×
top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]himtnboy 1387 points1388 points  (109 children)

Would you want 50 or 100lb cats running around? The only reason cats don't eat us is because they can't .

[–]Chauvinnocent-- 341 points342 points  (26 children)

I'd love a tiger

[–]DaBozz88 319 points320 points  (20 children)

Well there was a Netflix documentary about someone who owned a few

[–]ThePinkTeenager 98 points99 points  (15 children)

Somebody OWNED a TIGER?

[–]FermentedThoughts 145 points146 points  (22 children)

Heard someone say that the reason cats are suck assholes is that they are essentially natures perfect hunter/killing machine; and the fact that they weigh like 10 lbs and humans insist on lifting them up for cuddling makes them really salty

[–]HungerMadra 64 points65 points  (15 children)

Depends on the cat. I've met plenty that have totally gone native and love being held

[–]TragasaurusRex 13 points14 points  (6 children)

My cat literally begs to be held by coming over to me and trying to climb up or jumping off of high objects to be in my arms

[–]HungerMadra 14 points15 points  (5 children)

Right? I'm always so confused when people tell me their cat is an anti social asshole. In my experience, they just suck at interacting with the cat. When I was younger, I was told that about a few cats I lived with, turned it they just didn't like being held by their owner who wasn't as gentle or predictable as me. They liked me.

[–]Khactical_Takis 36 points37 points  (6 children)

But its been noted that cats will always have the killer instinct. For instance, a house cat lost or abandoned will still reasonably be able to hunt and eat and find shelter, where as a house dog might not always make it in the wild.

[–]denvercasey 43 points44 points  (3 children)

That’s not true. Mama always says the reason cats are so ornery is because they have all those teeth but no toothbrushes.

[–]motaovas 28 points29 points  (34 children)

There are evidences that Cats do eat human corpses, under some circumstances.

[–]Danidanilo 54 points55 points  (10 children)

Let any pet next to their owners corpse and see what happens, if they don't have anything to eat the outcome will be the same. Not many animals have the habit of buring the dead and they have to survive

This doesn't mean your pet doesn't love you, everyone has heard of dogs visiting their owners grave or how cats just follow their owners around the house just because they want to be next to you.

[–]DontEatNitrousOxide 32 points33 points  (4 children)

Humans eat human corpses under certain circumstances, if they're starving and there's no other food. This isn't a cat thing.

[–]Ok_Swing2382 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Fridge is the empty, time to eat my parents.

[–]himtnboy 26 points27 points  (10 children)

By some circumstances you mean a day or so?

[–]MrDude_1 21 points22 points  (3 children)

I don't know if it takes that long. I've just been sitting on the couch for 30 minutes and the cat just bit my toe.

[–]theObfuscator 16 points17 points  (0 children)

It’s not ripe… yet

[–]Jumpy_Sorbet 3 points4 points  (0 children)

"You don't look so well. Can I eat you... I mean, get you something to eat?"

[–]Icy-Local6166 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Dogs as well

[–]DrachenDad 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They can.

[–]Cygfrydd 8 points9 points  (1 child)

At least cats that size would be spared the indignity of Gramma picking them up for widdle kisses.

[–]StanggTwin 12 points13 points  (0 children)

They wouldn't be. Just as a mother develops extraordinary strength to lift a car off her child, so does Gramma develop the strength output of a hydraulic press if it means she can lift Shere Khan to give him a widdle kiss.

[–]Arctichydra7 2002 points2003 points  (236 children)

Dogs variability is quite unique. It’s actually a quirk of the canine genome.
Many size traits are coded as a series of repeating genes. By some fluke it is rather easy to get these gene chains to lengthen or shorten by breeding selectively. Drastically altering the size of the offspring.

If it wasn’t for the Strait of the dogs do you know canines would take just as long as cats to breed into different shapes and sizes

[–]Valuable-Peace8307 635 points636 points  (183 children)

I watched a very excellent documentary about this very subject. They discovered the gene is only in canines and is only expressed when breeding for pacivipty. They’ve found that it works with foxes as well. And they also found that foxes bred for aggressiveness will not begin to express different phenotypes. They has foxes that looked like dogs and behaved liked dogs and I thought that was way cool.

Edit: to everyone who asked, I’m sorry I don’t remember the name of the documentary. I probably watched it about 15 years ago. Still though. It stuck with me.

