People are derailing this perfectly decent home-furnishing AskMe

January 9, 2006 9:34 AM

People are derailing this perfectly decent home-furnishing AskMe with a more-heat-than-light debate about a perennial hot-button issue. Maybe take the debate to MeTa and leave the green to window coverings?
posted by matildaben to etiquette/policy at 9:34 AM (79 comments total)

It's the old "first comment is sort of a derail" thing, which throws off the entire thread. If the declaw comment came in an hour later, it wouldn't have been such poison to the thread.
posted by mathowie at 9:52 AM on January 9, 2006

The interesting thing is that caddis's answer is probably the most common solution in the real world.
posted by smackfu at 10:09 AM on January 9, 2006

While I concede that it was a derail, the first comment basically told the poster to do something that a lot of people, myself included, find completely abhorrent, rather than providing the poster with an actual answer to his perfectly fine question about how to have curtains/blinds/whatever with cats in the house. Obviously, I wasn't the only person who felt that it had been made relevant to mention that what caddis would call a great solution is (in my estimation, again) barbaric.

(And before anyone goes on to the spay/neuter issue, that is generally done both for the health and well-being of the cat, as well as providing advantages to humans. Declawing provides no benefit to the cat.)
posted by Medieval Maven at 10:16 AM on January 9, 2006

If the suggestion were to get an abortion, is it ok for the pro-lifers to attack it?
posted by smackfu at 10:25 AM on January 9, 2006

the first comment basically told the poster to do something that a lot of people, myself included, find completely abhorrent, rather than providing the poster with an actual answer to his perfectly fine question about how to have curtains/blinds/whatever with cats in the house.

Well, no. It wasn't rather than -- it was in fact providing a useful and common answer. Find caddis' suggestion barbaric if you will, but I'm not so sure it's the noise you're trying to suggest it is -- many people declaw their cats specifically to solve the problem presented.
posted by cortex at 10:25 AM on January 9, 2006

smackfu: "If the suggestion were to get an abortion, is it ok for the pro-lifers to attack it?"

I don't think an abortion will fix the drapery problem.
posted by Plutor at 10:26 AM on January 9, 2006

caddis's suggestion was definitely not noise, it was a valid solution from a purely practical standpoint, so there's nothing wrong with it from that point of view. On the other hand, many people (including me) view declawing as unacceptable mutilation, so it was bound to provoke comment. I'd say on the whole the thread's going well; most people are coupling their declawing remarks with other suggestions, and it hasn't gotten very heated (by MeFi standards). Me, I'd remove the comments that are purely about declawing and let the rest go.
posted by languagehat at 10:40 AM on January 9, 2006

As I mentioned in my own comments, if you are going to declaw, you declaw kittens. Assuming his 3 cats are not kittens, it's not a realistic suggestion. Most vets in my area will not declaw a cat over 6 months of age, many draw the limit at 4 months.

Maybe caddis doesn't realize the difference between declawing a kitten and declawing a full-grown cat, but there is one, and I interpreted his suggestion as deliberately obnoxious. It didn't answer the question either, as the question was for window treatments, not cat treatments.
posted by catfood at 10:43 AM on January 9, 2006

catfood, it did answer the question -- it suggested a means of matching window treatments to cats. Thinking outside the box a little is a good thing in AskMe, because it gives the questioner new angles to their problem that they hadn't considered. (This is not an endorsement of adult cat declawing, just a general statement about "noise" vs. "lateral thinking".)

I'd guess that the folks with strong feelings about declawing are more likely to have read something antagonist (or "deliberately obnoxious") into what was, I'm presuming, intended as a benign, here's-a-possibility response. So it goes.
posted by cortex at 10:49 AM on January 9, 2006

Wood chipper.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:52 AM on January 9, 2006

How 'bout someone posts the question "Declawing Cats - What's Your Opinion?" in AskMe and Mefites can get it out of their collective systems (hopefully) forever.

