• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

More destructive: Pets or Babies?

Which are more destructive?

  • Pets

    Votes: 9 26.5%

  • Children

    Votes: 25 73.5%
  • Total voters
    34
RoJoHen

RoJoHen

Awesome
Admiral
I like to look at houses and apartments for rent just to see what kind of stuff is out there, and I always get annoyed anytime I see "NO PETS" or "EXTRA NON-REFUNDABLE PET DEPOSIT" on advertisements, but I never see anything like "EXTRA DEPOSIT FOR TODDLERS."

I don't know about you, but in my experience, toddlers are a helluva lot more destructive than my one little cat that sleeps all day. At worst, my cat might throw up on the carpet.

Meanwhile, my godchildren have managed to break the fridge, rip kitchen cabinets off their hinges, smear poop all over the walls, and break one of the living room windows of their parents' rented house.

I had to pay an extra $250 for my cat. They had to pay nothing for their toddlers. Does that seem fair to you?
 
From what i've heard McCaw Parrots are the most destructive Pets you can get, let loose from their cages, they fly around chewing furniture, clawing carpets, knocking over ornaments and harrassing houseguests

As for Children, from my small experience of Children, I've noticed they are only really at their most destructive from the ages of 16 months to 4 years and Children can always learn not to be so destructive during this stage

I suppose it comes down to the age old tradition, that owning pets in rented accomodation is "asking for trouble", therefore if the LandLord/Lady chooses to allow it, they will usually charge a guarantee deposit, in case pets decide to run wild, with children its usually assumed that by having children, you will likely be looking to move to a more spacious property, therefore no one seems to worry too much about it, however if you choose to say, its not unheard for a small amount of people to charge "Child Deposit"
 
Dunno, it could be that the thinking goes along the lines of people having more control over their children than their pets. Which, in many cases, is laughably wrong (I say this as a parent and an early years worker).

May I ask how many godchildren you have and how old they are?
 
Pets, but only by a slight margin; babies shit in diappers; animals shit on the floor (even occassionally litter box trained ones).

Though no cat I've ever had attempted to stick something in an electrical outlet (now THAT would be "curiousity" that killed the cat...). At least, they can't until they learn to speak and have apposable thumbs (at whiuch point we're most certainly SCREWED).


And if a child draws on the wall, you can always erase it (or even use left over paint to re-paint it). If a cat scratches up a door post or a couch, that's some money, work and time, and not to mention hiring someone who has the skills and tools to fix it.


Of course I am basing this on the most common of pets: dogs and cats. Babies make fish look like a delightful alternative to child beariing...
 
I've yet to encounter that, so I can't speak for it. But seemingly any parent with a brain and money buys their kids diappers.

Now, I've encountered old people -- twice -- who shit on the floor.
 
But babies can sometimes shit through their diapers. Or they might shit while in the middle of having their diaper changed. Or, like my goddaughter, might poop in her diaper, and then while getting her diaper changed, stick her feet in the poop and kick it around. Or hell, sometimes kids just run around naked and might start peeing and pooping wherever they are.
 
Oh, babies (all the way through to adolescents) are more destructive by a wide, wide margin. Pets, at least you can tether outside, put in a box or cage, or relegate to the basement or garage. Kids . . . not so much. At least the law frowns upon it mightily.
 
bluedana said:
Oh, babies (all the way through to adolescents) are more destructive by a wide, wide margin. Pets, at least you can tether outside, put in a box or cage, or relegate to the basement or garage. Kids . . . not so much. At least the law frowns upon it mightily.
Click to expand...

True. And while a bit cruel, you can even just dump your pet off at the pound if it gets to be a problem. I'd hate to meet the parents that drop their kids off at the pound.
 
bluedana said:
Oh, babies (all the way through to adolescents) are more destructive by a wide, wide margin. Pets, at least you can tether outside, put in a box or cage, or relegate to the basement or garage. Kids . . . not so much. At least the law frowns upon it mightily.
Click to expand...

I tried that once. Child Protective Services said no.
 
Id say babies. Considering, that my star trek models were obliterated by a one and a half years old... Rest in peace, my dear enterprises :wah:
 
Yeah, but that's what pants are for -- to catch shit that gets out. And when changing a kid ... you don't put a towel under them?
 
True. And while a bit cruel, you can even just dump your pet off at the pound if it gets to be a problem. I'd hate to meet the parents that drop their kids off at the pound.
Click to expand...
They call that daycare, hun. And boarding school.
 
bluedana said:
True. And while a bit cruel, you can even just dump your pet off at the pound if it gets to be a problem. I'd hate to meet the parents that drop their kids off at the pound.
Click to expand...
They call that daycare, hun. And boarding school.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, but at the end of the day the parents still have to take the kids back. You don't have to do that with a pet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top