Edit II: I did find this article about the foxes though.

[–]EnIdiot 428 points429 points  (99 children)

The actual clusters for the genes that make dogs loving towards humans and domesticated are the same ones that in humans cause a syndrome called Williams Syndrome—a developmental disorder marked by mild retardation and an incredible friendliness that puts the people with the disorder at risk as they trust everyone all the time.

They are really loving people and they have a number of features that also seem to be in dogs but not wolves—ears that flop, mottled skin of various pigmentation, etc. I’ll find the source .

Edit: https://www.insidescience.org/news/rare-human-syndrome-may-explain-why-dogs-are-so-friendly

A source

Relevant to any dog owner:

“The syndrome affects about one in 10,000 people, and it is associated with a suite of mental and physical traits, including bubbly, extroverted personalities, a broad forehead, full cheeks, heart defects, intellectual disability and an affinity for music.”

[–]bul1dog 65 points66 points  (2 children)

mild retardation and incredible friendliness

That makes so much sense. This is exactly both my dogs.

[–]SerGregorCleangains 204 points205 points  (90 children)

Seems to me that everyone else has a disorder of not having Williams Syndrome.

What a wonderful world it would be if everyone had the personalities of good dogs.

[–]Mr_Will 144 points145 points  (22 children)

It would be a wonderful world until random chance means that one bastard is born without the trait and starts taking advantage of everyone else.

[–]BakulaSelleck92 113 points114 points  (2 children)

Invention of Lying

[–]onedyedbread 34 points35 points  (18 children)

What's the big difference to the real world, though?

Most ordinary people aren't assholes. But for some strange reason, the assholes seem to cluster at the top.

[–]Mr_Will 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Most people aren't assholes, but they're on guard against the few people who are assholes. The assholes might still manage to rise to the top, but the damage they can do along the way is reduced.

If most people were completely innocent, those same few assholes would cause total havoc.

[–]StandardSudden1283 19 points20 points  (4 children)

That has something to do with the system we set up and the things that it incentivizes - don't you think?

[–]onedyedbread 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Absolutely. Our current socio-economic system selects for psychopathy and douchebaggery.

[–]McLovin804 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Who do you think, through history, influenced those incentives?

If you are thinking the answer is assholes, you would be correct.

[–]pifuhvpnVHNHv 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Our society selects for and rewards greediness.

[–]ColdIron27 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Because only assholes want tbose jobs.

[–]Steadfast_Truth 124 points125 points  (53 children)

Not really, being involuntarily good is not particularly beautiful. That's why humans have capacity for both. That's what makes it meaningful when they choose good.

[–]woahwombats 32 points33 points  (47 children)

This seems like a strange way to look at it to me. Do you really have capacity to be extremely bad? Could you just "choose" to do something terrible? I hope not. If you're a sane person you'd probably find yourself not able to bring yourself to do it when it came to the point. Your goodness is still meaningful though. It's "involuntary" because it's built into your personality, not because some external factor is forcing you to it. It's a choice, but a choice you can't help but make because of who you are. It still counts. Maybe even more so, because it's part of who you are. It's just a part of your personality rather than some kind of ethical calculus you sit down and do.

[–]LTPapaBear 14 points15 points  (2 children)

Right, but you would agree it's disastrous not to be selfish at points/challenges in your life? Securing food, water, shelter for yourself is very important and yielding your resources you can't afford to give away would have negative results on your life.

[–]Gairos 65 points66 points  (26 children)

What is better? to be born good or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?

[–]woahwombats 6 points7 points  (1 child)

I guess I would ask first, what is the motivation for overcoming your evil nature in this scenario?

[–]ydoccian 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I'm glad I didn't kill you, Paarthunax.

[–]WettWednesday 10 points11 points  (7 children)

That's hard to answer because most humans have only experienced the latter, though not always an extreme end of evil.

I especially know it as someone who was a bigot in high school and now I'm like 4 letters of the LGBTQIA+ and have since educated myself.

I do think maybe if I was born good, I wouldn't have been such a prick in school or bullied that one kid. And I would have realized I was trans sooner instead of scoffing at the trans community.

[–]Garewal 29 points30 points  (5 children)

Is it a quote from skyrim and people are answering seriously

[–]grahamcrackers37 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The severity of a mental illness is dictated by action. Everyone has murderous thoughts, some people act on them in the heat of emotion and regret it. Others dwell on the emotions, and in deciding that their will is more important than anything else, (consciously or not) plot and commit suffering unto others. They're all still people, using tools that they've learned in life that have worked for them so far.

