Are different views on pets a deal-breaker for you in relationships?

[Lavender Brown]

Would you find it difficult to pursue a relationship with someone who doesn't share your interest in having pets (even one... not talking about a 'cat lady' situation or anything).

I don't mean someone who truly hates or abuses animals, but someone who has never had a pet, and says he will probably never want to have one, and doesn't understand people who consider them to be a significant part of daily life.

I'm not someone who usually has a lot of "deal-breakers," but to me this seems like an important difference in lifestyle/values. What do you think?

[flvegan]

1. For me, that would be a yes.

If she didn't like dogs, she'd probably not be happy with someone that runs a rescue.

[Iggo]

2. Yeah, like if she has any.

:hide:

[lunatica]

3. Deal breaker for me

Anyone who doesn't even think about animals or have any experience with them simply isn't a well rounded human being in my opinion. Pets teach us more things than we teach them. They are who they are without pretenses or political intrigue and they always remind us of our obligations to all living things.

Anyone who didn't grow up with pets has a void in their life they don't even know about.

[Boojatta]

5. "they are without pretenses or political intrigue"

In other words, you don't know anything about cats.
;)

[lunatica]

11. LOL! I thought of that when I wrote it

But the fact is there's no pretense in cat politics. It's the real thing. They really are superior.

I've had many cats in my life. Usually both cats and dogs at the same time.

[wickerwoman]

8. It could be an income thing though.

I know people who couldn't afford pets growing up. I also know people who had siblings or parents who were allergic.

I think people can develop a relationship with nature even if they don't have pets and the fact that they didn't have them as children wouldn't prejudice me against them when choosing a life partner.

[lunatica]

10. The OP was specifying someone who would prefer not to have pets

Other than that I agree with you. Not having any pets when growing up is NOT a deal breaker, but anyone who definitely doesn't want pets is a deal breaker for me.

[Elmo39]

63. As My Grandmother

always said...never trust a person who doesn't like animals or that animals don't like. IMO Good Advice

[Danger Mouse]

4. As a dog-lover, I'd have to say yes.

If they don't understand why somebody loves a pet, I can see it leading to a lot of strife when a pet is destructive or becomes expensive.

[Lavender Brown]

16. I agree. This hasn't been a major discussion yet or anything...

I just don't know how to put it... "Oh hey, by the way, I'll probably always want to have a cat or dog in my home." Some people think I'm looking for something to find fault with, but I'm really put off by his attitude.

[Danger Mouse]

24. Well, what IS his attitude?

I'm still your friend, you know.
You could always pm if you want. :hi:

[kayakjohnny]

6. Most of what I do seems to be a deal breaker in relationships.

So this could possibly fit well into that scheme.

[ScreamingMeemie]

9. I don't know...

some of us find eating on the floor with one's cat charming.

[kayakjohnny]

14. D'oh!

:P

[ScreamingMeemie]

7. I was never going to have pets...and look at me now, 2 catsx a dog/human

hybrid. Because there's a probably in there, I think one little puppy or kitten would change that person's mind. I know it did mine. Now I treat them like potato chips. You can't have just one.

[Brickbat]

12. I guess not.

I never thought about having pets, and after Mr. Brickbat and I moved in together he said he wanted a dog, and had always wanted one. So we got one. Frankly, I think what he actually wants is a cat, but he's allergic, and we've had dogs ever since.

[Sanity Claws]

13. If the person is not willing to reconsider, yes, it's a dealbreaker

Some people may not have been raised in a home with pets and simply do not know the pleasures of having a pet. If they're open minded, the relationship could work.
However, if the person says he is dead set against pets, forget about it.

[wickerwoman]

15. Not for me.

I *love* cats and have almost always had a few in my life. But they are expensive as hell (I can't afford to keep them now) and dealing with illness or injury can be absolutely emotionally devastating. Cat or dog ownership is a serious 20+ year commitment and most pets will cost thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars over the course of their lives.

What would be a deal-breaker for me would be someone who approached pet ownership too casually. We'd have to be in a seriously committed long-term relationship and agree that we weren't go to move too many times before I would consider co-owning a pet with someone. I'd also have to think about work security and schedules... would someone be home with the pet most of the time? before I could consider it. They really are like practice kids.

So while I love pets, I can also understand good arguments for not having them- especially in the early stages of a relationship or for a couple that is experiencing financial instability or wants to travel a lot.

[Lavender Brown]

18. There are definitely many good reasons people choose not to have pets

and I don't have anything against those who simply aren't animal people. This person just seems to have kind of a negative/dismissive attitude towards pets and people who have them.

[wickerwoman]

21. Having a dismissive attitude towards anything would be the dealbreaker for me I guess.

They can feel any way they like about pets and pet owners as long as they aren't snide about it.

