if you found the thread insulting and explained how I had interpreted the words. If you cannot accept my apology and except that I have the freedom of speech on here as well as you do. then I suggest that you do not read my threads anymore.
However as you said yourself - This is distracting away from the fact that there is a website allowing "people" to give away pets to whomever they please. Please do not distract away from that because you disagree with my opinions and the way I express them.
Once again I apologise and will not use the word again if you find it offensive.
March 11th, 2005, 03:03 PM
Thank you for the apology. I accept it.
And I do not want to prolong what is essentially a very peripheral issue to the topic of the thread. I have worked my entire life to promote free speech but you do not know me so you really have no idea whether I am over sensitive (I cannot afford to be in the rough and tough world of academic medicine and politics in general).
This is not about me or you - nor is it even about free speech. This term is very offensive to society in general. In New Brunswick, it has been taken off the books entirely and someone using it in the school or health care system would be severely reprimanded. In Canada, the association that used to be called "The Associaton for the Mentally Retarded" has been known now for almost 20 years as the Association for Community Living, promoting inclusion in society - as opposed to how we marginalized the intellectually disadvantaged for too many years! The term would never used by even the most un pc politicians or medical professionals here.
The rare place it is heard is where someone who lacks understanding about it (like a child who overheard it and does not recognize the significance of what he or she is saying).
I do not want to belabour this but I am not seeking to curtail your freedom of speech. Freedom of speech means possessing the liberty to speak and express one's opinions. One can surely accomplish that without utilizing terms that belittle and hurt others. Thankfully, we do not use the "n" word any longer in reference to black people. We have progressed and do not refer to Native women as "Squaws" and nor do we use other ethnic slurs when we talk about groups of diverse cultures.
I do not know how old "you" are (university age? Older?) but I find it hard to imagine it is cool to use this term where you live and among your peers. If it is, you might want to share this information with them. I do know the students I teach (medical students and residents- avg age 20-29) would never utilize it and in explaining case studies, they sometimes have to refer to someone with an intellectual disability.
I am sorry you felt the need to delete something you had already written. You seem to have already judged who I am and what I am open to. I am open to everyone's opinion and viewpoint - and I know you did not mean harm in using the term. It is just that I have spent my life as a woman in what has been a male dominated profession (though that is changing :) ) as well as being the first woman to break certain barriers politically where I live and I see the struggle for human rights as inclusive of everyone and opted to point out the hurt and lack of awareness it conveys.
There is an old Native expression that we should not judge anyone until we've walked a mile in their moccasins (sp?) Put yourself in my shoes (and I am trying to put myself in yours) - I spent 20 years plus lobbying for the rights of disabled (among others :) ) and have several patients who are thrilled to live in a society that is becoming more inclusive (sadly, we are not completely there yet) and happy to be working in a real job (not just some workshop for "special people") and where they do not have to deal with that ugly term. (There will be bullies who may use it with them but they, like everyone else, need to learn how to stand up for themsleves). I've seen the effects of a child being called that by someone at her school who did not know any better and that is heartbreak no-one needs.
So you have to understand that it is very distressing to see it utilized so flippantly by you. I am not coming down on you for it - you would know if I did that, lol - I am just explaining as diplomatically as possible why it is not appropriate. I have to believe that anyone who advocates for animal rights cannot be that narrow minded and that it is a case of truly not realizing how horrible it is to hear that.
Anyway, nuff said!
March 11th, 2005, 03:28 PM
OK well lets call it quits ok, and ive changed it. see first thread!
Its not my intention to upset ppl. I think were all here for a common reason so lets get back to it :)