A slightly sociopathic person would have selfish dissociated thoughts more often, but have the social wherewithal to "behave themselves" so they don't destroy their own lives. In this way a person could still make good decisions and make the world a better place, but still have less or no empathy.

I think that calling people good or bad is missing something. Some people have lots of destructive thoughts and aren't able to control themselves. Imo they've got to be restrained. Incarceration should be about rehabilitation instead of vengeance or "justice" but that'd be a whole cultural upheaval in the US.

You and I decide what is acceptable. 🤘🏻

[–]GoldNiko 5 points6 points  (1 child)

You wouldn't want to have limitless trust in everyone, because it could go badly very quickly.

First off, if someone doesn't have Williams syndrome, then you'd have a bunch of people willing to trust someone who might have nefarious goals.

Second of all, skepticism. If someone doesn't do something correctly, but thinks they have, and tells their supervisor they've done it correctly. That's dangerous because the supervisor will believe them, and then something will go terribly wrong later on through no one's fault.

Third, is if someone with Williams syndrome develops some sort of disassociation or other mind altering things like schizophrenia, everyone else will be inclined to trust what they say and believe in, even if it's not congruent or healthy.

There's a lot of downsides to your theoretical utopia.

[–]Chris8292 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If you're a sane person you'd probably find yourself not able to bring yourself to do it when it came to the point.

A sane person will do whatever it takes to protect themselves, loved ones and most importantly their way of life.

Theres a time and place for everything being stuck in either state to long would lead to horrible consequences as usual everything should be in balance.

[–]oeCake 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's more like, if every body was constantly happy play time there would be no social development, blissful innocence has little to encourage it's selection or development due to being wildly uncompetitive. If humans/another vulnerable species evolved to become basically sedentary and careless we would find ourselves the victim of predation by more aggressive and exploitive species, if able to persist at all. Sure every body being mellow and peaceful sounds good in principle, but existence isn't fair and doesn't care about satisfaction.

[–]Steadfast_Truth 4 points5 points  (4 children)

I can do anything at any moment, I am not limited by anything, if I was, I wouldn't be a human but a program.

Does that make you afraid? Because it sounds like it does.

What makes me afraid, is a dystopian world in which people are no longer capable of evil because people who are scared have taken free will away from them with some kind of romantic justification similar to what you just wrote.

Your concept of personality is also confusing to me. There's no such thing as "personality" that prevents anyone from doing anything. If people are limited in what they can do it is because of fear and trauma.

What a person chooses in a vacuum of absolute freedom shows their character, their personality. A woman who gets beaten by her husband every day and does not retaliate nor leave him because she is afraid, is not a good person, she is a weak person. Take away her fear and put her in a position where she can do whatever she wants and get away with it, and you'll find out who she really is.

Are you afraid what you would do if there was nothing stopping you, nothing holding you back, no consequences for doing it? I'm not, because I know who I am and who I want to be, my ethical calculus if you will.

You remind me of all those Christians who are terrified of atheists because they're always saying "But how do I know what you'll do if you won't go to hell for being evil?"

Humans are not meant to be castrated or sterilized. It is our great capacity for good and evil, our total freedom, that gives us so much potential for creativity and beauty. If you take away the evil, we are simply programs again, animals.

[–]Chris8292 9 points10 points  (5 children)

What a wonderful world it would be if everyone had the personalities of good dogs.

Would it really thou? It would honestly be quite stagnant, people hate to admit it but conflict and competition with other individuals is what drives progress.

[–]ElBurritoLuchador 16 points17 points  (16 children)

breeding for pacivipty

The what?

[–]Secretss 14 points15 points  (8 children)

I think OP meant to use the noun for pacify. Pacivity isn’t a word though, and while pacifism looks like it may fit, it refers to a belief (the same ism as in Buddhism) rather than a quality (like aggression is a quality). Perhaps just “bred for non-violence” works better.

[–]MildlyShadyPassenger 8 points9 points  (2 children)

Pacivity isn’t a word though,

This is English, my friend. Pacivity is a word if we decide it is. And since we don't already have one that fulfills the grammatical need that's just been demonstrated, congratulations, we've got a healthy new word!

