It's not unneeded. A lot of people don't understand what declawing actually is or haven't put thought into the harm it causes. They just think it's a harmless way to protect their furniture.

let beans live

I had a cat that was like that with tuna. He never begged for any other food but he'd try to get that if you had it on your plate. It got to the point where he wouldn't even bother me while I was making the food, he would just go and wait on the desk where I ate. He never sat there otherwise so he was planning that shit out lol. He also once stole an entire McDonald's cheeseburger, wrapper, and all and hid under the bed with it like Beans when he was a very young kitten. That thing was bigger than him.

Whenever I make tuna, I squeeze all the juice on a plate, with a few chunks of tuna. They slurp that up quick, and that satisfies them.

You have to keep an eye on them though, and make sure the one big one doesn't get it all. Everybody gets a few licks of the tuna juice.

Nuh-uh. Caught that chicken fair and square

They will never own a home

Is now 18 pounds, until the chicken is digested 😂

I guess I'm lucky my cat wont touch any of my food.

tru. Beans won this prize fair and square

You think a lot of people on Lemmy don't understand that declawing harms cats?

I don't know what everyone on lemmy knows or not.

Beans with the mean genes and the sharp beans

They didn't "create a reason to be upset." Declawing cats is a reason to be upset. It's inhumane.

How would you feel if someone cut all your fingertips off at the first knuckle and said "wow, impotent rage must be your identity" when you got upset about it?

Become ungovernable.

You literally just contradicted yourself in two sentences.

You claim you don't support inhumane practices, but then you call it "unnecessary drivel" when someone speaks out against them? And then you try to normalize those inhumane practices as simply "perfectly well accepted terms"?

They're not just words, those words have meanings, and the meaning of this one is atrocious.

Beans must be a millennial (/s)

If one wants to be an 'aktually' arse then take note that 'declawing' is actually a much more precise term than 'mutilation of extremities' which could perfectly well mean putting their tail in a wood chipper and be technically correct

get that money Beans

How do you feel about children?

Yeah my daughter did this to a box of popcorn chicken one time....

Trigger warning. Why you gotta bring artax into this?

Really? You have no grasp on the general demographic and ideological leaning of this platform and how that might be an indicator?

Ok, but no one said anything about declawing their cat. No one suggested that declawing cats wasn't harmful to them. What exactly is the point of getting pissy with someone for using the correct term for a thing?

Dragged it under the bed and growled at you for 40 minutes?

If it's a euphemism then it's not the correct term; mutilation is correct.

Lmfao!

It is the currently used term, perhaps but it’s certainly not the correct one.

Is that information even available anywhere or are we just guessing?

That isn’t a cat.

A very very happy uncle to many, love spending time with them, but also love going home to a quiet house a lot too

The top-level comment literally said "because the cat isn't declawed" not "because cats have claws."

It subtly insinuates that cats being declawed is the norm and that cats with claws are a deviation from that norm, when the reality is that cats with claws are the norm and that cats being declawed is the deviation. Not only that, but it's also harmful and atrocious to force that deviation upon them.

The top-level comment was an attempt to normalize the mutilation of pets, and the next person's response was completely appropriate and called for.

Yes, it is available.

Oh. Alright then.

It subtly insinuates that cats being declawed is the norm and that cats with claws are a deviation from that norm

No, it doesn't. Declawing was a common thing to do and it's still legal in most places. It's not that unusual to find rescue cats that have been declawed.

it’s also harmful and atrocious to force that deviation upon them.

Yes, for the 10th time in this thread, literally no one here has suggested otherwise.

The top-level comment was an attempt to normalize the mutilation of pets

Not it's not, it was an observation of the absence of a still relatively commonly seen occurrence. If they really cared cats, then a simple correction would have sufficed, rather than bringing attention to themselves with passive aggressive shittiness.

Beans will whoop your ass if you touch his chicken.

Declawing was a common thing to do and it's still legal in most places.

Exactly, all the more reason to call it out when you see language that normalizes it.

literally no one here has suggested otherwise.

If you agree that it's bad, then get with the effing program instead of focusing your ire on the people who are actually calling it out!

it was an observation of the absence of a still relatively commonly seen occurrence.

Again, a sane person would say "cats have claws," not "that cat hasn't been declawed." See the difference?

If they really cared cats, then a simple correction would have sufficed

Oh, you want to question whether someone really cares about cats? Someone who actually called out language that was attempting to normalize declawing, while you're the one rushing to defend that language? I don't think so.

rather than bringing attention to themselves with passive aggressive shittiness

You're the one doing that by arguing on the same side as the rhe people saying things like "do you go around looking for reasons to be offended" and "some people make impotent rage their identity."

Are you literally being the arse you wish to see in the world?

Also, no, that's a really shitty take. "Mutilation" doesn't have to refer to the most extreme examples in every case. Amputating the tips of their digits is mutilation, and just because you can think of a more extreme example of mutilation doesn't change that fact.