:hi:

[kimi]

17. I'd like to think that I'm open-minded about almost everything

but nope, I don't believe I could be happy with someone who didn't want or like pets. And maybe I'd be considered a "cat lady", with six indoor cats and 1 feral I take care of outside. But it says a lot about a person's character, IMO, if they can't open their hearts and minds to share life with sentient beings other than humans.

That's just the way it is.

[goldcanyonaz]

19. My husband was the same way until we got a dog, now he can't imagine his life without him.

[Blue_In_AK]

20. I don't particularly care for dogs,

but my husband does, so I tolerate the little Shih-tzu. It's what you do sometimes for the one you love. Of course, I set ground rules, so the responsibility for the dog is strictly his unless I'm just in a good mood and feel like playing with her or something. She IS kind of cute, for a dog. And, of course, I would take care of her if he wasn't here for some reason.

If you are such an animal lover and the other person involved here isn't willing to compromise a bit to make you happy, then maybe the relationship isn't going to work out. To me, it's indicative of a certain uncompromising mindset -- on both people's parts, really -- and the two people involved might be more compatible with different partners, people more like themselves.

I've been in noncompromising, stressful relationships before, and they are not fun. My current husband and I (who were lost-and-found high school sweethearts) are so alike in so many ways that we have very little stress in our lives, not much to disagree about. So it's easy for us to compromise on little things like whether or not to have a pet because we respect each other and want each other to be happy. Maybe it sounds kind of boring, but it sure beats the other way.

So, anyway, be aware of little things when you're contemplating a relationship, because they can turn into big things later.

[mitchum]

22. deal-breaker (n/t)

[BuelahWitch]

23. Love me, love my cats

I've chosen a pet over a lover before and would do so again.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

25. The cats are part of the deal.

If they don't want the cats they don't get me.


... Not that I've had any offers lately, but that's a whole 'nother issue... :(

[old mark]

26. Since I like dogs more than many humans, the answer is yes. nt

[struggle4progress]

27. Yep. I won't have any around permanently. I like dogs and cats, but I'm allergic to dander

I can certainly interact nicely enough with your dogs and cats in your house for a few hours but I can't tolerate continual extensive exposure

So they ain't livin in my house and they certainly ain't sleepin in my bed

[LeftyMom]

28. I just laughed aloud reading this.

Uh, we both do rescue.

[quakerboy]

29. Hells yes.

A person who had never had a pet would be an instant deal breaker for me. Even for just friendship, it would instantly put me on high alert. Everyone I have known who did not have pets as children were lacking in their ability to empathize or deal with people. Something about just having childhood pets makes a difference, in my observation.

Now, if someone just has allergies and cant put up with it, or knows they live a life too busy to reliably care for an animal and give it the attention it needs, that's a totally different thing. Or even if you just had differences, ie a dog person and a cat person. My wife and I don't have pets because for the time being, we both enjoy monopolizing each others attentions.

[Arugula Latte]

30. I couldn't go out with a non-cat lover. Luckily, I married one. :)

[mkultra]

31. Im immediatley out on anyone how considers their pet to be a "significant part"

of daily life. Pets are pets and people who elevate them to people status seem mildly ill. Its almost like they want human interaction but cant handle the part where the other person communicates back.

[Brickbat]

37. Ah, I agree with that. I never dated anyone who treated their pets like people, but I had friends

who did date people like that, and I totally disagree with that attitude. I find it weird.

[Arugula Latte]

47. I think people are weird who don't make their pets part of the family.

[Brickbat]

48. That's not the first time I've heard that.

[mkultra]

53. and to me that's overt personification of your pet

which is weird.

[Lavender Brown]

40. One can consider pets significant without thinking of them as humans

It's not necessarily elevating them to something they're not, or preferring them to humans and human interaction. What you describe is hardly representative of most people who love animals.

[mkultra]

52. well, i can tell you this

I like dogs. I like them because they are friendly and helpful and even the smallest dog is great for home security. I have had four dogs in my life and the one that meant the most to me was my childhood dog. Now that i am an adult, i could easily go with or without a dog.

They are not a "significant part of my daily life." People who have no kids but claim their pets are "their babies" creep me out. I have compassion for animals and i enjoy their presence but anyone who integrates an animal into his or her daily function as a necessary component(sans service animals of course) is going to be an automatic "NO deal" for me.

In contrast, i have a few friends that i consider to be a significant part of my daily existence.

