There are several situations in which the human being looks for a pet, which can be divided into the following main sections:
1. Search for companionship.
2. Psychological need.
3. Disability or reduced mobility.
4. For personal protection.
5. For generosity and compassion (not to be called pity).
6. For other, less important causes and motives.
Some of them can be observed combined (mixed) in some way, that is to say, that the only interest of looking for company, could be sponsored by a psychological factor, or the other way around, and so the rest of the scenarios.
Some of these conditions are generated because the human being needs to transmit his feelings, impulses and appetites, in general terms, and has no other being to whom to transfer them.
The full binomial of this “mascotarian” relationship is give and take.
In addition to the exercise factor, which practically all pets generate, some more and others less, there is a great quantity of benefits and services that they provide us, being very diverse, which we relate in the following table, in a generic way. However, these benefits that can be obtained from certain pets should not be confused with other services that they provide in a commercial, mercantile or economic sense.
Dogs and cats are the ideal and perfect pets because they live inside our homes, we take care of them and feed them as if they were members of the family, and the affection we feel for them is reciprocal.
Those benefits and services that we receive from our pets depend a lot on the customs of the human group we are referring to, however, in general, in the following table we present the benefits and services that we enjoy from the great diversity of them.
Of course, we cannot find all these benefits in a single pet; however, this long list guides us to think about why we can always choose to have a pet, depending on the need we have at a certain time of our lives.
All the functions that are attributed to pets are benevolent. However, physical exercise is one of the most important, as well as companionship and catharsis.
PHYSICAL EXERCISE. WALKING WITH THE PET.
I do not have enough information about the rest of the animals, apart from dogs and cats, to illustrate in this respect. The percentage of the relationship of the human being with the dog and the cat, is very high, and fundamentally on that statistic we will concentrate in this subject, and not for it we will stop giving some data on other pets that have accompanied the man and the woman.
Of these two, the dog as a pet has given us an invaluable benefit as “physical exercise”, forced or not, in different stages of life [men, women, elderly and children] being a very great benefit, and that exercise is also almost 100% in walking next to the pet. Likewise, we must be aware that in a high percentage the individual does not seek exercise when adopting a pet, but other benefits, however he/she obtains it without seeking it.
COMPANY
Another of the benefits that we find in pets, which is practically generalized in all of them, is their companionship. The value “Company” is one of the most important factors for pet owners. This is an immediate and regular response in all pets, although it varies in degree according to the type, and invariably solves several problems such as lack of communication (isolation), loneliness, self-imposed isolation, confinement, social withdrawal, separation from partners, orphanhood, melancholy, sadness, nostalgia, etc.
Loneliness is one of the great problems that afflict a high percentage of the elderly population, although we also find it in big cities and in adults, and we try to solve it with the company of a pet.
THE CATHARSIS
The catharsis -in the broadest sense of the word- that is achieved with pets is very effective. Studies that have been developed in this respect allow us to assure that a great variety of psychological discomforts (ailments, disturbances, alterations, disorders, disorders) are improved when having contact with animals and better with pets. Many people who have experienced it comment: “my pet serves me as therapy”. This can be understood if we observe that “your” pet keeps you company, reinforces your security, gives you love, and you feel useful. Of course, pets eliminate -in part- boredom, loneliness, annoyance, tedium, discouragement, psychic withdrawal, monologues, melancholy, discouragement, pessimism, despair, nostalgia, sadness, we could even say, they also help in depression, anxiety and psychic anguish (Future Pot CATARSIS MASCOTIAN AND THE WALK-RWD SYSTEM-PART II).
In this line, the list of effective benefits is quite large: attention, love, affection, caresses, affection, attachment, tenderness, friendship, interest, sympathy, appreciation, pampering, cuddling, physical care, etc. In a single phrase is sought and achieved: “the substitution of human companionship”.
LONELINESS.
