I know this might sound far-fetched but bear with me. Same arguments, same anecdotes, same dismissal of scientific evidence, same disbelief in what vets tell them.

A few examples:

But but “it’s natural” that’s what “they evolved” to do!!!

While outdoor cat owners claim there cats are only semi-domesticated and comparable to wild animals the dog equivalent takes it up a notch or two, comparing dogs to wolves. Ignoring thousands of years of domestication, nutritional science, the risks of nutritionally unbalanced diets, bacterial contamination, bone injuries…

But but my pet is thriving!!!

Keeping them indoors is cruel, cats need to hunt, my cat has never had a problem… The dog equivalent of this; dogs are meant to eat raw, kibble is unnatural, my dog has never gotten Salmonella.

The arguments are the same, and so are the anecdotes:

Dog owner feeding raw: “My dog’s coat has never been shinier!”
Outdoor cat owners: “My cat would be miserable indoors!”

The reasoning is the same, something is “natural”, therefore it MUST be healthier or better. A classic example of the appeal to nature fallacy combined with a dose of anecdotal evidence and survivorship bias. A pet can appear healthy while still being exposed to unnecessary risks.

Last but not least, there’s the similarity in how incredibly easy and straightforward it is to mitigate virtually every risk.

For outdoor cat owners:
a catio (with the door closed), leash walking, a fenced-off garden, or simply keeping your cat entertained indoors.

For raw feeders, it’s even easier: Drumroll, please… Cooking. Yes, just cook the goddamn meat like we’ve been doing for centuries. That’s all it takes.

Defending the method over welfare!

If your argument is that your dog must eat raw despite the avoidable risks, you’re defending the method and not the nutrition.

The same applies to outdoor cats. If your argument is that your cat must roam freely despite the avoidable risks, you’re defending unrestricted outdoor access and not your cat’s welfare.

“I bought my Frenchy from an ethical breeder!”

Here’s your Ethical Sticker™. Thank you for making the choice you already wanted to make.

Somehow we’ve turned “ethical” into a marketing adjective that gets slapped onto anything so people can feel morally good while doing it. It’s not enough to make a personal choice… they also need everyone else to reassure them they are a wonderful person for it.

Meanwhile, shelters are overflowing, healthy dogs are euthanized every day, and we’re having philosophical debates about whether paying thousands for a pedigree bred health mess is a humanitarian act.

Sometimes the ethical option means accepting that you don’t get exactly what you want. But apparently that’s become an outrageous suggestion. Everyone believes wanting something automatically entitles them to the Ethical Sticker™. Preferably with applause and medal ceremony.

The goal isn’t doing what is ethical anymore. It’s with making sure the thing you wanted to do gets rebranded as “ethical” so nobody can question it.

No, not every decision earns a participation trophy. Sometimes you just make a choice, and that’s all it is.

As the sub continues to grow, we get more and more new members. Many of them are interested in ethicalpetownership but may not be familiar with all the topics, terminology, or debates that come up here. Especially the rules need a much needed update and rework, but that is for another post.

Some ethical discussions can be complex and difficult to approach, especially for someone who is new, often leading to misunderstandings, assumptions, or conversations going off track.
I have issues myself to answer a certain question that looks simple from the outside with a reply that isn’t half a book long due to the all hidden complexity and nuance. (Pitbull bans, breeding ethics, TNR)

At the same time, I think one of the strengths of this community is that it allows space for discussions that don’t happen elsewhere, such as criticism of pedigree breeding, shelter/rescue issues, breed-related ethics and other difficult topics.

Maybe a way to make the sub more welcoming while keeping those deeper discussions would be to introduce different discussion flairs.
Flairs that could give new members a way to ask questions and learn without feeling like they need to already understand every aspect of the topic, while still keeping room for more experienced members to have deeper conversations.

Should we add flairs for casual and in-depth ethical discussion and open discussion?

For example:
Advanced discussion
Casual discussion

This year’s annual entry in the EthicalPetOwnership Whataboutism Olympics comes from a post about the importance of keeping cats indoors.

As is tradition, the field did not disappoint. Performances included the classic bigger problem routine, the wild animals do it too reinterpretation, and the ever-popular attempt to escalate into a referendum on the entire human species.

One contestant in particular delivered a strong entry:

Have you considered that humans do way more damage to the environment?

A flawless attempt to change the subject by bringing up the fact that humans, the same species that domesticated cats and is responsible for their care, have a larger environmental footprint.

A classic move from the Whataboutism playbook. Unfortunately, the judges have seen this performance 47 times this season.

Fourth place goes to a longtime contender in the Whataboutism Olympics:

More birds are killed by sky scrapers than cats!

Breaking news: skyscrapers have been domesticated and released into the wild without supervision. The fix is simple: keep your skyscraper inside or attach a leash. It is so easy to solve a problem when we apply the same logic to buildings that people apply to cats. It was that easy all along.

