You know, it seems to me more and more like there's something quite wrong with mankind in the Housepets universe. Every single Christmas special we have seen or heard something of the ugly side of humanity: a poor dog's owner mistreating her because she can't get him a date, King's outburst and whole experience at first (which was more humanish than anything), a story of a werewolf whose tail was cut off in the 30s, and most recently, Animal Control, who, in a world where animals are SAPIENT and SENTIENT, seem more like secret police, a force keeping animals as something akin to second class citizens. I'm beginning to think that the Sandwiches are the EXCEPTION to the rule, rather than the rule itself. Perhaps humanity needs a BIG lesson or adjustment.

Of course, I acknowledge that there are problems with animals, too. Case in point, Joel's pets. If animals are as sentient as humans in this comic, they'd have a lot of their flaws as well. I'm just saying, they do seem to not have the rights that humans do, and get pushed around.

I used to share that impression, but then again...

Sasha is more of an exception, since in BG pets are treated fairly well. Pete's treatment of King doesn't count since the griffin is acting out of sadism rather than playing an owner.
jeff can be a real jerk with Max and Bino, but I have the distinct impression they didn't do much to help his nerves. AND jeff slugged Joel the moment he heard PETA, so he must not be really a bad guy.
itsuki proves that animals can enjoy a citizenship, in regard with the culture of their fatherland. I guess that in America it goes differently than in Japan.
The Milton Wolves (the only ferals who, to our knowledge, tried to mix with civilization) are treated much like Roms and Indians are treated in our world... And if they were competitors for our livestock as long as our wolves were, the...uneasiness is comprehensible. At least, Miles is proving an example of goodwill and the Gardens' general population is being quite accepting.

in other words, IMO, we're talking about a universe very complex and which Rick is unveiling a bit a time, in a very interesting fashion, going by hints rather than wikipedying us.

Your making assumptions again.

Out of a world with billions of humans in it, of course there are going to be some 'bad' humans. Your forgetting there are 'bad' animals as well.
There are no werewolves in Housepets's world, that was a wolf, Grape was telling -part- of a story from Housepets:An Infinitesimally Brief History of the World. He had it cut off himself for a TV role, which while still bad, isn't the "Evil Humans" role your placing it in.

-Pete is not a human, he's a socially maladjusted semi immortal gryphon.

-We know next to nothing at all about Sasha's owner other then he's lonely and drinks alot, so don't paint him with the 'evil human' brush. Till Rick finally decides to use his skills and give us as much character development as he does the pets, it's not fair.

-The only real thing we know about King's human years is he was a jaded person from dealing with his own pets leaving him alone on the street. Again, not right to paint him as 'An evil human who was saved and made good by becoming a animal'

-We've seen Animal Control in action ONCE and they were called in because wolves mixing with humans on the level that Miles and his pack did is unheard of or when it's happened, the results have likely never been good. Also not worth painting as 'evil humans'

I expect more from you as a poster and fourm user then to turn and run to the very tired old method that furries often jump to which is in a human and furry story, furries are always good and humans are there to molest, kill and abuse the poor 'scared furries' with good humans being unheard of, or Mary/Gary Stus.

I'm just confused about the reaction Miles keeps getting. People in this universe know animals are sentient, yet their reaction on seeing a wolf seems at odds with this knowledge. The immediate assumption seems to be that somehow the animal is dangerous before even giving it a chance to prove itself so.

The woman in the zoo's reaction is particularly confusing. She was having a decent conversation with Miles and he had a tag on. Why she screamed and fainted when he announced he was local (and her assumption that he was feral) confuses me to no end. It's almost like a racist or bigoted mindset where regardless of the distinct personalities out there the default is hateful, idiotic xenophobia.

What more rights the pets would even need? They already got the best gig in the world: Eat, sleep, play, get everything taken cared for you and they don't even have to pay taxes.

Despite being sentient and sapient, (adult) pets have no apparent voting rights in this world.

exactly!
sounds like a sweet gig to me



Well, he's a wolf, that's scary.

I feel the same way. I would love to be a pet in this world!

That said, pets are still forced into that role, even if it's a great one. A pet that wants to do more could potentially be stifled by the system.

You know this is something I always wanted to comment on. This never really made any sense to me (Beyond the fact that Werewolf legends make almost no sense existing in this world in the first place, even with magic being real, but that is very minor and not important) there are legends of Werewolves that have tails on them (though they are not the majority) so why would the studio waste the money to cut off the tail in the first place? It would just be a waste of money and lower the value of their star to be used in any non-werewolf picture.