I would like to say a few words about the concept of loneliness. I am referring to that loneliness that is the result of living alone, of feeling alone, perceiving oneself alone, regretting being alone, regretting being alone, because one longs to be in company, in a desperate way, and being afflicted by not being accompanied. In posts WALKING AND THE ELECTION OF LONELINESS. PART I and WALK IN SOLITUDE, AN ANALOGY OF LIFE, we have mentioned that solitude is required and sought voluntarily, at certain times of the day, to dialogue with oneself, to meditate, or simply to be in silence during a period of thoughtless contemplation; however, now I am referring to that state of mind of being afflicted by feeling alone, fundamentally due to being alone, a state of psychic solitude.
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS.
This is a very broad and difficult aspect to validate. Pets can replace the friend, the husband or wife, the son or daughter, the priest, the psychologist, the teacher, the boss,… And from the psychological point of view, one unconsciously seeks not to have negative answers, claims, denials, rejections, oppositions, obstinations, or to be able to say anything, an insult, scolding, shout, insult, insolence, irreverence, provocation, knowing that there will not be any censure or protest. From the psychological approach of the difficulty that human beings have in their relationship with beings of their own species, in contemporary times -and since always-, the pet can be a compensatory mechanism in the face of this type of communication problems. Does this have a relevant relation with the responsibility that pet owners feel? That is to say, they discard and discharge any kind of responsibility for being irrational animals, as they have been called.
It is hardly possible to achieve a dialogue with any pet, although some parrot owners claim otherwise. It is more difficult to achieve an effective confession or confidence, but we try.
Perhaps monologue and soliloquy can be channeled in a better way. Practically 100% of people [male, female, elderly and children] who have a pet talk to it. We can also say that it is the “owner” who talks with them the most and not the rest of the family members.
Pets, in general, require a lot of constant attention, however, they are also useful for those creators who cannot concentrate on creative work. This may seem contradictory, but it is not so. I believe that this aspect that helps in creative concentration should be investigated in greater depth. Perhaps something has to do with the type of responsibility that one has with pets.
Together with the lack of responsibility, there is the wielding of power (with authority and hierarchy) that human beings, almost in general and according to their own levels of emotional imbalance, try to exercise and impose on the rest of their fellow beings; pets are of great help in this unhealthy channeling, since they exercise it knowing that there will be no response or retaliation (hostility), and it will always be immediately forgotten (?) by the pet.
TRANSMISSION OF AFFECTION AND LOVE
There is no doubt that the contact we have with our pets is a reciprocal transmission of love, affection, tenderness, friendship, empathy, and that it places us in a healthy situation of harmony with ourselves because of the emotional support we receive from them. We seek to receive affection and interest because we need it, because perhaps we have no one to transmit it to us or it is insufficient for us. We seek to give affection (love, affection, etc.) because we have too much of that feeling or we have no one to transmit it to. In one sentence: give and receive.
WALKING WITH OUR DOG.
It is also possible that our dog forces us to walk every day, and this gives us an extra state of health, both physically and emotionally.
For some, this is the mechanism they use to initiate a walk, 2 or 3 times a day.
Before continuing this great benefit we get from walking and thus cover the basics of this first part of the post, I would like to comment on certain aspects regarding dogs.
The relationship with them is to receive and give them affection. To feel company and to make them feel it.
Personally, since I was a kid I always had pets, a dog, a hybrid (mongrel) of collie and German, and cats, several cats -like 5-, from the age of 4 to 10 years old. Having declared this true inclination that I had and still have, towards cats and dogs, I would like to comment on what I think now about our affection (attachment) as a human species, towards dogs.
The dog is one of the pets that we have always “educated” to keep us company, and for this we have managed to subtract part of their instincts, with greater intensity [more brutally (intensely)] than with other types of pets. Their docility is correlated with their training. The better they behave and obey, the less instincts they will have.
So, if they do not bother, it is because we have destroyed their instincts.
If we have them trapped (imprisoned) in a room, their organs and other functions will atrophy; just as it happens to human beings.
