Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why a grown woman would starve herself or work out to get the body of a 12yo boy. Most men I know want a woman with a woman's body.

But they do like 'em without hair like a child.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From way back: I think the way puppy mills and the shady rescue organizations work is that the "expected donation" you make when you "rescue" a dog from one of these rescues gets funneled back to the puppy mills with percentages taken out along the way. Go to a random rescue fair, how many times are you vaguely told that some dog came from "some" rescue in the south somewhere? I think they are routed though shady nonprofit to shady nonprofit until they get to wealthy areas.

People who are blindly smug about rescuing drive me nuts. There are some good rescue organizations but many aren't.

I don't have all the details, but friends of mine in South Carolina are part of a underground for rescuing dogs. They said so many of the shelters are kill ones, and there's so much backyard breeding, that the rescues further north rely on volunteers who each move the dogs up the coast to no kill rescues.

Yes, that goes on too.

I think basically a lot of people who are patting themselves on the back for "rescuing" are essentially subsidizing puppy mills and backyard breeders. Plus, as another PP pointed out, the same people don't seem to have much trouble eating factory farmed meat.

I think this whole idea about rescue organizations subsidizing puppy mills is a conspiracy for people to feel better about adopting breeder dogs. The only rescue dogs I've ever had have been full on mutts (like hound dog mixes) that no puppy mill is trying to breed. And I used to live in the south. Tons of people do not spay/neuter down there, so it's not surprising a lot of rescues come from down there. Also, pretty much everyone I know with rescue dogs tends to be more educated than people I know with breeder dogs. Think along the lines of highly educated, top-tier attorneys who are vegetarians or actually go out to local farms to stock their freezer with free range meat. I know some first time dog owners living in hicksville who thought they'd be all fancy and get a breeder golden and now post on facebook with #goldensofinstagram a million times a day like it's some status symbol to have a purebred dog. They are incredibly unhealthy, overweight, and are the ones who eat factory farm garbage.

I'm sure they're not the standard, but it goes to show you these stupid stereotypes about rescue people filtering money to puppy mills and eating in humanely treated meat is not necessarily true for all or most rescuers.

Rescuing a mutt doesn't mean you're not subsidizing backyard breeders. Honestly, use a little logic. Where do you think this supply of convenient dogs comes from? I don't care if you adopt a rescue dog, just don't think you're more ethical than somebody who goes to an ethical breeder and don't go around crowing about your "rescue" and how awesome you are. I just am so tired of the blind bragging of the "rescue" crowd when it's obvious with even the slightest bit of investigation what's going on with so many of these shady "rescues."

I'm seriously trying to understand this logic. So backyard breeders are breeding mutts to give away to rescues? There
Is seriously no logic to this. I did a dog DNA test and my dog came back with at least 7 different, very random breeds of all different sizes. Who exactly is breeding all these random types of dogs together and trying to sell them? Don't get me wrong -- I love my dog, but he's not exactly something you'd go pay top dollar for if you care about lineage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. I'm only on page one and I'm so disgusted by the nastiness on this thread, I'm out of here. You are really gross people.

bye felicia

Yeah, sorry, not Felicia. You think there's only one person who feels this way?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe most working mom's wish they were SAHM. I think they are usually jealous.

I think the reverse.

Wouldn't they get a job if that was the case?

No, because they've rendered themselves irrelevant and convince themselves that their kids benefit from their laziness. What's more hypocritical than the SAHM of a daughter who pushes her kid to excel academically?

SAHMs are lazy, but spending your day sitting at a computer trolling dcum takes lots of energy?

I am a SAHM with 3 kids in school all day. It's 11:30am in my area. So far, I have made my kids breakfast, packed their lunch and taken them to school. I spent about 45 minutes volunteering in my son's class. I went for a jog, did 2 loads of laundry, and a load of dishes. then I paid the bills. Dinner is in the crock-pot. Getting ready to shower and then heading to a meeting for a volunteer committee that I chair. Then I will pick up my kids, as well as the neighbor kids since I will baby sit them until their mom gets home from work. With all that done, our evening will run smoothly. I will have no problem finding time to take my daughter to the library to do some research for a school project. Then I will enjoy reading with my son. After that, I will enjoy a glass of wine and Netflix with DH.

Enjoy your stressful, frantic evening with your family, PP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From way back: I think the way puppy mills and the shady rescue organizations work is that the "expected donation" you make when you "rescue" a dog from one of these rescues gets funneled back to the puppy mills with percentages taken out along the way. Go to a random rescue fair, how many times are you vaguely told that some dog came from "some" rescue in the south somewhere? I think they are routed though shady nonprofit to shady nonprofit until they get to wealthy areas.

People who are blindly smug about rescuing drive me nuts. There are some good rescue organizations but many aren't.

I don't have all the details, but friends of mine in South Carolina are part of a underground for rescuing dogs. They said so many of the shelters are kill ones, and there's so much backyard breeding, that the rescues further north rely on volunteers who each move the dogs up the coast to no kill rescues.

Yes, that goes on too.

I think basically a lot of people who are patting themselves on the back for "rescuing" are essentially subsidizing puppy mills and backyard breeders. Plus, as another PP pointed out, the same people don't seem to have much trouble eating factory farmed meat.

I think this whole idea about rescue organizations subsidizing puppy mills is a conspiracy for people to feel better about adopting breeder dogs. The only rescue dogs I've ever had have been full on mutts (like hound dog mixes) that no puppy mill is trying to breed. And I used to live in the south. Tons of people do not spay/neuter down there, so it's not surprising a lot of rescues come from down there. Also, pretty much everyone I know with rescue dogs tends to be more educated than people I know with breeder dogs. Think along the lines of highly educated, top-tier attorneys who are vegetarians or actually go out to local farms to stock their freezer with free range meat. I know some first time dog owners living in hicksville who thought they'd be all fancy and get a breeder golden and now post on facebook with #goldensofinstagram a million times a day like it's some status symbol to have a purebred dog. They are incredibly unhealthy, overweight, and are the ones who eat factory farm garbage.

I'm sure they're not the standard, but it goes to show you these stupid stereotypes about rescue people filtering money to puppy mills and eating in humanely treated meat is not necessarily true for all or most rescuers.

Rescuing a mutt doesn't mean you're not subsidizing backyard breeders. Honestly, use a little logic. Where do you think this supply of convenient dogs comes from? I don't care if you adopt a rescue dog, just don't think you're more ethical than somebody who goes to an ethical breeder and don't go around crowing about your "rescue" and how awesome you are. I just am so tired of the blind bragging of the "rescue" crowd when it's obvious with even the slightest bit of investigation what's going on with so many of these shady "rescues."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe most working mom's wish they were SAHM. I think they are usually jealous.

I think the reverse.

Wouldn't they get a job if that was the case?

No, because they've rendered themselves irrelevant and convince themselves that their kids benefit from their laziness. What's more hypocritical than the SAHM of a daughter who pushes her kid to excel academically?

Anonymous wrote:I believe most working mom's wish they were SAHM. I think they are usually jealous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From way back: I think the way puppy mills and the shady rescue organizations work is that the "expected donation" you make when you "rescue" a dog from one of these rescues gets funneled back to the puppy mills with percentages taken out along the way. Go to a random rescue fair, how many times are you vaguely told that some dog came from "some" rescue in the south somewhere? I think they are routed though shady nonprofit to shady nonprofit until they get to wealthy areas.

People who are blindly smug about rescuing drive me nuts. There are some good rescue organizations but many aren't.

I don't have all the details, but friends of mine in South Carolina are part of a underground for rescuing dogs. They said so many of the shelters are kill ones, and there's so much backyard breeding, that the rescues further north rely on volunteers who each move the dogs up the coast to no kill rescues.

Yes, that goes on too.

I think basically a lot of people who are patting themselves on the back for "rescuing" are essentially subsidizing puppy mills and backyard breeders. Plus, as another PP pointed out, the same people don't seem to have much trouble eating factory farmed meat.