Disclaimer: not a serious suggestion. Really.
posted by deborah at 10:53 AM on January 9, 2006

Those who found caddis's comment offensive could have flagged it as such and moved on. Just saying.
posted by desuetude at 10:56 AM on January 9, 2006

I don't think an abortion will fix the drapery problem.

You obviously haven't been seeing the same drapery I have. Some of these designers need to be prevented from reproducing.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:00 AM on January 9, 2006

And the drapes don't even match the curtains.
posted by cortex at 11:03 AM on January 9, 2006

most people are coupling their declawing remarks with other suggestions

Yeah, that's pretty much the key. tastybrains did it right.
posted by mediareport at 11:04 AM on January 9, 2006

I suggested two ugly window coverings, despite the original poster's objecting to 'ugly' options. If answers that aren't directly on target to the original question is the problem, why am I not being jumped on for that?

Because it's not about window treatments vs. cat treatments. Or ugly vs. pretty. It's about a hot button issue that people felt the need to jump all over regardless of whether it was an appropriate answer to the question or not.
posted by jacquilynne at 11:06 AM on January 9, 2006

Those who found caddis's comment offensive could have flagged it as such and moved on.

It wasn't the offensiveness that bothered them, I think; it was that caddis was giving what to them was, as catfood put it, "not a realistic suggestion." They had every right to note that in the thread, and then go on to answer the question.
posted by mediareport at 11:07 AM on January 9, 2006

... tastybrains did it right.
posted by mediareport at 11:04 AM PST on January 9 [!]

Since tastybrain said, "Please don't listen to caddis" I would have to disagree.
posted by caddis at 11:09 AM on January 9, 2006

Because it will be deleted, deborah. You'd have to put "I'm thinking of declawing my cat, but am worried I haven't considered the moral and physical ramifications. Can you enlighten me?"
posted by bonaldi at 11:09 AM on January 9, 2006

Well, caddis, I doubt that tastybrains meant not to listen to you in general (unless you two are having some sort of catfight (oh i am deeply sorry but i couldn't help it)), so the reading seems to be "please don't act on caddis' suggestion toward declawing". I'm not saying that's a detailed or nuanced rebuttal to the declawing suggestion, but it wasn't noisy or assholish.
posted by cortex at 11:14 AM on January 9, 2006

bonaldi, now that's an AskMe I would almost pay to monitor
posted by edgeways at 11:16 AM on January 9, 2006

I find the idea of indoor-only cats (or dogs) abhorrent. Release them, or are they already habituated to their sad little prison?
posted by Joeforking at 11:23 AM on January 9, 2006

MeFites: already habituated to their sad little prison
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:27 AM on January 9, 2006

bonaldi : "'I'm thinking of declawing my cat, but am worried I haven't considered the moral and physical ramifications. Can you enlighten me?'"

And then someone will derail it immediately by posting something about how cats should be kept away from draperies and we will be here again considering the complain about how the window people is ruining what is otherwise a perfect cat mutilation thread.
posted by nkyad at 11:27 AM on January 9, 2006

My "sad little prison" keeps my cat from getting lost or hurt in my extremely urban area. So yeah, I'm keeping her inside.
posted by agregoli at 11:27 AM on January 9, 2006

No, the mere fact that tastybrains disagreed was sufficient for my comment, which was delivered half in jest.
posted by caddis at 11:29 AM on January 9, 2006

Yeah, I'm in this manic analytical mode this morning. If it helps, my response was as much a vehicle for the weak catfight pun as anything.
posted by cortex at 11:30 AM on January 9, 2006

I like tastybrains too, for obvious reasons.
posted by brain_drain at 11:38 AM on January 9, 2006

P.S. MeFi must be doing pretty well right now if this AskMe thread and y2karl's posts are the only things prompting callouts. </jinx>
posted by brain_drain at 11:38 AM on January 9, 2006

I find the idea of indoor-only cats (or dogs) abhorrent.

