I wonder is those on their mighty high horse- you know, the ones who've never cheated on their partners, abandoned their children or even being convicted of crimes- would dare to criticise you

Are we really supposed to 'let go' any kind of behaviour if it's been done in the name of lonelyness? I'm not trying to cause a row here but I honestly cannot see how anyone can defend this behaviour.

BTW, I don't pretend to be any better or worse then any other person but I certainly do not hurt animals that cannot speak for themselves. It's basic morals. Some people clearly need to invest in some.

As you quite rightly point out, from what we've seen on the program, she probably bought the situation on herself and I'm more than likely wasting my sympathy on her.

However, for those reasons, I thought the story was a very sad admission from a woman who we've seen argue and fight her corner with the best of them. I'm just surprised that noone on any of the TV shows picked up on this. Even those, who dislike her could have argued (like yourself) that she was probably lonely because she appears to be so difficult. However, people have remained focused on what she did rather, than asking what led up to it.

I don't see anyone here defending what she's done! The act has been done now so what do you suppose we do? Move on and hope she never repeats it again or criticise her from our high horses from now till eternity?

BTW, is it better to hurt other humans rather than animals purely because humans should be able to stick up for themselves?

Maybe I'm being heartless here but I seriously couldn't give a shiney sh*te what led up to it. As far as I'm concerned, she could drink herself into a coma without involving her dog.

Says it all really!

No need to answer post 29 now!

I was appalled when I heard her story about her dog.

I live alone, and have in the past been horrendously lonely and actually suffered from clinical depression (and have tried drinking as a panacea - doesn't work, incidentally. It only heightened everything and made them seem ten times worse). At no time have I even considered giving alcohol to my cat(s) - because I love animals and would never want to hurt them.

I consider myself fairly self-centred (you get that way when you live alone - it sort of comes with the territory), but I'm not self-centered enough to experiment with alcohol or anything else which might harm my animal(s) regardless of how down I might be (and, as I have stated, I suffered from clinical depression).

There is absolutely no excuse for this and I am horrified that anyone who had an animal would even consider such a thing. But then, having said that, I'm not at all surprised. Human beings can be absolutely ghastly (not all of them, of course,) I much prefer animals.

And I have never hurt a human in my entire life either - I abhor violence and would try never put myself in that position. But when making the analogy between humans and animals - animals don't have a choice (because for some unknown reason, despite the many acts of cruelty that are committed toward them, cats and dogs especially can be too trusting). Humans know what alcohol does to them and can make a reasoned decision not to drink - an animal can't.

So yes, it was cruel and thoughtless and there is absolutely no excuse.

But why do you keep bringing up about hurting humans? What has this got to do with anything? The issue is the dog, not a human.

I only let my cat smoke because it led such a stressful life you must understand. It died of heat exhaustion when I took it with me to the sauna, thinking that might be a better way of coping with the stress. How wrong I was.

Because like dogs, humans have feelings too!

On another note, some of the posts I've read on this thread remind me of stories I've read about animal rights activists (not to be confused with animal welfare activists) who neglect their partners and kids and send death threats to people working in research labs and actually physically abuse such workers including digging up the graves of people related to such workers!

Pathetic!

A point very well made.

Exactly.. the sad fact there is no justification for it, regardless of what led up to it and therefore all arguments for it to be excused are bound to be a bit shaky because the moral high ground has gone. All this flannel about humans, and adultery.. all these 'Christian' rules etc, not one of them says 'if you're feeling a bit on your todd, get a drink for yourself and one for your dog'. I'm a poet dontcha know.

I think the OP needs to think about whether she'd be quite so sympathetic to someone who she'd just read about in a newspaper needing to get her dogs stomach pumped due to drink, rather than her favourite contestant in a reality show.

PS as an owner of two beautiful dogs this is a bit of a sore point. They really are defenceless and rely on your kindness and goodwill to do right by them.

But the thing is Komol, no one even mentioned about hurting a human. My whole point is about a dog being force fed something that is toxic and dangerous for their little body because someone was 'lonely'. YOU decided it was about human verses animal. You are clearly trying to make some kind of other point.

I am in no way an animal rights activist. I have a cat and I grew up with a dog. I am not a veggie. I agree with animal testing for medical reasons and I disagree for comestic. I know the balance in life but I do not hurt animals for purely selfish reasons. Simple as that really.
Last edited by ebjeebe : 28-11-2006 at 15:43

Yep, us defending a defenceless animal makes us animal rights activists. Stretching it a bit. Or just trying to detract from the facts.

Because the human in question was hurting at the time. Not once has anyone condoned what she did. I would be horrified if I realised I'd done that to my dog which, is why I can also feel sympathy for her.

Am I alone in finding those people who set up stalls with gruesome pictures of animals being tested on and mistreated fascinating?

Without fail there seems to be two kinds of people behind these stalls... Either an elderly woman with a lovely smile, slightly overweight, and no fashion sense whatsoever, or some young angrogenous looking thing wearing army combat gear. Sometimes it's even both.

If you think about it honestly, do you think you could ever be that wasted to do something like that though?

I've been at low points and I've been totally trollied, I just don't think it would ever cross my mind.

I knew a man who owned a hotel for cats that smoke and drank. And then he died.

I don't think I've seen one of those stall type things since the '90s.

'Am I alone in finding those people who set up stalls with gruesome pictures of animals being tested on and mistreated fascinating?

Without fail there seems to be two kinds of people behind these stalls... Either an elderly woman with a lovely smile, slightly overweight, and no fashion sense whatsoever, or some young angrogenous looking thing wearing army combat gear. Sometimes it's even both.'

- Don't you find though that the elderly and kindly looking woman is the far more effective because of her gruesome relish in telling you the gory facts 'and then they tear his head off' whilst type b - combat wearer, earnestly states statistics at you. In a fairly posh voice. Or is that just in North London?

I went past one in Oxford Street a few months back. Or near Oxford Street anyway. They had set up stall near the man who shouts Don't Be A Sinner, Be A Winner.

Wow. I hope I wasn't being likened to an animal right activist!

Considering how a couple of months before my mum died our front door (in a very nice neighbourhood in a town where things like this don't happen!) was firebombed - (suspected animal rights activists who got my last name confused with a huge meat factory owner in town). That hastened my mother's death, by the way (and it almost killed my cat, who was sleeping behind the door at the time!).

And I hold no truck with animal rights activists - whilst I applaud the motives (being against animal cruelty etc), I abhor their methods. And any animals they 'free' from captivity would die in the wild.

I do have two cats (from rescue sanctuaries). I lost my beloved 13 year old earlier this year. I support animal welfare charities (WWF, Cats protection, PDSA etc), but I do not agree with the terrorist methods employed by those who give animal welfare people a bad name.

And I wouldn't ignore any human suffering. Nor would I send death threats to anyone working in vivisection (even though I don't agree with it at all and refuse to buy cosmetics for that reason and don't buy French anything because the French have always insisted on testing on animals for everything).

Stating that people on here remind one of animal rights activists because they don't like cruelty to animals is a sweeping generalisation and an insulting one. Especially when you know nothing about the posters nor their background.

And giving a dog alcohol because you were lonely is not an excuse. In any world. (If Phina had said she'd done it because she was stupid, then I might have understood. Because she was - exceedingly stupid. However, she is a supposedly intelligent woman; therefore she has no excuse).

He was an albino.

He's actually more famous than half of the contestants on this years I'm A Celeb.