I think this whole idea about rescue organizations subsidizing puppy mills is a conspiracy for people to feel better about adopting breeder dogs. The only rescue dogs I've ever had have been full on mutts (like hound dog mixes) that no puppy mill is trying to breed. And I used to live in the south. Tons of people do not spay/neuter down there, so it's not surprising a lot of rescues come from down there. Also, pretty much everyone I know with rescue dogs tends to be more educated than people I know with breeder dogs. Think along the lines of highly educated, top-tier attorneys who are vegetarians or actually go out to local farms to stock their freezer with free range meat. I know some first time dog owners living in hicksville who thought they'd be all fancy and get a breeder golden and now post on facebook with #goldensofinstagram a million times a day like it's some status symbol to have a purebred dog. They are incredibly unhealthy, overweight, and are the ones who eat factory farm garbage.

I'm sure they're not the standard, but it goes to show you these stupid stereotypes about rescue people filtering money to puppy mills and eating in humanely treated meat is not necessarily true for all or most rescuers.

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why a grown woman would starve herself or work out to get the body of a 12yo boy. Most men I know want a woman with a woman's body.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From way back: I think the way puppy mills and the shady rescue organizations work is that the "expected donation" you make when you "rescue" a dog from one of these rescues gets funneled back to the puppy mills with percentages taken out along the way. Go to a random rescue fair, how many times are you vaguely told that some dog came from "some" rescue in the south somewhere? I think they are routed though shady nonprofit to shady nonprofit until they get to wealthy areas.

People who are blindly smug about rescuing drive me nuts. There are some good rescue organizations but many aren't.

I don't have all the details, but friends of mine in South Carolina are part of a underground for rescuing dogs. They said so many of the shelters are kill ones, and there's so much backyard breeding, that the rescues further north rely on volunteers who each move the dogs up the coast to no kill rescues.

Yes, that goes on too.

I think basically a lot of people who are patting themselves on the back for "rescuing" are essentially subsidizing puppy mills and backyard breeders. Plus, as another PP pointed out, the same people don't seem to have much trouble eating factory farmed meat.

I think this whole idea about rescue organizations subsidizing puppy mills is a conspiracy for people to feel better about adopting breeder dogs. The only rescue dogs I've ever had have been full on mutts (like hound dog mixes) that no puppy mill is trying to breed. And I used to live in the south. Tons of people do not spay/neuter down there, so it's not surprising a lot of rescues come from down there. Also, pretty much everyone I know with rescue dogs tends to be more educated than people I know with breeder dogs. Think along the lines of highly educated, top-tier attorneys who are vegetarians or actually go out to local farms to stock their freezer with free range meat. I know some first time dog owners living in hicksville who thought they'd be all fancy and get a breeder golden and now post on facebook with #goldensofinstagram a million times a day like it's some status symbol to have a purebred dog. They are incredibly unhealthy, overweight, and are the ones who eat factory farm garbage.

I'm sure they're not the standard, but it goes to show you these stupid stereotypes about rescue people filtering money to puppy mills and eating in humanely treated meat is not necessarily true for all or most rescuers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From way back: I think the way puppy mills and the shady rescue organizations work is that the "expected donation" you make when you "rescue" a dog from one of these rescues gets funneled back to the puppy mills with percentages taken out along the way. Go to a random rescue fair, how many times are you vaguely told that some dog came from "some" rescue in the south somewhere? I think they are routed though shady nonprofit to shady nonprofit until they get to wealthy areas.

People who are blindly smug about rescuing drive me nuts. There are some good rescue organizations but many aren't.

I don't have all the details, but friends of mine in South Carolina are part of a underground for rescuing dogs. They said so many of the shelters are kill ones, and there's so much backyard breeding, that the rescues further north rely on volunteers who each move the dogs up the coast to no kill rescues.

Yes, that goes on too.

I think basically a lot of people who are patting themselves on the back for "rescuing" are essentially subsidizing puppy mills and backyard breeders. Plus, as another PP pointed out, the same people don't seem to have much trouble eating factory farmed meat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that people of color who don't think that Redskins is offensive missed the entire point of the civil rights movement.

Which was to have freedom from discrimination in employment, places of business, and housing. Not sure it had anything to do with football mascots, per se. That kind of started with an NCAA crackdown, but somehow the ridiculously racist Seminole mascot and tomahawk chop still exist.