Yeah, well, I find your cat crapping my garden abhorrent. If a dog was roaming free in the streets, it would get picked up in short order. I find the double standard for cats annoying.

I don't dislike cats (really!) but if I wanted one around my house, I'd go and get one. Please keep your cats indoors.
posted by GuyZero at 11:50 AM on January 9, 2006

Please give your poo-flinging monkey butler a colostomy. Thank you.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:55 AM on January 9, 2006

Why should your cats come over and kill the birds in my yard? We have laws against killing and it is to be the death penalty for your killer cat.

I am of course not serious (about the death penalty for your cat at least) but it is no less logical than your argument for indoor only cats.
posted by caddis at 11:57 AM on January 9, 2006

catfood writes "I interpreted his suggestion as deliberately obnoxious. It didn't answer the question either, as the question was for window treatments, not cat treatments."

In fact, the question was ultimately: "Any ideas? [or should I just get some new verticals and find something worthwhile to work on?...]" I'm not a fan of declawing, but it was a perfectly legitimate suggestion.
posted by OmieWise at 12:06 PM on January 9, 2006

Can you circumsize cats?
posted by klangklangston at 12:16 PM on January 9, 2006

For the love of . . .

Indoor only - Keeps cats from being run over, mauled by dogs, from being poisoned or otherwise hurt by other stupid human beings, keeps cats from terrorizing other people's homes, gardens, pets, etc. Result - Longer, healthier life for cats. Fewer pissed off neighbors. Net: Good.

Declawing - long healing process, can cause your cat to associate the litterbox with pain and therefore stop using it, can traumatize even young cats, and certainly older cats, is painful, prevents the cat from stretching properly by forshortening its legs/feet. Result - cat is needlessly short a digit and humans don't yell about the drapes. Net: At least the cat isn't traumatized by yelling about clawing but the yelling about crapping on the floor is a little disturbing.
posted by Medieval Maven at 12:18 PM on January 9, 2006

I don't see much 'derailing' of the thread. I see several interesting, direct answers to the drapery problem and a splendid showing of both the humane minds of Mefi and the barbaric. I'd suggest that caddis and jeffo-o-matic avail themselves of some hard thinking about why they would wish to keep an animal as a companion that they need to MUTILATE to enjoy.

Pro-declawing folks, if your drapes and furniture are so important to you, learn about humanely training your animals not to claw them. Don't resort to the scalpel.

If you simply can't undertake adapting to the changes an animal will bring to your world and work out conflicts of behaviour with kindness and training, then I suggest you don't get a pet.

Get a piece of rock instead.
posted by Arqa at 12:21 PM on January 9, 2006

Dear AxMe, I have three fully grown cats and am interested in unique and novel ways of declawing. Do you think an average man, armed only with a towel could consistantly declaw three cats? Assume no element of surprise. Bonus points if you can help me do this while getting the cats into a bathtub full of water.

Related question: What is the best way to reattach the flesh to my forearms? Will my ear grow back?
posted by blue_beetle at 12:33 PM on January 9, 2006

See above.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:35 PM on January 9, 2006

Hmmm, we never really did get to explore tail docking. Where do you stand Arqua?
posted by caddis at 12:40 PM on January 9, 2006

sorry, "Arqa"
posted by caddis at 12:41 PM on January 9, 2006

How about dewclaw removal while we are at it?
posted by caddis at 12:44 PM on January 9, 2006

Oops, forgot ear cropping.
posted by caddis at 12:47 PM on January 9, 2006

Declawing - ...can cause your cat to associate the litterbox with pain and therefore stop using it

How so?
posted by luneray at 12:50 PM on January 9, 2006

The cat's paws hurt from the surgery - it scratches in the litterbox - which causes it pain. Therefore, it doesn't want to use the litterbox.
posted by agregoli at 12:57 PM on January 9, 2006

How so?

1. Rip toenails out with pliers.

2. Walk barefoot on gravel.

3. Nonprofit!
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:00 PM on January 9, 2006

Yes caddis, as I suspect you have guessed I'm against tail docking and pleased to see that at last the UK is considering a total ban on it.