[RadiationTherapy]

59. Yes. When I hear the word 'fur-baby' I am on my way out.

[Lavender Brown]

60. just to clarify

When I said "significant part" I simply meant that pets have meaning to me, not that they occupy or encroach upon the place in life that friends, children, or an SO otherwise would hold, which is what you seem to be taking it to mean. :hi:

[mkultra]

70. well, perhaps, but maybe not

I'm not even talking about the crazy cat lady effect. To me the phrase "significant part of daily life" is telling. My dog is not a "significant part of my daily life." I like animals, especially dogs, but i can easily do without one for the rest of my life. My dog has meaning to me, i think its the degree of meaning which differs.

[Orsino]

32. Probably. Not sure. n/t

[dropkickpa]

33. deal breaker for me

and if he/she were a cat person I'd be iffy on them. I'm a confirmed dog person and am very allergic to cats. Just cant have them around me.

No pets at all people are just fucking weird.

[CBR]

34. I couldn't do it. I love animals too much. nt

[Shell Beau]

35. I think it would be a deal breaker.

I have always had and will always have pets. Especially dogs. So if you can't handle dogs, we probably wouldn't be a good fit.

[muffin1]

36. It would certainly be a deal-breaker for me.

Most people I know who don't understand why people like animals are dicks.

[fizzgig]

38. it would be for me

i have spent less than one year of my nearly 29 years without a cat and we come as a package.

the fact that my husband loves my cats as much as i do is one of the many, many wonderful things about him

[Withywindle]

39. Not an absolute deal-breaker, but definitely a warning sign.

People who don't 'get' pets seem kind of emotionally stunted to me. Like they can only love and communicate with other humans using language, they don't get all the myriad ways other species communicate with us non-verbally, and they have a lack of curiosity about it that I find off-putting.

Unless it's something they're willing to be flexible about, it probably makes a long-term, serious relationship a non-starter. No way am I going to live without animals for the rest of my life, nuh-uh. I'm better off not even going there with someone who would want that, and those people are better off finding someone who shares their feelings on that.

[Deep13]

41. No. Good thing too.

We would never have had our 18-year relationship or our ten year marriage if it had been.

[hippywife]

42. I wouldn't care for it.

Usually, not always, people like that end up being okay with the pet once they've been around it enough. If he's still against it after that, I'm afraid I'd give him the boot before I would even think about finding a new home for my pet.

I look at my cats at times and just simply marvel at just having them cohabitate with with us. It's really awesome to have these different little beings sharing your living space and developing relationships with them. I would not want to ever be without them.

:hi:

[Jade Fox]

43. Allergies don't give you a lot of choice......

Cat lovers tend to act as though I could get over it if I wanted to, which doesn't make one feel very valued.

[WildEyedLiberal]

44. Maybe - I don't have any desire to live with a big stinky dog my whole life

No offense to those who love big stinky dogs, but having them in the house is very much not my cup of tea. My sister has always had large dogs, and her house smells overwhelmingly of dog. Not to mention all the various chewed-up items (because not even the best pet owner can watch every dog 24/7), the jumping (because unless you're Cesar Milan or have money to take your dog to be trained, most dogs will jump at least a little when they're very excited), and the constant, constant maintenance.

I don't hate dogs. I do prefer smaller dogs for many reasons, and might consider owning one of my own someday, if my future potential husband is a dog lover. Left to my own devices, I might someday own my own cat, under the right circumstances. But frankly, I love to travel, and so as long as I remain single, I doubt I'll own an animal, as that would mark the end of my ability to take a spur-of-the-moment trip if I so chose.

I find the judgments against people who don't wish to own pets harsh and a bit ridiculous, to be quite honest. Not everyone who doesn't have the desire to actually own a pet is an animal hater or thinks animals or animal people are stupid. I grew up with a ton of animals and both my parents and my sister love animals. I enjoy them, too, especially cats. But I value my independence more, especially at this stage of my life, and I don't appreciate being stereotyped as "emotionally stunted" because I haven't structured my life around pet ownership.

[Bunny]

50. Thanks for saying this. I can't believe some of the people here.

It's pretty goddamned obnoxious to declare that someone who doesn't want a pet must be emotionally disturbed. What great leaps in reasoning does it take to reach that conclusion, for fuck sake? :eyes:

Having said that, I would probably be leery of someone who didn't want at least one dog, without having what I would consider a valid reason for it, like allergies or something. It wouldn't necessarily be a dealbreaker, but I'd be concerned.

[Withywindle]

54. Sorry about that "emotionally stunted" remark (I know that was me)

I don't mean people who have valid reasons not to have pets. I just think it's weird and kind of sad to only be ABLE to love members of your own species. That doesn't sound like you.

It's very possible to take spur-of-the-moment trips if you have a cat, as long as you have a network of friends and neighbors willing to look in on the critter (and most people who have cats themselves won't ask for money to do this, only that you return the favor when they need it). They really are independent enough to be left to their own devices for a while as long as there's plenty of food and water.

