No announcement yet.

Baby Cutting vs Sterilizing Pets

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Zbubs View Post
    I think they drain the nuts of male animals, like suck the juice out of them or something, whereas with female animals they neuter them in a less damaging way? I don’t know, but I have wondered, just like in the olden days when people would put skirts on their chair and piano legs, because they thought it was perverted for a chair or a piano to have its legs showing, perhaps, there is still just as much silliness when it comes to neutering, that if it is true that male animals are neutered in a more harmful way than female animals, then there would be one similarity between baby cutting and neutering animals, that there is a matriarchy that extends even to the way that animals are treated, such that the male animals are treated worse.

    otherwise I don’t think neutering animals compares to baby cutting, because neutering animals is good, as long as it has no side effects on the animal , other than their sterility. Draining male animals balls is bad, I think they should get vasectomies instead. Cutting babies isn’t good, it serves no reason or purpose. If someone neutered me as a baby, as long as they didn’t drain my balls, as long as my body works perfectly, as long as I felt no pain, and had no changes to my life and body other than that I can’t have a baby, I wouldn’t care, because I never want to create more people anyway. Even if I was forcibly given a vasectomy as an adult, I wouldn’t care, as long as a vasectomy doesn’t affect my body in any way other than making me sterile.
    Sorry, but you are misinformed. Castration is the amputation of the testicles. Not "draining" the balls, but amputating them. This was even done in humans at times. It has many effects, beyond sterilization.

    In general, it is easier and less risky than the female equivalent of spaying. Spaying also has effects beyond simply sterilizing the animal. The human equivalent is a hysterectomy.

    Whether one wants to argue that males or females are treated better in some way, requires first defining what that actually means.

    A vasectomy is cutting the tubes that carry the sperm from the testicle to the penis. The male retains his balls, and the only effect is to keep the sperm from "leaving the balls", instead they reach a dead end.

    The female equivalent is a tubal litigation. And, as before, the male operation is easier and less risky.

    You can look up these terms and learn a lot.


    • #17
      I deleted this post because it was unrelated and redundant .

      As far as the quote from me above, I was not mentally well when I wrote that, and would no longer say that I wouldn’t care if someone forcibly sterilized me
      Last edited by Zbubs; 11-30-2021, 12:08 AM.


      • #18
        Good on you that you did some research and reported back with better information. That speaks well of your character and intellect.

        I will just point out that humans have domesticated many wild animals, not to mention plants, so that they are "better" suited for human use, whether that is as food or pets. Whether one agrees with that or not, it was for that reason, and if domestication and sterilization was not done, then we would not have dogs, cats, chickens, etc. While one can envision a world in which this was not done, it is not as easy to try and change things now, given the long history and integration into our lives of these plants and animals...


        • #19
          Thankyou, my messiah complex ego sparked up for a moment before my good character took over and forced me to think and research before I speak. It was good I did. I learned something that lifted a burden off my chest too, I have suffered on behalf of my cat , that I believed had drained nuts, and I believed that could have been causing him pain, even though he doesn’t show it. I was happy to know that isn’t the case.


          • #20
            I hear the parallels trying to be drawn here, but I remain in favor of spaying and neutering animals. If there are less invasive procedures, sure, maybe they should be done instead, but I don't see it as genital mutilation.

            My basic retort is that sterilizing pets has a measurable benefit. There are too many unloved, unhomed animals out there and adding more to the world is profoundly unethical. I suppose you could argue that Rex might miss his balls, but think of all the puppies you are saving from starving in the streets or in a cage at the animal shelter, waiting to be inevitably put down. That's a sacrifice worth making.

            I've also approached questions like this from a more philosophical aspect, one that probably won't get much traction here but I'll throw out anyway. One way that animals appear to be "limited" relative to us is through the lens of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Animals respond to food, security, and at least to some extent love (not my cat, though), but have you ever seen an animal that was intellectually fulfilled? Or self-actualized? Animals' hierarchy seems to stop a fair bit short of humans'.

            As it applies here, I consider how much trauma I faced coming to grips with my circumcision. I sometimes wonder what I might have been able to accomplish without this emotional baggage, all the math and science I could have studied or better relationships I might have had. It was an affront to my bodily autonomy and the act itself must have made me fear for my physical safety, but years later, I feel the most pain in trying to shed this burden by restoring and freeing up the time and thought to move on to better things in my life.

            Obviously I don't feel animals should be wantonly harmed, but I don't see much evidence that fixing animals impacts their ability to feel safe and loved, which seems to be everything they can get out of life.