So, if we have a dog, let’s take it for a walk, let’s walk with it every day.
I have already mentioned something about the aspects of lack of time and free time (Posts THE WALK AND THE LACK OF TIME. PART I and WALKING AND FREE TIME. PART II) and I have expressed the following: “It is important to point out the aspect that some people feel that they are wasting time walking; that they are not getting anything in return. In those cases it will be necessary to indicate to those people that if they have that feeling, they should think that they are taking advantage of it by reading that text or document that they had not had the opportunity (or desire) to do so, or to write that poem, and walking the pet, is it a time lost or fully enjoyed?
If you have a private garden where you can always have it available for your pet to exercise – playing, walking or running – ignore it; use that space for your pet to relieve itself. It is best for your pet if you take him out for a walk and accompany him in his play and mischief, and not necessarily in that yard.
It goes without saying that you will also benefit from this, since you will be able to WALK, 2 or 3 times a day.
I will share with you some statistics that can make us aware of what is happening regarding the relationship of human beings (men, women, children, old men and women) with dogs (exclusively) and their daily outing to exercise the pet.
Putting your dog on a leash is the most advisable thing to do, because although your own pet might be well trained and educated, we can’t assure anything about other people’s pets, and with the leash you will at least be able to control your own dog.
Certainly there is the possibility of being able to read certain types of documents while walking with our dog, the eternal friend.
Walking is an exercise that allows us to have freedom in our arms and hands, so with one hand you could keep your dog on a leash, and with the other you could read any document, whether it is a book or through a Mobile or Tablet. You could even attach the leash to your belt, to have both hands free, and you could even write.
We must take into account the type of pet we have in order to organize our walks, choosing the place, the timetable, etc.
Pets also get tired from walking, jogging or running, like “Cindy” shown below, who is somewhat exhausted.
She is usually taken out for a walk and to play with her other peers, but she likes to graze (pasture), i.e., eat grass.
Not all pets have the benefit of forcing their owner to walk every day. For example, taking a rooster for a walk is not the same as taking an elephant for a walk, or an elephant for a walk.
an elephant, or a deer, or a snake.
By the way, this Crotalus Dirissus Terrificus is the species that the ancient Mayas used to represent it as one of their main symbols, which we can appreciate in their banners, clothing, buildings, rugs, mats, murals, in almost all their cultural legacies, which have been able to reach us. The same that we see today descending from the pyramid of Kukulkan twice a year, the time dedicated to the God Topilzin-Ce-Acatl who took the name of Kukulkan (Quetzalcoatl) when he led the Toltecs who invaded the Maya by sea, in the tenth century. A spectacular descent observed at the spring and summer equinoxes, in this pyramid in Chichen Itza, Mexico.
Some time ago we had a Papillon dog at home, and later a Maltese crossbreed.
It is impossible to “walk” a fish, nor an eagle or an owl, nor a lion or a Bengal tiger.
Notwithstanding the above, we should also be aware, if we decide to adopt a dog -to support our walks- about the care and responsibilities to which we will be obliged with him, and not to think that we can delegate those commitments to other people, because then we will put to walk -far from us- that pair of companions -our personality and character- that always try to accompany us, and then they will do it by another path, different from ours, far from us, and they will do it at totally different speeds, so we will lose them in the distance (Post THE WALK AND THE INSTINCT TO LEAVE THE PLACE OF ORIGIN; Future Post THE PERSONALITY DEFINED BY THE PACE OF WALKING-BODY).
When we decide to go for a walk with our dog and cat, let’s do it but walking, and all 3 of us upright.
When cats and dogs became aware that human beings began to have higher intelligence indexes when they stood on their 2 legs and feet, they also decided to stand on their 2 lower extremities.
