Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> We've always had two or three dogs at a time, and they've had our love, attention, and affection. They're spoiled rotten. Better dogs than children.

One very common trait among people I know who don't have kids is that they have dogs. For them, dogs help to fill the need they have for unconditional love and the seemingly built-in paternal/maternal need to care for someone. That's great. Nothing wrong with that.

I've had lots of dogs in my life. In my experience, the dogs were fun. We played and wrestled and went on walks and went to the park. I was sad when they passed away.

I also have three children. I can honestly say that I never experienced anything close to the feelings I have for my children with the dogs. My children look like me, and like the woman I love. They think deep thoughts and ask questions and figure things out.

Instead of teaching them to sit or rollover (though you have to start somewhere!) I teach them to reason and understand. I try to teach them as best I can to be a good person. That's a process that has inspired deep introspection and personal growth, as well as some of the best work I've done in my career and my community.

Owning a dog is certainly easier than having a child, by which I mean it's a lot less work. So if easy is your metric for better you could probably say something like "Better dogs than children." But using every other metric that I can think of I would say the opposite.



Context. The author said it's better that they spoiled their dogs rotten than spoiled kids rotten. She's not saying that dogs are better than children.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: