The implications of Dog Leash Fashion

Interspecies communication, women's liberation, perversion, pseudo activity

I walk through a park in a large city every day, so I see a lot of people walking their dogs. As it happens, I have some opinions about that. I grew up in a multidog, hunting dog, household.

Something changed recently. I don’t know when it happened - it happened gradually, like all rot, decay and perversion. I only noticed it when it was long established, and I realised, wait a minute, I feel like I haven’t seen a dog on a leash in years.

as God intended it

Everyone I see, and have seen, for I don’t know how long, months - perhaps years, have taken to the fashion of leashing their dogs around the torso, rather than their necks.

animal abuse. a crime against God and Nature

I’m sure it’s a product of the city, of course, it’s probably not as bad out in the real world. But it does arouse great contempt in me regardless. I feel there is great significance here, being an expert on both dogs, language, and specifically, dog language.

The problem is obviously that the animals are being coddled - overly humanized, overly anthropomorphized - and it is disrespectful to treat an animal as if it was a human.

The basic idea behind the design is, it appears obvious to me, that the imagery of a chain around a neck and a poor widdly pubby :( :( straining and being strangled :( :(, hurts people’s feelings, because they’re pussies. Because they’re stupid and are cruelly exploiting the animals for their own weird emotional hang-ups and use them as dolls to act out little power-dominance plays about “what if my parents liked me”. But I digress.

The basic idea, it seems to me, is that “it’s mean to have a chain around the throat, and it’s more humane :^) to use a torso harness”. Correct me if I’m wrong.

The design of the harness is literally one originally designed for use on humans - they tried marketing it to evil stupid parents, but it never fully caught on in a big way, because it’s, you know. obviously incredibly evil and elicits a gut reaction of disgust in all civilized human beings.

So what we have here is a technology explicitly designed for use on humans, which is being deliberately used by women and, lets call them, “mainstream” men, on their -pseudo-children substitutes.

We return to the old Zizek talking point about the “soft” tyranny of the modern father/boss: guilting and bullying your children/employees emotionally, because he is afraid of wielding power, of wielding authority, of being a patriarch. I look at these people with their poor dogs, and I see only a further degeneration of this phenomena - a step further removed. A pseudo-dominance on a pseudo-child.

When you take on dog ownership you have a responsibility to the animal to treat it well. Treating it like a human is not treating it well. Treating it like a child and then coddling that imaginary child - insane. Treating a dog like it’s a child and then treating that child as if it’s a dog - literally, perverse. Fetishistic.

Humans can communicate subtly and appreciate the nuance of the difference between being yanked on the neck and yanked on the chest, perhaps. But dogs cannot appreciate this “kindness” or “humanitarian” gesture. It is entirely about making the owner feel good about the weird imagery in their heads, because they are insecure about wielding authority, and taking it out on the animal. Or rather, acting it out.

When you accept dog ownership, you have a responsibility to wield authority. Dogs are very literal. Dog language is very literal. Dogs have autism. That’s why they are based. All dogs have autism. All dogs are fascists. They appreciate direct, honest communication.

To accept the body-harness theory of dog leashing, you must assume that previous dog domestication and dog ownership for the past 20.000 years was either a) deliberately cruel for no reason, people just loved strangling dogs, or b) no one in all that time ever thought about it, until our “enlightened” humanitarian late modernity, because they were all just dumb. Either cruel and evil or indifferent and stupid - this is, generally, the historisation of modernity, the explanation for everything earlier than 1990. Anything after 1990, of course, the explanation is racism and sexism.

That is, to accept the body harness theory of dog leashing, you must assume that the choice to use the neck for 20.000 years was, completely arbitrary and random.

In dog language the neck and throat are incredibly significant, and are involved in all communication about dominance and hierarchy - all questions of authority. In dog language, when you playfight, which is the basic fundamental level of dog socialisation, the winner is decided by who can “control” the other’s throat, by putting your mouth on it. It is not a coincidence that in domestication, humans chain them by their throat.

The harness is solving for a non existent problem, and it’s a disgusting act of animal abuse - the dog himself wont know the difference of course, he doesn’t appreciate that his owner is indulging in some kind of weird psychosexual thing. Luckily, they are too autistic for that. But they do pick up on the fact that you’re afraid to wield power.

Your dog doesn’t respect you. You’re speaking to it like it was an idiot. How would you like it if you were spoken to like you were an idiot.