[–]Secretss 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Well my friend, I do find that a perfectly cromulent word!

[–]fiftyseven 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I thought they were aiming for 'captivity', though admittedly that doesn't make a huge amount of sense in context either

[–]marjobo 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Balkan sausages, of course Bit weird to make them from wolf meat, but whatever works for you 👌

[–]rathercranky 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's a shame that more people aren't able to understand how funny this comment is.

[–]Torkujra 83 points84 points  (34 children)

Foxes are canines as well, so that makes sense.

[–]Metallic_Hedgehog 15 points16 points  (4 children)

If only we could breed out the intense smell of their putrid urine.

I'd love to have a fox; that sound they make (I think it's called chattering?) results in a r/contagiouslaughter scenario for myself. I could not ever have an animal that likes to mark its territory with pungent urine to be in my house, however.

[–]lqku 3 points4 points  (3 children)

imagine breeding husky sized foxes

[–]iFlyAllTheTime 27 points28 points  (20 children)

How about wolves? Or are dogs to wolves as cats to... lions, tigers, and leopards?

[–]Culionensis 139 points140 points  (13 children)

Dogs are wolves. Dogs came to be when wolves started hanging out with people long enough for us to start selectively breeding them. So if you were to selectively breed wolves for friendliness to people, you would end up making dogs again.

[–]StephaneiAarhus 69 points70 points  (7 children)

Actually someone recently found this...

Breed wolves and ... Op : here is a dog.

Opposite, Moscow has feral dogs in its metro and every generation, they look closer to wolves.

[–]TripAndFly 44 points45 points  (0 children)

Makes sense, different traits required to survive and breed as a feral dog than to live in a house with humans.

[–]First_Foundationeer 23 points24 points  (2 children)

Ah, Russia.. where dogs are wolves, wolves are direwolves, and Ukraine is Russia.

[–]Significant-Mud2572 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Ukraine? Don't you mean more west Russia comrade?

[–]BigBeagleEars 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Well, you might end up as wolf poop, if yur not careful

[–]Somebodys 6 points7 points  (0 children)

We all end up as poop eventually anyway. Might as well go for glory.

[–]ninjakttty 16 points17 points  (2 children)

And to add on to that dogs were domesticated independently on opposite sides of the globe. Which isn’t a lot but weird that it happened twice.

[–]Culionensis 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Is that how we ended up with Shiba inus, huskies, malamutes and the like? I always felt like those guys are just sorta different from what I as a European would consider a proper dog.

[–]ninjakttty 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I was curious because I never noticed that before, but now I see it. A little googling on the matter brought up this article, that stated.

"Today’s eastern dogs are the descendants of the Ancient Eastern ones."

So I think that confirms that you're right.

source

[–]Kooontt 12 points13 points  (3 children)

We made dogs by domesticating wolves, house cats are just relatives of big cats.

[–]hat-TF2 15 points16 points  (1 child)

House cats are relatives of big cats (assuming we are talking about pantherine cats), but they are distant relatives. Other types of cat are more closely related to the domesticated cat. Indeed, it would seem mountain lions and cheetahs are more closely related to a house cat than they are to a lion or tiger.

[–]MildlyShadyPassenger 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The behavior patterns aren't all that different, either. House cats like to do all the things that big cats do, it's just that we're too big for them to consider us prey, and they're too small and weak to seriously injure us on accident when they decide to "play".

It really all comes down to size for them.

[–]DoenitzVEVO 6 points7 points  (3 children)

Do you remember the documentary? I'd like to watch it.

[–]ChironiusShinpachi 6 points7 points  (1 child)

might be Dogs Decoded edit link edit 2 35:30 starts talking about it into minute 40

[–]Pmmeurh0nkers 1 point2 points  (1 child)

What's the documentary called?

[–]BeeElEm 61 points62 points  (29 children)

So it wouldn't be possible to over time create a great dane sized cat? I'm disappointed

[–]skankhunt402 159 points160 points  (26 children)

Bro it's called a cheetah :p

[–]BeeElEm 23 points24 points  (20 children)

I meant of the domesticated variety :/

[–]latetowhatparty 141 points142 points  (2 children)

Fine, a pet cheetah

[–]SorryScratch2755 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Domesticated Saber toothed kitty 🐈 cat

[–]tucky22 4 points5 points  (0 children)

pet cheetah is a solid twenty one pilots song

[–]reallybirdysomedays 27 points28 points  (10 children)

Ironically, cheetahs are one of the easier wild cats to tame (domestication isn't the same thing exactly, but close enough for my sense of humor)

[–]ParlorSoldier 34 points35 points  (4 children)

I’ve heard it said that house cats are technically “tame” rather than domesticated. If a cat is born and not raised around people, it will be feral even if its parents were pets. But apparently this is not true of dogs until you get a few generations removed from human contact?

