S/O unwanted pet discipline - guests vs. pets...

[Another Sarah]

I think hosts have a responsibility to be welcoming and kind to guests, and guests have a responsibility to be understanding and kind to their hosts.  And this applies to interactions with pets.

If you are a guest and the host has a rambunctious animal, you should do your best to be patient and not act like the animal should have the exact same manners as a rational polite adult human.

And if you are a host, you should keep in mind that many people - even animal lovers - don't want a strange animal jumping on them / licking them /climbing on them. You should do your best to train your animal and to keep an eye on it while guests are there to see if it's being too rambunctious.

If an animal is repeatedly jumping on me or climbing on me - and I looove pets - at a point I'm going to be (gently but firmly) pushing an animal away if the host is not doing a good job intervening. And I don't think there's anything rude or inappropriate about that.

This. So much this.

Also with a couple of the posts I've noticed people are describing the bad reactions of people that just aren't pet people. I think it's unreasonable as a host to expect that guests know what to do with a pet that's paying them attention, so it's my responsibility to prevent the situation.

Example - I had a cat that loved sitting on my shoulders like a living scarf. Beautiful girl was totally affectionate, not a bad bone in her body - but if she clawed her way up a human ladder to sit on her favourite perch, then an unsuspecting person might object to the track of claw holes in their clothes and skin.
So I warned people that if they picked her up she might do that and gave them the hand signal that stopped her doing it. I never had a problem. But if I hadn't and someone had panicked, it would be my fault, not theirs.

same with the nose-tapping thing. A non pet person trying to fend off a nosy cat had their hand grabbed, probably panicked expecting clawing and reacted badly. That's not their fault.
They were clearly uncomfortable with the animal around and pet owner should have given some help/instruction "if she's bothering you, click your fingers and point at the floor, she'll jump down"

[Mel the Redcap]

It took me a while to remember this because it's been a long time, but I once owned a cat who was not good with visitors, and I needed to be proactive about avoiding trouble.

First of all, let me just say that I named her Shredder and it was very appropriate. She loved me - heck, she adored me - but in her (occasionally worryingly intelligent) cat mind, anyone who took up my time and attention was her enemy. When I had visitors, I had to introduce them to her and tell her to "Be nice!", because if I did she would just sit in the corner of the room, pointedly facing away with her ears back and tail swishing. If I didn't, she would wait until nobody was looking, sneak up on them under cover of the furniture, and bite them in the foot. HARD. I'm not kidding.

Luckily for her, everybody she ever did that to was a cat person; there was some yelping, but no deliberate attempts to hit her and no accidental kicks either. She got smacked (by me) and shut out of the room (a fate worse than death in her opinion), and if she'd been kicked when someone jumped I would have been horrified, but I would have blamed myself (and my horribly behaved possessive cat) for not preventing it, because it was my job to take her peculiarities into account and stop her from assaulting my friends.

_{(The time she bit a persistent door-to-door salesman, though, I confess that I patted her and gave her a treat afterwards. He totally had it coming. )}

[EllenS]

I think many cat owners, in particular accept signs of "affection" that non-cat-owners would classify as "violence". Do cats routinely draw blood on each other as a sign of affection?  (outside of mating)?

I think it is unreasonable for a pet owner to expect visitors to accept pain and bleeding as a sign of affection, and laugh it off, just as it is unreasonble to expect vistors to accept having their food stolen by large dogs. Those responsible pet owners who have special signals to the pet (that actually work) to prevent clawing, etc, do well to discuss this well in advance.

Personally, I think a pet that is prone to draw blood while being "affectionate", should be disclosed before the invitation is accepted.

[Hmmmmm]

If one of my pets bothers a guest, I will of course control them.  I also have no objection to anyone telling my dogs (firmly but without screaming or yelling or hitting) to get off, or to shoo them off the couch.  If one of my cats hops into a guest's lap and they are not interested in having a lap-cat, I have no problem with them just lifting the cat down and putting them back on the floor.  There's no need to be rough or for hitting, though a guest may find themselves relocating the same cat from their lap a couple times until kitty gets the message.