I do understand the arguments for from those who own real working dogs. The case for removing the tail to avoid hidden injuries to the tail that can occur when a dog is furrowing or in pursuit through barbed wire or thorny hedges is dismissable when the handler is shown how to properly examine a dog tail for damage.

Cosmetic docking is obscene and I believe that those who want to mutilate animals for the kudos a show rosette brings to them should visit the rock shop instead. Some breed societies allow this mutilation as part of the breed standard. I would prefer to see breeders take the initiative and breed working dogs with tails suited to their working purpose.

Depriving a dog of it's tail is taking away part of it's ability to communicate with others of its own kind.

As for dew claw removal, if a dew claw is badly damaged then yes, remove it under anaesthetic, if it's undamaged, leave it.

Domain over animals is not domination. Domain does not mean we can do what the hell we like to animals to suit our fancy, it means stewardship.
posted by Arqa at 1:03 PM on January 9, 2006

take off.
nuke.
orbit.
only.
sure.
posted by shmegegge at 1:17 PM on January 9, 2006

Thanks for illustrating the original complaint so clearly, Arqa. Here you've taken a perfectly good MetaTalk thread about derailing a thread with a discussion of declawing, and derailed it with a discussion of declawing.
posted by kindall at 1:40 PM on January 9, 2006

The cat's paws hurt from the surgery - it scratches in the litterbox - which causes it pain. Therefore, it doesn't want to use the litterbox.

I see your point, but since cats always scratch after relieving themselves, would anyplace they scratch cause them pain? Why not set up a different box in a new place, with different litter while the cat is recovering?

(Note: before the wrath MeFi cat lovers descend upon me, I have a non-declawed cat and am not planning on ever declawing him, but he does have litter box issues. I have to keep one step ahead of him to make sure that he's convinced that his litterbox is just the greatest place to do his business.)
posted by luneray at 2:18 PM on January 9, 2006

Personally, I believe that eradicating a cat's natural instincts by restricting their territory/mobility to far smaller area than what they were meant to live in is already sorta cruel; after that, a couple snipped claws is coals to Newcastle.
Caddis' suggestion is perfectly valid.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 2:19 PM on January 9, 2006

Kindall, caddis asked, I answered.

Simple.
posted by Arqa at 2:21 PM on January 9, 2006

DNFTT
posted by smackfu at 2:26 PM on January 9, 2006

I see your point, but since cats always scratch after relieving themselves, would anyplace they scratch cause them pain? Why not set up a different box in a new place, with different litter while the cat is recovering?


I'd ask you to consider getting gravel or sand inside your newly amputated finger joint and see if that perspective would add any understanding to the equation.
posted by agregoli at 2:27 PM on January 9, 2006

All cuteness aside, I think it makes a difference - a cat can only scratch the surface of the floor, while any cat I've ever seen using a litterbox was actively trying to dig...I think the latter is more vigorous, and therefore, more painful.
posted by agregoli at 2:30 PM on January 9, 2006

For the record, I am against declawing.

But I am really interested in how to convince cats to use their litterboxes after they've developed an aversion to it.
posted by luneray at 2:32 PM on January 9, 2006

Kindall, caddis asked, I answered.

With emotionally-laden words like "barbaric" and "mutilate" that virtually demand to be answered in kind, thereby causing the derail. Others have used these terms in this thread, of course, but they were careful to say things like "it is in my view barbaric" and "I consider it mutilation" etc. that do not come off nearly as judgmental as suggesting that other people need to engage in some "hard thinking" in order to see how wrong they are.
posted by kindall at 3:37 PM on January 9, 2006

(I don't mean to pick on you, really. It's just that it's rarely so clear exactly where a thread goes off the tracks.)
posted by kindall at 4:34 PM on January 9, 2006

How 'bout someone posts the question "Declawing Cats - What's Your Opinion?" in AskMe and Mefites can get it out of their collective systems (hopefully) forever.

