pets for addicted

Submitted by keanmedu on
Printer-friendly version

A good way to get out of porn, is to get a pet.
Pets are great, when you hug them, you will releases oxytocin. Especially mammals.
And the bigger the pet is, the more oxytocine will you release hugging your pet.
We all envy the people who have an elephant.

Please do not buy a pet if you think you cannot care for him later. I like my pets to always be free.
They live with me, and I give them food, but they are free to go and come back.
They do come back for cuddles and food.

Of course you also should NOT buy a pet if your porn addiction brought you into zoophilia.
But that's just obvious.

I agree

With everything you said (laughing at your last sentences!).

I have two horses~~I know I get *lots* of oxytocin when I'm around them~~might be why girls love horses (and boys) so much!


So true, so true, but I'm not sure size matters so much

I learned about oxytocin years ago (all the other brain chemistry related to sex I only just learned about a week ago), and have noticed since then that I must be having oxytocin rushes because sometimes just looking at my furry little cutie pies makes me soooo happy. I have three dogs, and two kitties and care for other peoples' creatures all day long. When I see a pack of happy, smiling dogs frollicking on the hilltops, my heart nearly leaps out of my chest! My littlest, a Pomeranian, is so cute that he can give me an oxytocin rush from across the room, not to mention when he allows me to cuddle him. The inevitable downside, though, is when they die. The crash and burn when suddenly that cuteness and cuddling is gone is, or at least in my case a couple of years ago when my first Pom died, almost unbearable. A conversation with my doctor confirmed that my actual physical heart was suffering from the emotional heart break of losing him. I guess that there just is a downside to every upside. :/

Thanks for sharing.

Wow, thanks for sharing. As I travel a lot, I cannot have pets myself. My cat disappeared this summer, and she is probably dead. This is the downside of keeping the pets free. I was touched by your description of the death of your pet. Doesn't the fact of having more animals, of different age compensate a bit. I might be totally off, and it might even sound offensive. Forgive me, in case, but if you have 4 dogs, and 2 are old, and 2 are puppies, and then one of the old dogs dies. Isn't this not as bad as if you only had that one dog? Just wondering.

That was my plan...

...that the younger ones would be here to sustain and comfort me through the loss of the older ones. But my first Pom had kidney disease and died at 4 years old. I think that is what some of the intensity of the grief was about - the ripped-off feeling, that he was supposed to live a much longer life. There just aren't any guarantees. Each day is a gift. That is what those last four months of his life taught me, anyhow. I learned about his kidney disease in September, was told that he'd be gone within a week to four months. He made it to January. After the initial shock of the news, I decided that every single moment he was here I was going to be happy, happy for his sake, happy for my own sake. Every time something negative came up, things that used to rile me, I'd look at him and remember that I wanted every moment of his remaining days to be filled with love and joy and contentment, and so I managed my emotions, allowed myself to be thankful for each milisecond he was here with me. I was completely unable to do anything of the sort once he was gone, tho. I heard a wail from somewhere so deep, so primal come out of me when the vet listened to his heart and said, "he's gone", that I almost didn't recognize the sound as being from my own body.

The sensitivity, love and concern for us that comes from our animal friends never ceases to amaze me. As I was writing this just now, all the memories of losing my precious boy had the tears flowing again. One of the dogs came up to me, gazed deeply into my eyes and began licking the tears from my cheeks.

Having these precious souls in my life means that I can't do things like travel a lot, but I find that I don't want to anymore. They are my family, and so much of my joy in life comes from their joy. I might be at a Y in the road of Life, at the intersection of "crazy animal lady" or "eccentric person", but I find my relationships with the critters to be largely much more fulfilling than those with human beings. Their love is so obvious, and the only games they play tend to involve a ball or a rope toy and bring joy instead of confusion and heartache.

Penny wrote: ...I find my

[quote=Penny] ...I find my relationships with the critters to be largely much more fulfilling than those with human beings. Their love is so obvious, and the only games they play tend to involve a ball or a rope toy and bring joy instead of confusion and heartache. [/quote]

I am equating "more fulfilling" to being closer to complete.


Put that way, then yes. But I have a hard time imagining love from anyone being "complete." Perhaps because I've never experienced love without conditions, except from the animals. Is that what you mean? When I think about what Jesus (myth or reality) talked about, I think that THAT would be a "complete" kind of love, but like I said, I've never experienced such a thing.

I'm biased because I've

I'm biased because I've never had pets. I don't have any interest in pets. Pets with some exceptions seem like substitutes for human connection. I guess it is better to have a pet than be lonely, but what happens when that fulfillment makes it harder or impossible to find human connection?

Just because there may be no complete love from humans doesn't make a pet's unconditional love superior. We're wired for human love.

Has anyone studied societies from a pets per capita or similar perspective?


Having pets (whether dogs or horses) has without exception, given me *more* opportunities for social interaction than I would ever have on my own. Just getting out and walking my dog or going on a trail ride with my horses and friends...

Also, I never think of them as "pets" because truly, they own me, rather than vice-versa!



Pets are a connection to our ancient ancestors - who domesticated the first wild animals. The Dog is believed to have been the first domesticated animal, which makes sense from a hunter-gather tribal life. Domestication of animals went hand - in - hand to moving to an Agrarian culture.

When I was a kid, even the cow at house next door was a 'pet' to me - she'd come up to the fence and wait for me to snag an ear or two of corn to feed to her. We got her milk to drink from the neighbors in gallon pickle jars.

We had two dogs, a couple cats. My school had a tamed boa constrictor that lived in our school library. I've had two children, and while the kids lived at home, we had family pets (rats, mice, cats, fish, a dog). The only pets I have now are cats. They are not substitutes for children or a partner, at least not in healthy people. I'm not sure that our pets love us back in the way that we, as humans, perceive Love. When we pet them, play with them, and care for them, oxytocin is generated in both us and our pets, creating a connection. I also feed the birds (even the crows) and squirrels that visit and sometimes live in my backyard.

Maybe you should start small, and get some houseplants to care for?