I will move a cat from a chair so a person can sit there, or shoo a dog off the couch. In the case of the OP with the room mate's dog, I wouldn't have seen any problem with the guest simply picking the dog up and putting him back down on the floor or beside them on the couch rather than in their lap or in their face.

I have two extremely social cats who also believe that every guest wants to pet them. As the host it is my responsibility to notice if someone is trying to keep the cats off of them and engaged after the first removal from their lap. I do not expect my guests to have to continually pick up the cats and move them off of them. Someone moves one of the cats off of them I know I need to redirect the cat to a different activity.

Just like with a child. Someone has enjoyed interacting with my child for 5 minutes but is now getting tired. I shouldn't expect my guest to redirect my child after the first indication.

[Dorrie78]

I definitely think there are (or should be) limits. Quite frankly, letting your cat touch a guest and then getting outraged over a tap on the nose astounds me.

I think that if your pet is getting in someone's space you need to check and see if they are comfortable. Don't assume they want your pet on them. If they are uncomfortable, take reasonable measures to make the guest/human comfortable.  Call the pet over by you. Now, you don't have to lock them out in the cold or cage them up but you should take reasonable measures.

If someone were to tap my cat on the noise because she touched him or her, the guest would be escorted immediately out. My cat is affectionate and loves to rub ankles as she walks by. She's showing kindness in her way. She likes to curl up next to someone on the couch. If that is unwelcome, gently remove her. She also sniffs people. This isn't an aggressive or forbidden behavior. Punishing her affection with a tap on the nose (as mother cats do to naughty kittens) would leave her confused and me pissed.

If she bites you (unprovoked), that is different. Very unlikely with my genial and elderly cat, but I would immediately remove her from the situation.

I'm assuming I know which post from the other thread this is referring to.   The cat was on the back of the couch at face level and when the person tried to shoo the cat the cat saw "play" and grabbed the persons hand. *I'm going to presume that the person was trying to discourage the cat.   It happened fast ( too fast to intercede) and we have the pet owners interpretation but even as the pet owner described I'd fault the pet owner(not for letting it happen but for faulting the person) , people who are slightly uncomfortable around animals may not know how to effectively discourage an animal. IT sounded like an inter-species misunderstanding.

Where in the post to which I responded is there any mention of this? I understand that sometimes people may be referring to another thread, especially in a s/o thread such as this, but that is not clear in this post. The poster only says that if a cat "touches" someone, it is okay to discipline the cat and to disagree with that opinion is "astounding." I was replying to say that my cat can touch people in many ways, the vast majority of which are signs of affection from the cat and to discipline my cat for showing affection would be completely unacceptable. In my personal situation with my specific cat, she would never scratch or draw blood in any of her displays of affection and she doesn't play that way either (as she is 14 and ill and doesn't really play at all anymore).

[spookycatlady]

My beloved and departed male cat liked to stand on people's laps.  He never curled up, never did the push-push, never gave head bonks, or sniffed/licked.  He just stood there, like he climbed Mount Everest.  The strangest sight was seeing my non-pet loving mother-in-law being conquered by Clyde.  She didn't want to move him because she was sitting in his regular spot, but she was really really uncomfortable (he was the size of a small mountain lion).

I clapped and he let her be after that.  That was the closest I've come to the topic at hand.  Actually, with Clyde, if she had tried to pet him, he would have run off on is own.

In theory, gentle discouragement of a guest being made uncomfortable would be totally okay with me, but anything resembling corporal punishment would be an Oh. Heck. No.   

I'm going to give scritches to Nubbin the Dog when I get home today for never jumping, never schnorfling sensitive bits, and being an all-around perfect dog.  Best 90 lbs of cuddle you will ever meet.  But only if you want him too.

 

[Sharnita]

Dorrie78, I am not really sure how you can disagree that I am astounded by something.

[Another Sarah]

I definitely think there are (or should be) limits. Quite frankly, letting your cat touch a guest and then getting outraged over a tap on the nose astounds me.

I think that if your pet is getting in someone's space you need to check and see if they are comfortable. Don't assume they want your pet on them. If they are uncomfortable, take reasonable measures to make the guest/human comfortable.  Call the pet over by you. Now, you don't have to lock them out in the cold or cage them up but you should take reasonable measures.

