Sunday, September 9, 2012

Some notes...

I've been studying the dog owners since 1990 till now. The country I live in, does not have the laws that regulate a lot more important areas of life, let a lone the pet ownership. So I think that this setting creates the unique opportunity to study this relationship, when it is not being governed by the outside force aka the law and the state. When it is not being conditioned and when it is left to be as it is. When it is almost...natural and untamed. When it is in its original form.

What I've found out is devastating.

Since 1990 till 2012 the dogcravers never, and I mean never, did any attempt to regulate and organise their dog ownership. They didn't formed any group or sent their representatives to the city council. They never felt the need to limit the space that is available for their dogs. Although they had the money, they never attempted to protect the children's playground from the dog fesses contamination or dog attacks. They never cleaned after their dogs in or around the playground.
They never tackle the stray dogs and cats issues. They never helped the strays if they were injured by their dogs. Not only that they didn't care for the injured, they never cared about the corpses of the dead animals that were killed by their pet dogs. They never cared about the pain and the traumas that they inflicted on to other people whom took care of the strays. In the most cases they never trained their dogs and when they did they used the public spaces for that. For 22 years, our public spaces were and are constantly filled with dog shit and mangled up stray cat corpses. Attacks on humans got the miserable attention and were exclusively placed in the well known context that dog is good and that it doesn't attack unless it is provoked. Thus the dog and the owner were never guilty yet presented as innocent victims.

As soon as the dog became an economic burden, it would be thrown out to the streets, creating the stray dog population. Over time that population exploded, leading of massive packs of dogs with unpredictable behaviour that roam everywhere. Not ever was this issue brought up under the public spot light. Yet it became the part of the “reality”. Anyone, like myself, whom wanted to raise the voice about this was automatically labelled as the animal abuser and animal hater. As the insane person that does not accept the reality.

With this, I am ending the basic psychological profiling of the dog owner and moving towards the social realm, where the society and the dogcravers meet.


  1. Dr Sam Vaknin declares that dog love is essentially an owner's craving to return to infancy.

    This fits with the usual evaluation that a dog has the mental age of a 2-3 year old child.

    There's more here:

    1. Among other things, yes. Returning to infancy means in essence running away from the responsibility or not accepting the responsibility for your actions. However, since as we grow old we don't get younger, meaning that our life is the path of progression (as we go old, the older we get the more years we have) wishing to return to infancy is a process of regression. So you have the reality that is progression and the abstract (the non material psychological reality) that wants regression. Since we all know that the life ends with death, craving for infancy can also be interpreted as the fear from death, thus triggering the very basic urge, the urge for survival. So one way or another, you get the fear that you can't confront with and you want to avoid it.

      Thanks for reading the blog, more will come soon.