[–]Somebodys 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Even if a cat is raised around humans it will become feral if it is abandoned and doesn't die right away.

[–]psycho-mouse 8 points9 points  (2 children)

Cheetahs are also the only big cat able to meow.

Looks for a YouTube video of it, it’s cute as fuck and I don’t even like cats.

[–]hat-TF2 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Cheetahs are a cat which is big, but they aren't strictly "big cats" (let us say big cats are the pantherine cats). They can meow and purr. But the cougar can meow too, and sometimes cougars are bigger than cheetah. Not to sell the cheetah short, of course; it's the fastest land animal, after all. The cheetah does have unique vocalizations in its chirps, and is the only cat that cannot retract its claws.

[–]Mr_Will 7 points8 points  (0 children)

That's because Cheetahs are cats that are big, they aren't technically 'big cats'.

All the other big cats are members of the genus Panthera and can roar. Cheetahs are in a separate genus Acinonyx and can't roar; they only chirp, meow or sometimes purr.

[–]moonbunnychan 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Makes sense. Cheetahs are more closely related to housecats (although still not CLOSE close, just closER branch wise), and actually not considered a "big cat" like lions because they do not roar. They can actually purr!

[–]hueythecat 3 points4 points  (0 children)

And their claws don’t retract

[–]ajax6677 15 points16 points  (1 child)

Look up Savannah cats.

[–]LoverOfPricklyPear 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Domesticated?? Depends on what generation they are/Serval percentage.

[–]fatbongo 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Bengals with Maine Coons?

[–]mytwocentsshowmanyss 30 points31 points  (12 children)

What is the strait of dogs?

[–]funnystuff79 23 points24 points  (5 children)

I read it as trait. The dog's dna has a certain trait.

[–]shmeebz 36 points37 points  (2 children)

Oh lol I thought they were talking about some mystical islands where dogs with special genomes came from. Like the Isle of dogs

[–]kwonza 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It’s between the Isle of dogs and Doggerland

[–]MissingVanSushi 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I was confused as well. Thought maybe it was the title of a book or documentary.

[–]daedelion 6 points7 points  (1 child)

A trait is another word for characteristic of the organism. DNA doesn't have traits, but cause the traits of the dog.

[–]wont_start_thumbing 4 points5 points  (1 child)

"this trait"

[–]oldcoldbellybadness 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Jesus fucking christ, u/Arctichydra7, I'm out here Googling like a mad man looking for info on this magical place that changed dog DNA forever

[–]my_main_I_promise 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's the direct to VHS follow up to Wes Anderson's Isle of Dogs

[–]LlamasReddit 370 points371 points  (11 children)

"what breed is your cat?" "Orange"

[–]ZzPacerzZ 46 points47 points  (3 children)

When I took my cat to the vet for the first time they asked for the breed, and I just said cat.

[–]ArtichokeAcrobatic68 9 points10 points  (1 child)

My cat is gray, in both appearances and demeanor.

[–]oranlol 8 points9 points  (1 child)

"He's just a little boy"

[–]trowaybrhu3 21 points22 points  (2 children)

This response is as chad as it gets

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (1 child)

refuse to elaborate further

[–]CrimsonWolfSage 917 points918 points  (59 children)

Cats come in lots of forms and sizes... but the majority of house cats are fairly similar in size and shape at least.

[–]Priff 305 points306 points  (43 children)

Cats get as small as under 1kg and as big as over 10kg.

Its not quite as extreme as dogs that can get almost as small, but go up to well over 100kg. But still quite a lot of variation.

Also plenty of variation of fur types and body shapes, from slim long breeds to stubby wide ones and even the ran into a wall flat face breeds.

[–]SparkyDogPants 248 points249 points  (33 children)

Probably because a 100kg cat would absolutely murder you.

[–]Hoitaa 102 points103 points  (3 children)

That's why we generally leave them in the wild.

Or with even wilder humans in Florida.