This is Rick trying to make the Housepets world too much like ours IMO. IRL you would be scared of a wolf coming up to you or being outside of a cage in a zoo, so they do the same in this world because its what we would do in ours, even if it makes very little sense in the reality of their world.

"Nice" wolves are not really a common thing in the Housepets! universe, though.

I would buy that is why she fainted (she thought he was dangerous) if she had not talked to him first, she should have been able to tell he was no danger after she talked to him.

Edit: And actually its not like we know how common or uncommon "Nice" Wolves or other Ferals are for that matter.

In the similar light that cat and dog relations are a taboo, wolves no doubt have the same taboo as well since wild animals are like that. Lucrecia's first impression example is a good example where they talk about animal meat like it's a casual thing. In real life and in the sense of the comic, it's likely that the fear of a wild animal tearing you apart is still there as well, so while it sucks for the animals, i can relate.

As for fixing the issue when we know it's clearly not there for the most part, i'm sure we'll get to that someday. It doesn't look like that's meant to be a subject that will last forever and i find the subject isn't finished yet.

Oh yeah I can totally see that
"Well this wolf hasn't attacked me yet, so there's probably no danger at all."

Well, I wish to revise my position a little. See if all animals are sentient in this universe, then that makes the natural predation of animals by wolves more than a LITTLE disturbing if one considers it. And the human race in this universe is, in ALL likelihood, NOT a bad thing in this universe (though it doesn't lessen the actions of animal control. Might be my [our?] love of the wolves talking, though). So indeed, there are "good" and "bad" people and animals here, as I originally TRIED to say. It's just that when we see injustice done to characters we love, it gets a little complicated, I THINK.

Additionally, perhaps we're not SUPPOSED to think about it too much. Rick wants to make a funny comic, not a dramatic epic, difficult as that distinction can get at times for me. I get the feeling that whenever some minor plot point is brought up and people make noise over it, if and when he does explain it, he may be shaking his head and saying "you wanted complicated plot development and exposition, you got it, you stupid, stupid people". Or, you know, SOMETHING like that.

This is just minor stuff, but it's possible there's a big difference between lycanthropes and their animal counterpart. IMO, the bipedal animal in this universe may be false anthro whereas true anthro are much more humanoid. Try looking at this http://rickgriffin.deviantart.com/galle ... 4#/d3e26qr even though this just an art style, the left one has more similarities to the human in-universe. We just never see how the humans depict lycanthropes.

Except she seemed to think he was from the petting zoo and was okay with that. It was only after he announced he was local that she assumed he was feral, screamed, and fainted despite the conversation. It's like the minute he announced he was local her brain shut down all higher-thinking processes and went strait into too dumb to live mode.

World building aside, it is a cartoon strip, logic does not always apply.

That's an excellent point
perhaps we should just ignore the implications and take it as a comedic device.

Hmmm seeing that it is Tax time...

Do housepet's pets count as dependents? or not there just animals.

I think they would probably.

Once again, with the latest arc, this thread becomes relevant. Despite not liking Duchess, I actually feel sorry for her. Whether it is from an owner or another dog, I'm pretty sure she has NEVER known what real love is. She's been born and raised to be beautiful eye candy. That seems to be what she may exist for: to be beautiful. And I highly suspect someone MADE her that way.

That happens to people too, so while it is kind of sad it doesn't really point to a larger issue.
Just my two cents.

It does if it results in sapient animals actually BELIEVING they don't deserve or want equality. If this weren't PG-rated, dog shows and breeding could actually be classified as eugenics.

EDIT: I said IF it WEREN'T PG-rated, to clarify. Eugenics is WELL outside what Rick would EVER write. It's just disturbing if thought about long enough.

Your assuming things again.

Just like their are young girls who love being in pageants and work hard to do well in them even outside of their parents (Protip, not all women who appear in them have stage moms or dads), there are bound to be dogs, male and female who enjoy the show circuit and work hard to do well in it by any means. I see nowhere how this arc has made this thread any more relevant in the slighest and if your going to react like this to plots in Housepets, I bid you to not read Rick's other writing projects for fear of what they may do to your psych

Your concern may not be entirely unwarranted, but most of this kind of worry stems from a single issue.

Anyway, I say Duchess has a skewed view on how dogs are supposed to be.

EDIT: I MAY want to take some earlier statements back. Seems like dog shows are just a "mean spirited rich people popularity contest" the way Rick is painting this picture. You know, like reality TV? Anyway, this likely is not ENTIRELY the humans' fault, I haven't even seen Duchess' owner. I can only speculate.