If someone were to tap my cat on the noise because she touched him or her, the guest would be escorted immediately out. My cat is affectionate and loves to rub ankles as she walks by. She's showing kindness in her way. She likes to curl up next to someone on the couch. If that is unwelcome, gently remove her. She also sniffs people. This isn't an aggressive or forbidden behavior. Punishing her affection with a tap on the nose (as mother cats do to naughty kittens) would leave her confused and me pissed.

If she bites you (unprovoked), that is different. Very unlikely with my genial and elderly cat, but I would immediately remove her from the situation.

I'm assuming I know which post from the other thread this is referring to.   The cat was on the back of the couch at face level and when the person tried to shoo the cat the cat saw "play" and grabbed the persons hand. *I'm going to presume that the person was trying to discourage the cat.   It happened fast ( too fast to intercede) and we have the pet owners interpretation but even as the pet owner described I'd fault the pet owner(not for letting it happen but for faulting the person) , people who are slightly uncomfortable around animals may not know how to effectively discourage an animal. IT sounded like an inter-species misunderstanding.

Where in the post to which I responded is there any mention of this? I understand that sometimes people may be referring to another thread, especially in a s/o thread such as this, but that is not clear in this post. The poster only says that if a cat "touches" someone, it is okay to discipline the cat and to disagree with that opinion is "astounding." I was replying to say that my cat can touch people in many ways, the vast majority of which are signs of affection from the cat and to discipline my cat for showing affection would be completely unacceptable. In my personal situation with my specific cat, she would never scratch or draw blood in any of her displays of affection and she doesn't play that way either (as she is 14 and ill and doesn't really play at all anymore).

I think most people are assuming it relates to a post in the other thread

"One of my friends tapped my cat on the nose once. She climbed up onto the back of the couch and was sniffing his head. I didn't know he didn't like cats. I thought it was cute that she was trying to smooch him. Anyway he kept shaking his hand in front of her which made her try and play so she grabbed his hand with her paws. He tapped her on the nose and said "No!"

I was horrified. I said "don't hit her" and I got up, grabbed kitty, gave her a cuddle and put her on the couch next to me. He left after that and has not been back."

I feel for the poster in that situation because he reacted badly, but I do think it was that- a bad reaction, and I think she was assuming a level of feline-handling competence that he didn't have.

[Dorrie78]

Dorrie78, I am not really sure how you can disagree that I am astounded by something.

Fair enough. But I also think that you will find most cat owners would be very unhappy that you hit their cats just when they touch you.

As you said in the original post to which I was replying:
"I definitely think there are (or should be) limits. Quite frankly, letting your cat touch a guest and then getting outraged over a tap on the nose astounds me."

[Sharnita]

A tap on the nose is, to me, literally a tap on the nose. Not hitting anyone or anything.

[shhh its me]

I definitely think there are (or should be) limits. Quite frankly, letting your cat touch a guest and then getting outraged over a tap on the nose astounds me.

I think that if your pet is getting in someone's space you need to check and see if they are comfortable. Don't assume they want your pet on them. If they are uncomfortable, take reasonable measures to make the guest/human comfortable.  Call the pet over by you. Now, you don't have to lock them out in the cold or cage them up but you should take reasonable measures.

If someone were to tap my cat on the noise because she touched him or her, the guest would be escorted immediately out. My cat is affectionate and loves to rub ankles as she walks by. She's showing kindness in her way. She likes to curl up next to someone on the couch. If that is unwelcome, gently remove her. She also sniffs people. This isn't an aggressive or forbidden behavior. Punishing her affection with a tap on the nose (as mother cats do to naughty kittens) would leave her confused and me pissed.

If she bites you (unprovoked), that is different. Very unlikely with my genial and elderly cat, but I would immediately remove her from the situation.