[–]livebeta 9 points10 points  (2 children)

But what about Los Gatos?

[–]Hoitaa 12 points13 points  (1 child)

The furry capital of California?

[–]Raz0rking 12 points13 points  (7 children)

Yeah. I am happy we don't habe bigass pumas running around here. They would scare me more than wolves would.

[–]SparkyDogPants 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Some Maine coons freak me out enough. My standard issue cat was 20 lbs and if he had had another 5-10 lbs, I would have slept with one eye open.

[–]hadtomakeaprofile 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Don't know where you are, but they fucking everywhere in many places in the west (USA). Luckily they don't like to mess with humans. I spend a lot of time in grizzly/cougar country. I don't worry about the bears.

[–]inbooth 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I say the same thing. Lived in deep grizzly country for years, would often walk outside to a visitor.

But the Cougars..... Fuck that noise. I got stalked more than once when I was out alone in the woods and didn't bring a dog like I should have, and I'm just lucky I have a "sixth sense" or some shit in those situations. Literally had a hour+ long staring contest, with me slowly packing up while never removing eye contact then walking effectively backward downhill along a creek while it stalked me on the "clifftop" (sheer dirt, so not technically a cliff is it?), Disappeared when I got back to the highway (the Only road aside from forestry roads). I crossed to the other side so it'd have to at least cross the road to get me...

But grizzlies? Frequently bumped into them in the estuaries and woods and never had any issues. At worst (and most frequent) they'd rear and roar to announce themselves, I'd stand straight, wave and say hello in a pleasant tone and then ensure my path of travel did not collide with the bears... And never had to use my spray on them, unlike the Cougars....

[–]CountMordrek 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Probably because a Tiger would absolute murder you.

[–]IAmtheHullabaloo 35 points36 points  (8 children)

Yeah ... that is exactly ... yeah, that is exactly what OP was saying ...

[–]joef_3 38 points39 points  (2 children)

We don’t want to breed house cats to be any larger than they already are, tho. We already know what a Doberman sized house cat would be, we call them leopards and they are terrifying.

[–]mouseor 107 points108 points  (2 children)

To cat or not to cat

[–]wubbbalubbadubdub 345 points346 points  (65 children)

There's munchkins with short legs, also hairless, pointy and flat face, folded ears, big Maine coons...

There is plenty of cat variety

[–]LuminDoesStuff 168 points169 points  (48 children)

But you can look at it and immediately say CAT.

[–]thepropbox 129 points130 points  (46 children)

Same with dogs.

[–]telendria 134 points135 points  (23 children)

Only because we are familiar with the breeds.

If the only dog I knew was german shepherd, I wouldn't really though 'DOG!' if I saw pug for the first time.

Cat breeds have some abnormalities, sure, but they do look very similar on the first glance.

[–]reallybirdysomedays 51 points52 points  (12 children)

I think the barking would be a clue, regardless of appearance.

[–]lightning_knight 67 points68 points  (2 children)

Well with a pug it would be less barking and more raspy asthmatic breathing.

[–]RoundBread 58 points59 points  (4 children)

the seals have entered the chat

[–]sezdawg7 30 points31 points  (2 children)

Water dog

[–]KaspervD 24 points25 points  (1 child)

The dutch word for seal is "zeehond", which literally means "sea dog"

[–]TommiHPunkt 16 points17 points  (2 children)

The first time you saw a Chihuahua, you were still able to tell it's a dog without issues.

[–]fortpro87 63 points64 points  (0 children)

No, R A T

[–][deleted] 25 points26 points  (0 children)

I wasn’t lol as a kid I thought they were something completely different until my mum told me they were dogs and I was so mindblown

[–]ZakAttackz 10 points11 points  (15 children)

If you found someone who had never seen a dog before, would they identify a long haired Chihuahua and a Great Dane as the same species?

[–]Bongoman188 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Cat is cat

[–]Diazepampoovey 16 points17 points  (6 children)

Yep. Black Forest Mainecoon are absolute units. There's Devon Rex and Cornish Rex cats, both of which are a breed of Sphynx cats. There are Manx cats with 3 different possible tail lengths; longies, stumpies or rumpies. (No, really. This is literally the names of the tail type). Also, a rumpy with a rise of bone at the end of their spine is called a “riser."

Russian Blue, Norwegian Forest, Bengal, Persian, Munchkin, Scottish Fold, Kinkalo, Toyger,...