[Lavender Brown]

61. Sorry...

I didn't mean for this to be a pile-on against people who don't want pets. Like I said, the guy I'm describing isn't some cold unemotional person (obviously, or I wouldn't have gotten involved to begin with) and I wouldn't make that assumption about anyone just because they aren't interested in having a pet. :hi:

[Flaxbee]

45. Fortunately, my husband had been adopted by a cat before

we met, and well and truly loved that cat.

But regardless, he knew I came with Clarisse, my psychotic calico. Clarisse was part of the bargain.


I would not be in a long term relationship with someone who didn't understand the joys of living with cats and/or dogs. I can understand not having time or a lifestyle to care for pets and therefore not having any, but the person would have to love and respect any pet that did eventually come along.

I have a sibling who is sometimes gone for months at a time for work - no way can she have a pet, even though she specializes in species and habitat preservation. She'd LOVE to have a dog, but it would be unfair to the dog.

[Kali]

46. "views" are one thing

as long as I get my way, and my pets, they can view it however they want}(

[CBGLuthier]

49. I would just as soon not have any pets. 2 dogs. 3 cats. 1 wife of almost 25 years.

Sometimes you got to bend a little.

[tango-tee]

51. It would be a deal-breaker if my prospective mate simply didn't LIKE animals.

In which case I would know without doubt that we were just not meant for each other.

But it would be a different story if for reasons of upbringing, career, what have you, this person simply had never been exposed to pets before. Then we could work on this issue together.

[Hawkeye-X]

55. I knew my wife didn't like pets

We did give it a try. Twice actually, with the same pet. Didn't work out, now he's living out his years with a friend of ours since 2004. He'll be 8 years old May 2nd.

Hawkeye-X

[elocs]

56. For me it's a moot point since I am retired from relationships.

I've had dogs and cats, and dogs with cats. My current cat is 16 years old and when she dies, no more pets for me.

[Heidi]

57. It sure would be. Fortunately, CMW and I both are absolutely

unapologetic lovers and protectors of all animals, domestic, homeless, wild and otherwise. :^)

[LibertyLover]

58. Yes, it certainly would be for me

I'm lucky that my husband always wanted a dog and when we married I had one. Since then we've had as many as 5 at once and now are down to 3. He also likes rats and gave me my first pair. For Valentine's Day this year he gave me 2 more because the pair I had are old and one (now dead) was quite ill.

It would have been more of a deal breaker for me than children. I wanted kids, but when we married he didn't particularly and in fact had had a vasectomy years before. He also didn't want to adopt. I put my dreams of being a mom behind me and married him anyway. After we adopted our first greyhound he decided that adoption wasn't a bar to loving someone or something. Our daughter is 7 and we have had her for 6 years.

[Withywindle]

65. Now that is a happy ending.

:loveya:

[LibertyLover]

68. Yes, it is -

I sometimes look at the kidlet, the dogs, the rats and the husband and wonder how did I get so lucky - of course that's usually when they are all asleep. :evilgrin:

[Dappleganger]

62. Love me, love my dogs.

That's pretty much the end of it. Dh has always accepted it although he definitely shows preference for the bigger dogs.

[Richard Steele]

64. Absolutely a deal-breaker. If you don't love cats, don't try to date me. nm

[Withywindle]

66. I guess when I really think about, it's not so much a deal-breaker as...an oddity.

Pretty much every serious relationship I've ever had (and there have been quite a few) was with someone who also liked animals. I've lived with dogs, cats, fish, frogs, turtles, rats, birds, snakes, guinea pigs, ferrets, you name it, who came with various partners and roommates...(OK, ya know what? A tarantula might be a cold, hard deal-breaker. It's the only creature on earth I can't be in the same room with without freaking and shuddering just a little.)

I think I have spent my adult life in dating situations where there were lots of fish in the sea, and every one I really bonded with had at least an interest in animals. I have very few friends or relatives without pets either. It's one of those "like attracts like" areas of affinity. I have honestly never had to seriously confront the question of getting serious with a non-animal-lover.

It might just be that animal-affinity is one of the features I find most attractive, for lovers or friends, and I just have not come into contact with people who lack it very often. I don't know if it's a deal-breaker or not, but it's definitely a potential obstacle on a level with religious difference or the vegan/omnivore or smoker/non-smoker divide.

[Lucian]

67. Smoking is the only deal-breaker for me.

I would never date a woman who smokes.

[pitohui]

69. a deal breaker for health reasons

i know a LOT of nutty cat people and those people, no matter how nice they might otherwise be, are ineligible for any type of serious relationship with me because no cat, no pet is worth the sacrifice of my health -- i do know people who have allergies/asthma who have made the choice otherwise but it seems a bit self-hating and desperate "okay, i'll give up my ability to breathe so you can keep the cat"