Now, what is true is that “As an example of the survival in our human nature, of that spiritual totemic need, the dog and the cat are those animals that we try or wish to imitate, that is why we have retained them as pets. The dog, perhaps the easiest to domesticate, or perhaps he allowed it because he himself needed that almathic exchange and chose to coexist with the human being; faithful and inseparable from his master. We have needed his ‘totemic’ presence since we wish to imitate him because of his imperishable and imperious need to be in movement, circulating, but above all wandering, as an instinct still firm in him” (Text extracted from Post TOTEM AND WALKING. PART I. ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASPECTS).
The domestic cat, still with its semi-wild instinct that still persists in its essential feline nature, of being free and of not allowing itself to be enclosed or domesticated; its “totemic” attribute is unconsciously observed by its owner, to imitate it in its free roaming (Post THE WALK AND THE INSTINCT TO LEAVE THE PLACE OF ORIGIN).
Both pets are the faithful reflection of our lost ancestral nomadism.
Finally, I would like to emphasize that pets are used unconsciously to express our own ways of being, which we humans do not dare to say, from the affection and love we feel to our aversions to the rest of the entities and things that surround us, that give us joy, pleasure, anger, animosity, but that we cannot or do not dare to say it directly and openly. A true “mascotian catharsis”. But we will deal with this in the second part, in a few months (Future Post MASCOTIAN CATARSIS AND THE WALK-RWD SYSTEM-PART II).
P.S. Now at this time of COVID19 I can’t recognize my neighbors for bringing all of them facemasks, what helps me is that I can identify them by their pets, but sometimes they don’t take them out for a walk.
Now, I would like to say a few words to refer to certain psychological aspects of human beings in reference to their inclination towards animals. That is to say, there has always existed a part of the human population that has been inclined to the protection of animals in general, and another part of the same, that does not manifest any inclination towards their care, and we could say that even tends to be cruel.
In my novel GOD GOES TO PSYCHIATRIST, Doctor Wood -the second most important character- when he was selecting his specialty in the Faculty of Psychology, argued that he wanted to aspire to a doctorate with the firm purpose of knowing for sure what were the causes of these two worlds in the human being. I quote some paragraphs from this novel:
“After some time, and being about to finish his degree, Ernesto had the opportunity to enter the Institute of Psychology in the area of Research on the mistreatment of animals, as a research assistant.
For five more years he studied at the Division of Higher Studies of the same Faculty at the University, which kept him away from his family. After finishing his doctorate in Psychology, he was soon promoted to full researcher in the aforementioned area of the Institute, and, due to the clarity he showed in his objectives, he was soon appointed Project Leader.
The three lines of research that Ernesto had planned to carry out since he wrote his bachelor’s thesis were outlined in his doctoral dissertation and would form part of his new research program.
In addition to thoroughly investigating the reason for the differences between human beings with respect to their inclination or rejection towards animals, when they are not aggressive, harmful or poisonous, over and above the traumatizing or fearful attitudes taught and learned in childhood, he would delve into finding out why some do introject them and others do not.
In parallel, and as a second way of analysis and corroboration, I would investigate if it was a case of genetics, that is, if it had to do with the genes by which the love for animals and the need to coexist with them during childhood was inherited, since the instincts were not yet repressed or lacerated; and within this line, to verify if the culture and the family environment had more weight. In addition, if by education or genetics, the inclination or repudiation towards animals was also determined by gender difference.
Finally, and as a third way of his psychological research, he would study whether children who need and love their pets are just as healthy psychologically as those who are not interested in them or do not need them, either because they ignore or reject them.
The above would lead him to elucidate if those children who love them as company, already show some feeling of emptiness or loneliness that inclines them to accept the animals and protect them; that is, if those children already suffer from some predisposition or emotional weakness that makes them require that presence, which can later become dependence. It would also be necessary to discern whether or not children with an absence of love, or mistreated children, with diminished instincts, require animals; and if they protect them, or mistreat them?“
Is it possible to find an answer to this differentiation?
While we meditate on this great human dilemma, let’s take our canine pet and invite it for a walk.