Do you think that castration is the highest form of cruelty to animals and is generally inhumane?

Hassathra

Hassathra

Tourist
I have nothing more to add, only that I am categorically against it. To all the people who tell me that this is good for the pet’s health, I ask them: “in that case, why don’t you castrate yourself?” their answer: silence. I think this is only useful for replenishing the wallets of those who carry out such operations, and therefore they promote it with all their might. What about the poor animal? Is it fair to deprive them of the most intimate things if they are absolutely healthy?
 
No, I don't think it's the highest form of cruelty. Historically, in North American countries, it's been shown to decrease pet relinquishment, euthanasia, and hordes of resources required to deal with those types of problems, I'd argue that it's probably spared a lot of pets from crueler fates. I think there is a cultural shift currently happening and recommendations are more and more geared to the individual animals and their circumstance instead of the general population, but that stuff takes time.
Also, with all the free/low cost spay/neuter options out there, the argument that it would be pushed only for profit doesn't make much sense to me.
 
Is it the highest form of cruelty? No.
Is it a form of cruelty? In my personal opinion, yes.

I think we really should be giving our pets vasectomies rather than neutering/gelding/castration or whatever you want to call it, if it's really about population control and preventing unwanted pregnancy. Doing my own research, it seems the main reasons neutering is preferred is because a) vasectomies don't get rid of the animal's sex drive and associated behaviors and b) because apparently vasectomies fail occasionally (something like 3 out every 1000 or so is what I remember hearing.)
I find both excuses pretty lame, personally. Do people really think it's morally okay to permanently castrate an animal for their own perceived benefits, knowing that if they themselves didn't want any more children they'd choose to get themselves the vasectomy rather than letting someone castrate them? Is a .3% failure rate really enough to justify castrations over vasectomies?
 
Castration/spaying is just the proof irresponsible ownership. Unless it's asked for by a medical condition it's something that came with the package when you got them. Cutting out what is specifically "them" means you reject a specific part of their behavior that people want to edit.

If this is someone's motivation instead of understanding their companion they should focus on getting a gaming console instead.

Mating behavior is expected to occur as part of their wants. Not planning for those moments to prevent unintended pregnancies isn't something that should be ripped out. If you can't do it to a person then the animal can't be done to them
 
In my opinion it's cruelty, not the highest form obviously. There are better ways, but at the same time it may be understandable in the sad context we live in.
 
I believe it is certainly a form. I am of the opinion that canine sterilization should only be practiced under circumstances of medical necessity. Otherwise, folks can simply exercise responsibility over their pets like they’re supposed to. Sterilization is for people who are too lazy to mind the creatures in their care to ensure they aren’t breeding unchecked.
 
There's always worse.

But this would be a hypocritical topic of uncontrolled population control of irresponsible humans vs animal life.

My answer to anything is "if you don't do it to yourself why do it to them".
 
Like there are pros and cons I believe it shouldn't be done every animal on this planet should have the right to reproduce even if they never do but for zoo folks and there animals partners they have more sexual activity than the average dog or horse but it shouldnt happen,
like if people did that we wouldn't be over populated but that will never happen just most people that do that don't think what if I had no choice and I was taken to get snipped and now I can have kids, it would probably stop them in there tracks so I'm will alot of you on this topic, against it 💯
 
No. People are awful creatures who have devoted inordinate amounts of time thinking of ways to inflict pain and suffering on others.

There's far worse that could be done.
 
Dogs don't have the same emotional, social or psychosexual attachment to their genitals as humans do. It's hardly traumatic, perhaps a bit uncomfortable. However, I have kept my dogs intact out of personal preference.
 
My three dogs and stallion is intact and they are much healthier as I live on a farm which is a better environment than as in a city .
 
Almost everything about neutering making your dog the most perfect well behaved little baby is all propoganda. Dogs neutered before puberty have anxiety and growth issues, dogs neutered after puberty have no change or worse, develope complexes afterwards. Removing functioning tissue and modifying an animal to suit your lifestyle is immoral.
 
ClickAndWhistle said:
Is it the highest form of cruelty? No.
Is it a form of cruelty? In my personal opinion, yes.

I think we really should be giving our pets vasectomies rather than neutering/gelding/castration or whatever you want to call it, if it's really about population control and preventing unwanted pregnancy. Doing my own research, it seems the main reasons neutering is preferred is because a) vasectomies don't get rid of the animal's sex drive and associated behaviors and b) because apparently vasectomies fail occasionally (something like 3 out every 1000 or so is what I remember hearing.)
I find both excuses pretty lame, personally. Do people really think it's morally okay to permanently castrate an animal for their own perceived benefits, knowing that if they themselves didn't want any more children they'd choose to get themselves the vasectomy rather than letting someone castrate them? Is a .3% failure rate really enough to justify castrations over vasectomies?
Click to expand...
I think this is the right answer, as there are so many puppies in dog shelters abandoned, and some have to be euthanized, because people don’t fix their dogs and just dump the babies (shelters are always overfilled, I used to volunteer). I think fixing them is important, but you bring up great points that vasectomies are much healthier for them, and lets them live longer and more natural lives.

Vasectomies are also cheaper and less intrusive than castration, but many people choose castration because it makes their dogs “eternal puppies” but they don’t think of the long term problems that creates. I think the main problem with vasectomies over castration is that a dog with a vasectomy will still mount and knot other dogs, which will seriously piss off anybody who’s dog your dog is breeding.
 
colinmilo said:
I think this is the right answer, as there are so many puppies in dog shelters abandoned, and some have to be euthanized, because people don’t fix their dogs and just dump the babies (shelters are always overfilled, I used to volunteer). I think fixing them is important, but you bring up great points that vasectomies are much healthier for them, and lets them live longer and more natural lives.

Vasectomies are also cheaper and less intrusive than castration, but many people choose castration because it makes their dogs “eternal puppies” but they don’t think of the long term problems that creates. I think the main problem with vasectomies over castration is that a dog with a vasectomy will still mount and knot other dogs, which will seriously piss off anybody who’s dog your dog is breeding.
Click to expand...
Vasectomies are always more expensive and less performed than castration. vasectomies include subcutaneous operations such as an endoscopy and are more "complicated" than castration, sometimes or often poorly done leading to many long-term side effects such as urinary incontinence, rupture of the cruciate ligaments for certain breeds and also a great risk of osteosarcoma due to lack of testosterone...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top