Has anyone ever, actually seriously argued that a dog was good security?
And since the answer is clearly "no" can we please delete that trope from the fanfic lexicon for all eternity?
And since the answer is clearly "no" can we please delete that trope from the fanfic lexicon for all eternity?
no subject
We'd also have to delete the trope from traditional fiction as well.
(Although, my best friend totally suggested that when she bought her house.)
no subject
Good, it's fucking annoying there as well.
no subject
One side is that the "get a dog for protection" trope is deeply embroiled in rape culture and no one should ever get a dog only for that.
BUT dogs are good security in the sense that they alert to things and they can provide additional information about your surroundings. For instance, I know my shepherd mix can hear substance to sounds that I might let my imagination run wild on, so when I'm hearing a sound and I'm worried but she's not, it's a good cue to me that I might be overreacting. However, that's not good security so much as me being aware of how my dog perceives things and being aware of my surroundings, which everyone should do whether they have a dog or not. They do sometimes provide incidental information and yes, I do feel safer with her around (esp, again, when you consider that she's a German Shepherd mix and they've been used as working dogs, service animals, and guard dogs for a long ass time). - But I also first and foremost see it as my responsibility to protect my dogs and keep them safe, not the other way around. There are certain levels on which it's a partnership and being aware of their reactions to things is part of that.
Or like my friend who has a sheep farm - yes, she got a livestock guard dog for security purposes, and that dog is fantastic security for her flock. He's this big old white dog who scares away cougars and coyotes, and she hasn't lost a sheep to a predator since she got him. This also applies to the fact that the police and military have used dogs for various security-related purposes for hundreds of years. There are legitimate, official traditions of using dogs for security purposes.
So some dogs do have their benefits re: security, but unless you have a farm it shouldn't be someone's only reason.
no subject
And you're right - there are times (especially working dogs on a farm or in the country) where a dog means an increase in safety.
But I think - as you pointed out with this bit:
But I also first and foremost see it as my responsibility to protect my dogs and keep them safe, not the other way around.
Authors seem to ignore that owners have to care about the animal as well, and seem to completely disregard how much time, energy, and attention (plus money!) dogs need.
no subject
Authors seem to ignore that owners have to care about the animal as well, and seem to completely disregard how much time, energy, and attention (plus money!) dogs need.
THIS.
And I think, tangentially, authors forget what things like that tell the reader about the character and that it might be broadcasting things they don't want (like irresponsibility, etc).
no subject
I see getting a dog as getting a companion/family member who provides many, many benefits to my home and life. "Will bark at strangers" and "will keep me company when my husband is working late" are definitely two of the benefits on the list, but they aren't the only benefits, nor are they even at the top of the list. "Will chase raccoons away from the chicken coop" is also on the list, but even farther down it.
Anyway. Someone said "dogs" and that's all I'm thinking about right now, since in eleven days I bring home an eight-week-old puppy and I'm currently dying.
no subject
no subject
IDEK
no subject
Lucky girl.
no subject
no, thank goodness
no subject
I think a dog can only provide effective protection if:
1. He or she has been trained properly. If people can't defend themselves effectively without training, how can you expect your dog to do the same?
2. If they're wary/suspicious of strangers because dogs have different personalities. For example, my friend's dogs are more overly affectionate to strangers than threatening. Any burglar that came to their house would probably get licked and jumped on rather than bitten to death.
no subject
Happens all the time, because some dogs just love people!
If they're wary/suspicious of strangers because dogs have different personalities. For example, my friend's dogs are more overly affectionate to strangers than threatening. Any burglar that came to their house would probably get licked and jumped on rather than bitten to death.
Exactly.
no subject
ETA: That said, reading the further explanation, yeah, I get where this is coming from. I know exactly the story you're talking about and while I didn't read it as that and it DID read in-character in the moment, I can head nod along with this. And I do think the author set it up in-story - at least to my satisfaction - that it was not something that the female character would do without interest on her own terms with input from a partner. It would be a different story if that willingness wasn't there - pet ownership is a big thing! And I agree about my priorities being the dogs being kept safe and okay and that feelings have a TON to do with pet guardianship and the responsibilities inherent in that. (I didn't get a cat until I was 99% sure I could care for her and provide for her with a bunch of different backups.)
no subject
That said, reading the further explanation, yeah, I get where this is coming from. I know exactly the story you're talking about and while I didn't read it as that and it DID read in-character in the moment, I can head nod along with this. And I do think the author set it up in-story - at least to my satisfaction - that it was not something that the female character would do without interest on her own terms with input from a partner.
I have a feeling that it wasn't the same story because, trust me, with the story that prompted this, it WAS NOT in character.