Are ‘city folk’ more likely to see pets as members of the family?

I found a very short article on UPI.com with the headline – “” City folk: ‘My dog is a like a child to me.’ “”

The first paragraph suggests people who live in urban areas are more likely to see their pets as family members, as opposed to rural families who might be more inclined to not feel this way. I think this generalization is far too broad.

I understand the general concept applied to the study, but I don’t like to catagorize people in this way – anymore than I would catagorize dog breeds as bad across the board. Maybe I’m reading too much into the article.

I’m hoping every day more people are finding animals to be more than ‘just animals.’ I’m hoping more people with pets in cities and rural areas are finding the unconditional love and special qualities each animal possesses.

In the case of pets, they are family members. Why have a pet if they are considered less than a member of the family?

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: