Author Topic: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)  (Read 6132 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

JenJay

  • I'm a nonconformist who doesn't conform to the prevailing standards of nonconformity.
  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5373
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2012, 03:08:39 PM »
I might address this from a standpoint of logistics. IF you're going to bring Baby over, make clear you're bringing Stinky too. "Oh that sounds great. We'll be there with the dogs at 7." Just assume she's invited. If they specifically say Stinky's not invited, say that if you bring one dog, you bring both, so if they're not okay with Stinky, you'll just leave the dogs at home.

I agree. Does Stinky seem to get upset that Baby Dog gets to go for a car ride but he doesn't?

Shoo

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 16393
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #16 on: December 13, 2012, 03:11:33 PM »
If Pup gets invited over again, I'd say, "Oh, no.  We don't want to leave Stinky all alone.  She gets lonely.  That's why we got Pup, you know.  To be a companion for Stinky."

weeblewobble

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3150
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #17 on: December 13, 2012, 03:36:00 PM »
From FIL's frequently bringing up the former dog's food issues and belief that he'll be attacked if he doesn't train Baby to like him from puppyhood, it sounds like he has an underlying fear of dogs.  On the other hand, MIL seems to be trying to hard to make sure she can claim some ownership over Baby.  (Seriously, dog-proofing the Christmas tree?)

The bottom line is that it sounds like Baby is supposed to be a companion for Stinky.  It will be hard for Baby to do that if she's over at the in laws.  So either they take both dogs at the house, or neither.

CaffeineKatie

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 287
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #18 on: December 13, 2012, 04:26:41 PM »
Wow, handsome but BIG dogs. 

Deetee

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5374
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2012, 04:38:24 PM »
For the rest of the world, puppies are just more of a draw than a dog. When I walked the puppy I was swarmed by people. When I walk the dog, I am not swarmed.

I think this is just a "cute puppy" versus "barky dog" issue and not analogous to kids (that would be aware of such an issue) and playing favorites.

I will admit that I have some bonus affection for my cats that I got as kittens versus cats. The cuteness is custom made to melt heatstrings

So I don't think you should take it personally. But that said, you don't need to bring puppy anywhere you don't want to at any time ever.

TootsNYC

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 28713
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #20 on: December 13, 2012, 05:00:16 PM »
Part of the problem I'd have if I were you (and I think I'd react exactly the same way) is that I think they are "out of balance" in their reaction to YOUR puppy.

It's not their puppy, and them talking about the idea of their home being the puppy's other home would bother me. Add to that the idea that I can see they're not willing to expend any attention on or kindness toward my other dog, and it's very clear that this is NOT a "love you, love your dog" situation.

The appeal, to them, of Baby is apart from Baby's connection to you. And *through you* IS their only connection to Baby. By inviting Baby as "Baby" and not as "your dog" (bcs that would include Stinky) they are laying a claim to Baby that is not appropriate. He's not their dog; he's yours. And if he's their "granddog," then Stinky is too, and I think it's unfair *to you* for them to play favorites with _your_ dogs.

I do think your FIL is afraid of dogs.

But I'd be like you, I would just never take my puppy to their house.

ETA: the rest of my sentence!
« Last Edit: December 14, 2012, 01:07:33 AM by TootsNYC »

MeowMixer

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 394
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #21 on: December 13, 2012, 05:00:29 PM »
Wow, handsome but BIG dogs.

I take it my link worked! Well holy moly!... maybe I can master the coffee maker now... and thank you :)

yeah, I think FIL must have some fear of dogs, which I didn't pick up really since they have friends bring their dogs over. hubby told me when he was in his early teens FIL brought home a rhodesian ridgeback puppy. Not exactly a dog for beginners.

Deetee I totally agree about the draw of puppies (and kittens), there is a huge difference walking them as opposed to adult dogs. I'm grateful that pup's getting older, no more little kids chasing after us while on walks (with their parents smiling on as if it's a good idea to let their kids run up to strange dogs...)

MeowMixer

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 394
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #22 on: December 13, 2012, 05:07:31 PM »
I might address this from a standpoint of logistics. IF you're going to bring Baby over, make clear you're bringing Stinky too. "Oh that sounds great. We'll be there with the dogs at 7." Just assume she's invited. If they specifically say Stinky's not invited, say that if you bring one dog, you bring both, so if they're not okay with Stinky, you'll just leave the dogs at home.

I agree. Does Stinky seem to get upset that Baby Dog gets to go for a car ride but he doesn't?

I highly doubt she gets upset about Pup going. I walk them separately as it is because they're too much together right now, so they are used to the other being out of the house without them for a certain time. This is more about me feeling badly for my girl as opposed to her feelings, which go 'oh boy! food! oh boy! SQUIRREL! Oh wow! walkies!'... she's a simple yet delightful creature.