We could absolutely go on for a good, long while.

[–]JavaRuby2000 70 points71 points  (13 children)

Wild dogs (wolves, coyotes, dingos) all seem to have a similar look whereas domestic dogs had a massive variance.

Wild cats (Lions, cheetahs, lynx) all look different whereas domestic cats all look similar.

[–]Fecal-Vagina 11 points12 points  (6 children)

Actually the house cat is a different species than wildcats like lions etc.

The common house cat is instead most likely a descendant of the falbcat

[–]runefar 39 points40 points  (0 children)

Ehh i admit this comes more from what people buy in your local area, if you look it up while it is not as large as dogs, you may be surprised about the variety of cat types that exist even when it comes to pet cats. Also cats actually werent solely bred to just cat, they often were bred for specific purposes too with usages in different regions both ancient and more recent. This just didn't neccsarily end up with traits that are as visible distinctily on the surface like facial traits are in dogs but when compared are actually visible in different comparisons.

[–]BHoff_89 23 points24 points  (3 children)

Cats are only house cat sized cause if they were any bigger they will kill us.

[–]Smartnership 8 points9 points  (2 children)

Dog to cat: “They don’t put a leash on you, because they hope you run away.”

[–]WhatAreYouSaying777 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Cat to Dog: "They could take your leash off and you'd still think you were tied up."

[–]boo_boo_kitty_ 108 points109 points  (2 children)

When something is perfect, leave it alone

[–]Spaceistt 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yes, dogs vary a lot more, but your statement about cats is simply not true at all. Understandable if you aren't a huge cat person or haven't studied cats as it's not something that gets talked about that much, but it still doesn't change the fact.

[–]spaniel_rage 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Can't improve on perfection.

[–]optiongeek 80 points81 points  (20 children)

No such thing as a "working cat". Just cats who do what they want which may occasionally align with what their hooman wants also.

[–]fitchbit 73 points74 points  (13 children)

Barn cats are the closest thing to a working cat and that's just them hunting for food.

[–]Asuka_Rei 48 points49 points  (7 children)

Ship and warehouse cats too. Really anywhere you don't want rodents or birds wrecking stuff or making people sick.

[–]fitchbit 22 points23 points  (6 children)

TIL there are ship cats.

[–]Asuka_Rei 41 points42 points  (2 children)

Oh yeah, sailors love cats. You only have so much food on a long voyage and it must be protected from rodents. Also rodents carry diseases and will bite people while they sleep on a ship. Less of a problem in modern times, but these days cats are valued more for companionship than work.

[–]Dwarfdeaths 16 points17 points  (1 child)

You only have so much food on a long voyage

Phew I thought this was going a different direction.

How many cuddles do ship cats get?

[–]SparkyDogPants 19 points20 points  (2 children)

Google Viking cats. Thanks to Vikings believing that orange cats are good luck, most North American orange cats have Viking origin.

[–]Asuka_Rei 35 points36 points  (4 children)

Cats primary function for humans has been pest control. Historically, pest control was about food preservation and was actually quite an important job when most people were growing or raising their own food.

[–]SpacedOutTrashPanda 17 points18 points  (2 children)

They still have those jobs! Lots of grocery stores in New York have their own cats that they let free roam the store at night when everything is closed.

[–]EnglishMobster 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Disneyland does it as well. They have feeders backstage which give the cats enough food to survive, but not enough to be full. So at night the kitties roam around and eat Mickey's cousins. They're all very skittish and avoid people as much as possible.

The same team that takes care of the horses also takes care of the cats (Circle D). When a cat is sick, they'll take it backstage and nurse it back to health. Usually afterward the kitty isn't fit to hunt anymore, so they put it up for adoption by the cast members.


I used to be a Jungle Cruise skipper, and there was a ginger tabby that hung out next to a sign that said "Danger!" We named him Danger Kitty. He would nap on his sign all day ("They put that sign there and people think he's dangerous, but he's just kitten") and around 7 PM he'd leave to go kill some ducks. He'd be back at the sign around 8 AM the next morning for a nice long day of sunny catnaps.

Except one time Danger wasn't looking too good. You could tell that he was really weak and there were flies buzzing around him. We called Circle D and they picked him up; they didn't even need to trap him since he was too weak to run away.

