The End of the World as seen in a TV ad . . .

Post by **WampusCat** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:23 am

I know what you're saying.

Post by **samaranth** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:45 am

River wrote:...Your dog is never "just a dog" and your cat is never "just a cat", know what I'm saying?...

Absolutely.

Our little cat - practically the last thing he did was gently push his face against my arm and purr. I was holding him, waiting for my husband to come home so that we could make that much-dreaded drive to the vets. We'd known this day was coming, but it was still too soon.

Kitty-cat slipped into a coma in my arms.

I did wonder if he suffered too much because we didn't make that drive a bit earlier, but I remember his purrs, and particularly that last one, and I know he wouldn't have chosen to go any sooner either.

Post by **Frelga** » Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:57 pm

OK, so there may be some excuse for the doggie diapers, but this?

You Can Buy United Bamboo’s Cat Dresses at Opening Ceremony for $500

Post by **yovargas** » Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:17 pm

(from a link on that page)

Post by **Inanna** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 3:27 am

And note that "243 people recommend this" on facebook.

Post by **WampusCat** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 4:29 am

One doesn't put cats in $500 dresses. No, no, no, no, no..........

Post by **River** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:04 am

I'd agree with that statement even more if you changed it to "One doesn't put cats in dresses." Full stop. No adjectives, no qualifiers.

Seriously. Dude. Your cat is elegant and beautiful without anyone's help. Elegance and beauty is part of what makes a cat a cat. And why on earth would anyone spend that kind of money on something the cat is going to spend the rest of the day trying to remove? When a cat wants to feel pretty, it licks itself. It does not put on a designer dress.

Or maybe I'm just thrown because I'd hesitate before putting myself in a $500 dress (but I'm also the woman who bought her wedding dress on clearance so that's not saying much).

Post by **WampusCat** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:09 am

I've never had a $500 dress, not even my wedding dress. Nor do I dress my cats. How absurd.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:30 am

My wedding dress cost $180.

And it was perfect, BTW. It's under the bed as we speak.

My daughter being 3 inches shorter and considerably slimmer than I was even then, nobody's wearing it again in the foreseeable future; but I'm glad I have it and even more glad that it didn't cost Mom and Dad $10,000 or even $1000. I could not have afforded the $180 at the time, so I was (and am) grateful.

Post by **Hachimitsu** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:38 am

OMG. None of those pets look happy in the pictures. *shakes head* Cats are beautiful already.

Post by **River** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:56 am

We used to dress our cat in a collar, but he's a strictly indoor cat and the collar was detracting from his otherwise puma-like appearance. So we took it off.

Yes, we are that vain about our cat.

Post by **tinwë** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:56 pm

I mentioned earlier about people who dress up weimaraners to look like people, and how their owners insist that the dogs don't mind it. As I said then, dogs can be conditioned to "enjoy" all sorts of strange activities, but that's dogs. It is in their nature to want to please. Cats, on the other hand, don't seem to have the same Pavlovian characteristics to ever accept being put in a dress as anything even remotely approaching "normal".

Post by **yovargas** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 3:09 pm

On the pic I posted above, the bottom left one really bugs me. The dog looks like it's in some awful cage where it can't move. It looks like a torture device. An expensive and fashinable torture device.

Post by **Frelga** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 3:14 pm

Same here, yov. I kept looking at it, wondering where the legs are supposed to go.

Post by **Hachimitsu** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 3:18 pm

At least with this, as bad as it it the clothes can come off. There are people who dye their dogs fur. Even in colours like fuschia. It's atrocious.

Post by **axordil** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 4:00 pm

Frelga wrote:Same here, yov. I kept looking at it, wondering where the legs are supposed to go.

I just assumed it was a new legless breed.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 4:17 pm

I think that's a doggie carrier, not something the dog would wear around the house. There was a fashion a while back among people who see pets as accessories for carrying tiny dogs everywhere in purses. I seem to recall that it was back when chihuahuas were briefly the rage. Paris Hilton had one, etc.

Post by **yovargas** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:03 pm

Well, yes, I've seen those around too. But usually the purses are larger then the dog, ya know?

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:08 pm

Yes, certainly. But a dog used to be carried around like a baby probably wouldn't feel all that confined in that thing. And might be allowed to be taken places where a dog merely being carried might not.

Not arguing for the practice, you understand. Our own dog Lucy would never tolerate such an indignity, even if she were small enough.

Post by **Maria** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 8:03 pm

My little puppy might tolerate it. She was raised in a household of small children and thinks nothing of being carried around. All the other dogs I've had were/are terrified by height, but not this little one. I even carried her to her cage this afternoon with her little legs up in the air (she was very sleepy) and she didn't protest at all. She was just sprawled half awake, not caring at all that she was on her back being carried.

I usually make her walk/run everywhere so she gets plenty of exercise, but I do carry her sometimes just so she doesn't start to get scared of being up high.