Strong confidence, weak relevance. The judges appreciate the dramatic entrance but the routine is mostly recycled material.

Bronze medal, ending in third place this year:

Excessive agriculture does way more damage.

The ethical equivalent of a child saying: “But someone else broke a bigger rule!”
Call me when the problem can be solved by keeping the tractor in the barn.

The competitor trained hard and executed flawlessly. Unfortunately, the judges have to deduct points since hypocrisy carried the entire performance while originality was sorely lacking.

Well deserved silver:

I don’t see you advocating for culling humans, who are the most damaging animal on earth for ecosystems.

Nothing says “I have a strong ethical position” quite like immediately dragging the entire collapse of civilization into a conversation about responsible pet ownership. Onviously the logical comparison is a human population with complex social systems, economies, and birth rates (that are already below replacement) versus a domestic animal that can reproduce freely outdoors and whose offspring do not exactly require a 20 year long financial commitment. Truly a flawless analogy.

A bold attempt to jump straight from responsible pet ownership to philosophical crisis of humanity. The judges award bonus points for theatrical escalation, but had to deduct heavily for breaking the rules and bringing out the antinatalist forbidden moveset!

Taking everyone by storm, our newest contender in the whataboutism olympics, scoring a perfect 10 points on both originality and hypocrisy:

If cats are suffering outdoors than so are rats, mice, coyotes…

Your child should not wear a helmet because birds aren’t either… It’s perfectly fine for your child to play in traffic, so are the squirrels… This is the level of logic we’re working with. A domesticated animal that depends on humans being compared to wildlife that evolved to survive without us.

The judges were blown away by the originalty and hypocrisy. taking first place with a landslide victory. We expect great things from this young competitor in the future. The foundation is there: bold assertions, rapid topic deviation, and a natural talent for whataboutism.

Congrats to the winner, snatching away the famous ethicalpetownership golden lama Whataboutism trophy. And of course, congrats to everyone that participated.

In the last few hours I have shown several previous rulebreakers the door. Some of the rule-breaking comments were left up temporarily for discussion purposes. And also to demonstrate why certain rules such as rule 6 exist (ethical breeders defending brachycephalic breeds and other unethical breeding practices).

Unfortunately, I’m noticing that many newer members and even some older members are no longer following the rules. This includes comments calling others toxic for raising ethical concerns, discouraging discussion, using whataboutism, making assumptions about people’s character, and adding off-topic remarks.

None of this helps create a more ethical world or a productive discussion. If you believe there are other important topics that deserve attention, you’re welcome to bring them up. There is no limit to the number of discussions or posts on this subreddit. However, attacking others, dismissing their concerns, or invalidating an ethical question is not constructive and that behavior itself is toxic.

If you have any questions about the subreddit rules, you’re always welcome to contact us through modmail. Suggestions on how we can make the rules clearer or easier to understand are also greatly appreciated when done in a constructive way.

Thank you for your attention!

Apparently if you take an animal struggling with parasites, injuries, traffic, disease, harsh weather, that decimates wildlife and give it a nice sounding name, it becomes ethical in the mind of the Redditor.

Outdoor cat sounds too concerning.
Village cat is the way to go, let’s make it OUR problem and call it communal cat while at it!

Injuries and suffering are now traditional, getting hit by cars is community enrichment, starvation is just part of free-range living.

Congratulations to the marketing department of outdoor cat inc. Giving the problem a cozy nickname was all that was needed to change public opinion. Turns out if you add village or communal to something, people stop asking questions.

Let’s all come together and enjoy; communal wildlife destruction, the village catfeces in everyon’s yard, and of course the communal vet bill nobody wants to pay!

So charming. So ethical.

Amazing what a little rebranding can do.

Forget all the toad shaped animals and all the people suffering from irresponsible ownership for a moment. While scrolling through posts, you will find all kinds of different people doing their part. And this needs to be talked about more!

A “few” examples:

Vets giving in depth explanations and telling their stories, people running shelters or rehoming groups, the people educating/helping owners/those living with dangerous dogbreeds in a non hostile way (preventing tragedy), of course also the owners who got their dangerous dogs from a shelter and are keeping it without putting others at risk being open about the dangers telling others to do the same, those of you that work on feral and outdoor cat populations, people that leash walk their cats or build catios, those of you that get your pets from a shelter, the lone dogtrainer that tells everyone to leash their dogs, reptile/fish/rodent owners showcasing adequately sized tanks/enclosures, bunny owners warning people that you actually need to put some god damn effort in and can’t put the animal away in a small cage 24/7,…

Just like the choices you DON’T make; not buying or keeping exotic animals, not keeping pets because you know it’s the best thing to do for you or at that time, not getting a toad shaped dog or cat, not eating meat or sourcing from inhumane farms.

I probably forgot to mention a lot of you, I appologize in advance for that!