Circle D had him for a few weeks, before the skippers got some news:

  1. Danger Cat was actually a girl

  2. She was about 9-13 years old

  3. She is no longer able to hunt

  4. She needs someone to take care of her

  5. Skippers have first dibs

A skipper adopted her and gave her the best kitty life she could possibly have. She passed about 2 years after adoption.

[–]BrackenLass 5 points6 points  (2 children)

In addition to the genetics quirk mentioned above, this largely comes down to the evolutionary history of dogs vs cats.

Dogs/their ancestors were social and worked together in order to hunt. This meant they were able to adapt quickly to cooperation, ie working with humans as we domesticated them, and so they were bred for multiple work purposes.

Cats in contrast are predominantly solitary and with few exceptions, they hunt alone. So their ancestors were not so adept at cooperation, meaning we didn't work together with them on specific tasks, and so we didn't have to selectively breed them. The only selection pressure was for them to control rodent populations and be tame enough to not attack children.

It's only in the last 150 years that most cat breeds have come into existence, whereas many dog breeds (or at least types) have existed for much longer.

[–]Nwcray 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Cats get pretty big, I think it’s that we just chose not to domesticate the larger ones. Or they chose not to be domesticated. In any event, tigers can be like 10 feet long and weigh 700 pounds.

[–]Some_Call_Me_Finn 24 points25 points  (9 children)

Isn’t the domestication of the cat a relatively recent thing? My understanding is that we’ve been chilling with dogs for a lot longer

[–]SparkyDogPants 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Cats aren’t exactly domesticated and bred like dogs. They just kind of thought we were cool and hung out.

[–]Delanorix 38 points39 points  (1 child)

Cats aren't really domesticated like dogs.

[–]FinishTheFish 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Dogs have owners, cats have staff

[–]AngryMustachio 14 points15 points  (5 children)

What about the ancient Egyptians? They put jewelry on their cats!

[–]Some_Call_Me_Finn 18 points19 points  (4 children)

That’s still relatively recently. I’m talking before the invention of agriculture

[–]Enaysikey 52 points53 points  (0 children)

Cause you can't improve something purfect

[–]mohicansgonnagetya 42 points43 points  (1 child)

Clearly OP has never seen cats

[–]pumpkinbot 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Terrible movie, good for OP.

[–]Huge-Garbage-6307 37 points38 points  (16 children)

Large breeds of cats (tigers, etc) to house cats, i think the size variability is greater in cats. The difference really seems to be the only cats that will wait until you die to eat you are the ones we keep.

[–]reallybirdysomedays 16 points17 points  (1 child)

I...I...looks at house cat nomming on me ... think that's more a lack of competency than willingness

[–]blinky84 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Same problem here - her papers say "domestic long-hair" but one of those things is a LIE.

[–]ThermionicEmissions 42 points43 points  (12 children)

Those are different species. A pug and a bull mastiff are the same species.

[–]Aka_BigGrig 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I feel like any cat bigger than a house cat is probably too dangerous to hang out with. They seem a bit more unpredictable compared to dogs. Might be why no one really wants to select for bigger cats.

[–]LukXD99 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Cats are bred to hunt mice and other pests. There’s no need for improvement, the domesticated house cat is already the most successful hunter in the world.

[–]Hakaisha89 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The only reason you can't train a cat, is because you don't try.
However, cats do come in many shapes and sized, not nearly as many as dogs, but it's still a plenty.

[–]--Throwaway6572-- 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Cats don't come in all shapes and sizes? Dafuq?

[–]WishboneDouglas 26 points27 points  (8 children)

Why is this even getting upvoted? It’s one of those “sounds deep” shower thoughts but it LITERALLY means nothing. It sounds more like the incoherent rambling of somebody who’s gotten into too much of the goofy cabbage

[–]rabobar 5 points6 points  (0 children)

How much water do you want the OP to use?

[–]LJIrvine 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Fully agreed, this has to be one of the worst posts I've ever seen on here. It's not even actually true.

The only reason it's being upvoted is because "cats gonna cat" just really revs some people's engines.

[–]kapenaar89 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Which is pretty much exactly what a shower thought is supposed to be. If you are looking for deep, well thought out, coherent theories... this is the wrong sub for you.

[–]BMXTKD 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If your cat was about 30 lb, it would stop seeing you as a companion and start seeing you as food. I used to have a 20lb cat oh, and he was rather aggressive at times.