I'm assuming I know which post from the other thread this is referring to.   The cat was on the back of the couch at face level and when the person tried to shoo the cat the cat saw "play" and grabbed the persons hand. *I'm going to presume that the person was trying to discourage the cat.   It happened fast ( too fast to intercede) and we have the pet owners interpretation but even as the pet owner described I'd fault the pet owner(not for letting it happen but for faulting the person) , people who are slightly uncomfortable around animals may not know how to effectively discourage an animal. IT sounded like an inter-species misunderstanding.

Where in the post to which I responded is there any mention of this? I understand that sometimes people may be referring to another thread, especially in a s/o thread such as this, but that is not clear in this post. The poster only says that if a cat "touches" someone, it is okay to discipline the cat and to disagree with that opinion is "astounding." I was replying to say that my cat can touch people in many ways, the vast majority of which are signs of affection from the cat and to discipline my cat for showing affection would be completely unacceptable. In my personal situation with my specific cat, she would never scratch or draw blood in any of her displays of affection and she doesn't play that way either (as she is 14 and ill and doesn't really play at all anymore).

"One of my friends tapped my cat on the nose once. She climbed up onto the back of the couch and was sniffing his head. I didn't know he didn't like cats. I thought it was cute that she was trying to smooch him. Anyway he kept shaking his hand in front of her which made her try and play so she grabbed his hand with her paws. He tapped her on the nose and said "No!"

I was horrified. I said "don't hit her" and I got up, grabbed kitty, gave her a cuddle and put her on the couch next to me. He left after that and has not been back.

I realize that you were replying in context and made perfect sense but I think that this was the poster was referring to and that she was picturing this type of interaction not just a sniff at pant legs.

  BTW the cat handgrabbed without bitting or clawing. I do think this one example illustrated 2 possibilities of different perspectives of what a animal is intending. I've had and really like cats but I would not want a strange cat away from my face if it was getting playful as a cat owner I know trying to pull away from a handgrab might seen as further play and get me clawed/chewed and a soft tap on the nose means "too much, stop now". I'll be honest I may have nose tap in these circumstance. IF I wasn't a cat person I might be nervous and try very hard to encourage a cat to let go.

Normal is hard to define. I think its normal for animals to sniff and cats to legrub and dogs to nuzzle hands.  I think friendly dogs and cats my sit on someone lap and people comfortable with animals get usually get them off successfully and gently.  It's those interactions just slightly more intrusive then a sniff and those people just a tiny but unaccustomed with animals that thing have the most potential to go awry and into a grey area.

[EllenS]

I think it also depends what a "tap on the nose" consists of.  I often tap my husband or kids on the nose in a playful way - it is certainly not violent or harmful. I could see where a small "bonk" on the nose of a similar weight (one finger, no wrist action) could be used as a pattern-interrupt to an animal  or discouragement of unwanted behavior.

I personally would not try it because if an animal is being overly rambunctious, the last thing I want to do is stick my fingers in its face.  But I do think, if that is the scale we are talking about, that such a touch is no more hurtful or inappropriate than picking an animal up to relocate it.  Less effective, perhaps, but not harmful to the animal.

[menley]

A tap on the nose is, to me, literally a tap on the nose. Not hitting anyone or anything.

I agree with this. If someone escorted me out of their house for tapping their cat on the nose, frankly, we'd not be friends anymore. I view that as an extreme overreaction.

[Sharnita]

An actual tap on the nose might be easier for somebody who is uncomfortable aaround cats as well and doesn't know how exactly to pick up and move the cat without making matters worse.

[MindsEye]

A tap on the nose is, to me, literally a tap on the nose. Not hitting anyone or anything.

Well, the thing is that you are a lot bigger then a cat.  So what you think is "just a tap" probably doesn't feel like "just a tap" to the cat. 

Also, that "tap" is still physical discipline.  It is the same as going to someone's house and smacking their toddler on the hand because they grabbed for your shiny, shiny iPhone.  Just don't do it.  You don't get to apply your discipline standards to someone else's pet/child.

Edited to add: And don't forget that there is always the option of getting up and moving away from the pet.  You don't want that cat on your lap and don't know how to pick her up and move her off?  Try standing up.  I assure you that the cat will hop off when you start to move.  (At least, mine will)  You don't have to force a you vs the pet showdown.

I think that is what a lot of the pet owners on this thread are getting at.