Where I grew up, dogs were not a rare commodity, but "little dogs" were. Except for my Uncle's mini dachsund, I really had no exposure to "little dogs" until I came to Manhattan. Sure, I saw them all over the trashy entertainment gossip magazines that I subscribe to, but I figured only the movie stars were vain enough to carry these hairy little creatures around as if they were THE must-have accessory.

Not only do the UES-ers have more of these little creatures per capita than I could ever imagine, they treat them just as they would their children: designer clothes, fancy beds, gourmet food, and only the finest SHOES (refer to photo, courtesy of http://www.glamourdog.com/, on the left) for these little beasts. When I saw it for the first time in person, I thought I was just hallucinating. "No way did that dog have SHOES on!" I said to myself. I'd seen plenty of dogs wearing little coats, sweaters, etc, but I can almost understand the logic behind those. After all, those little dogs weren't made for the cold, harsh, East Coast winter. Without some added insulation, they might freeze while taking their daily walks/poops/pees. But shoes?! I always assumed that the tough bits of skin on the underside of their paws were sufficient to keep them comfortable, even on cold sidewalks. But what do I know?
Don't get me wrong. It is fun to dress pets up like people. But to subject them to public embarrassment like this? My cat, Bennie, for example, tolerates me putting little articles of clothing on him and taking photos (see photo on the right). But, would I ever take him outside and parade him around like this? (posting his photo on the web is an entirely different thing, so no comments from the peanut gallery!). Maybe a little more time in the NY area will change my mind about this matter, but for now, I'm anti-doggie-shoe, and I'm sticking to it!
1 comment:
i would rather cut off my left wrist than live on the upper east side. that's why i live on the upper west side :)
Post a Comment