JenJay

  • I'm a nonconformist who doesn't conform to the prevailing standards of nonconformity.
  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5373
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #23 on: December 13, 2012, 05:11:39 PM »
I might address this from a standpoint of logistics. IF you're going to bring Baby over, make clear you're bringing Stinky too. "Oh that sounds great. We'll be there with the dogs at 7." Just assume she's invited. If they specifically say Stinky's not invited, say that if you bring one dog, you bring both, so if they're not okay with Stinky, you'll just leave the dogs at home.

I agree. Does Stinky seem to get upset that Baby Dog gets to go for a car ride but he doesn't?

I highly doubt she gets upset about Pup going. I walk them separately as it is because they're too much together right now, so they are used to the other being out of the house without them for a certain time. This is more about me feeling badly for my girl as opposed to her feelings, which go 'oh boy! food! oh boy! SQUIRREL! Oh wow! walkies!'... she's a simple yet delightful creature.

That's good! I had a labby and he'd give me big ole puppy eyes whenever we left without him. I'm glad she doesn't realize she's being snubbed.  :)

But yeah, I still wouldn't like it. She's a good girl and should be welcome wherever her brother goes!

doodlemor

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1986
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #24 on: December 13, 2012, 05:21:01 PM »
I understand how you feel, and you are quite normal.  Stinky is your furry baby, and you love her very much.  I still tear up thinking of my dogs who are gone, and we have two lovely, beloved dogs right now.

I think that all of the PP have offered excellent advice.  If I were you I'd leave both dogs home, especially when a small child is involved. 

When IL's come over you might have a chance to demonstrate what a nice dog Stinky is - it does sound like FIL is frightened of dogs.


MeowMixer

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 394
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #25 on: December 13, 2012, 05:21:10 PM »
Part of the problem I'd have if I were you (and I think I'd react exactly the same way) is that I think they are "out of balance" in their reaction to YOUR puppy.

It's not their puppy, and them talking about the idea of their home being the puppy's other home would bother me. Add to that the idea that I can see they're not willing to expend any attention on or kindness toward my other dog, and it's very clear that this is NOT a "love you, love your dog" situation.

The appeal, to them, of Baby is apart from Baby's connection to you. And *through you* IS their only connection to Baby. By inviting Baby as "Baby" and not as "your dog" (bcs that would include Stinky) they are laying a claim to Baby that is not appropriate. He's not their dog; he's yours. And if he's their "granddog," then Stinky is too, and I think it's unfair *to you* for them to play favorites with _your_ dogs.

I do think your FIL is afraid of dogs.

But I'd be like you, I would

Whoa. Just an aside note whenever I'm reading a thread and I see 'TootsNYC' 99.9999...% of the time before reading your post I know you'll hit the nail on the head. This is another one of those moments. You've put into words what I couldn't really express in my original post, I just knew it didn't feel right. Thank you.

StarFaerie

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1125
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #26 on: December 13, 2012, 08:55:59 PM »
Nothing really to add as Toots said it all, but.... Can I invite Stinky over to my place? She looks just like the dog I had as a teenager and so beautiful.

artk2002

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12561
    • The Delian's Commonwealth
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #27 on: December 14, 2012, 09:35:47 AM »
This wouldn't be acceptable if Stinky and Baby were children and I don't see it being acceptable here, either. Toots has a very good summary of the underlying problems.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bow lines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. -Mark Twain

Corvid

  • Etiquette Hell Thread Assassin Squad
  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 856
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #28 on: December 14, 2012, 10:24:30 AM »
I'm sorry, I'm going to go against the grain here.  I do think you're overreacting.  A dog is not a child, and I say that as a dog owner who adores her guy, spoils him rotten, and takes him almost everywhere.  I'm well aware, though, that not everyone else will see my dog as do I, and some people have issues with dogs period.  Hey, I don't always like every dog I come across either, no matter how much their owners love them. 

You're offended because your in-laws like one of your dogs and don't care for the other one.  Stinky, however, as you yourself say, doesn't give a flip.  She won't develop any complexes over it.

It sounds to me as if your in-laws are trying to develop a relationship with Baby while young so it goes better with Baby than they feel it did with Stinky.  That's a good thing, not a bad thing, particularly if Father-in-law is a bit uneasy with dogs.  Me, I'd be supporting that.

As far as taking him on the holiday, that decision should be made purely on how much you want to hassle with it.

siamesecat2965

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8214
Re: Am I being irrational? Re: in-laws and our dogs (novel length, sorry!)
« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2012, 10:30:11 AM »
Beautiful!  Is baby a Mastiff? Because he looks JUST like the one I had growing up. They are both gorgeous!