Still a few bugs in the system.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 4:35 PM on January 9, 2006

luneray -- I really favor the idea that your cat got ambushed by your dog, and he therefore shuns the hooded box. If you want to email me, I will make sure it's in the profile -- we went through a real marathon of litterbox issues here, and I'm prepared to offer advice or be a sounding board or whatever.

re: words like mutilation, etc: I really can't think of another situation in which one would not call removing the first digit of any animal's fingers or toes cruel, barbaric, or multilation. If someone thinks of some valid reason that you might cut off say, your dog's front toes at the first joint, please, let me know.

Declawing is very, very extreme, and without being melodramatic about it, I really felt that caddis just tossed it out there as a totally viable option, when in fact, it is not. The OP's cats are not kittens based on the information/tone. To just say, "Oh, declaw them," is, frankly, a little irresponsible. Older cats are heavier and therefore generally have a longer healing period, and have a much harder time adjusting to being declawed. This is a procedure that, AT BEST, involves chopping off a cat's toe just beyond where the nail grows out, and then hoping the nail doesn't reappear and cause an infection. The other method removes the entire bone. But, hey, if you don't want to do that, you can always have your cat's tendons sliced so that he can't grasp anything. If this wasn't a cat that was clawing someone's armchair or whatever, I can't imagine that anyone here would think twice about saying that these procedures aren't an acceptable level of care. I'm perfectly willing to admit that I probably consider my cats to be more "members of the family" than some people, but I also can't imagine willingly (flippantly, even) putting another living thing for which I am responsible in a lot of unnecessary pain simply for my convenience. Certainly not when there are other methods out there to help with clawing/scratching problems. I think it's fair to say that a lot of people, myself included, felt that since the most extreme solution to the problem had been spouted off in the first comment, it was important to point out that declawing is the last option, assuming it's an option at all, and provide other information (such as Soft Claws). I don't see a whole lot wrong with that.
posted by Medieval Maven at 6:04 PM on January 9, 2006

Very, very extreme? Please. I came upon a freshly dead body tonight. That was extreme. (I am still in shock). The reaction some zealots have to this surgery seems extreme. Cutting off a limb is extreme, the tip of the digits doesn't seem so much so, especially when it allows the pet to live in harmony with many owners. I have had a declawed cat and cats with claws. The declawed cat acted no differently than the rest and did not seem to suffer unduly from the surgery. I admit that I was against it at the time, and did not have the stomach to take her in for it. My wife did the dirty deed. Nevertheless, the cat did fine. I personally would always try training first, it typically works fairly well and you can repair the rest. Nevertheless, I think declawing to be a viable option for many pet owners. In this situation I think I was wrong, because I did not take into account the ages of the cats.
posted by caddis at 7:47 PM on January 9, 2006

without being melodramatic about it

Riiiiiiiiight.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:31 PM on January 9, 2006

Yakuza cats do it all the time.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:35 PM on January 9, 2006

take off.
nuke.
orbit.
only.
sure.

I think we can trim that down even further:

nuke.
orbit.
sure.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:13 PM on January 9, 2006

Cutting off a limb is extreme, the tip of the digits doesn't seem so much so

So, caddis, you'd be OK with having the first joints of your fingers removed, right? "Not as bad as being killed" does not equal "fine and dandy," and I think if someone employed your rhetorical tactics against you in another argument ("Yeah, well, things were worse in NAZI GERMANY!!") you'd be indignant, and rightly so.
posted by languagehat at 5:30 AM on January 10, 2006

So, caddis, you'd be OK with having the first joints of your fingers removed, right?

This is why I won't neuter my cat.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:21 AM on January 10, 2006

I would be sorta pissed if someone locked me inside a house for my entire life and made me shit in a box.

There's something just plain complicated about the whole indoor-pet question.
posted by cortex at 7:38 AM on January 10, 2006

"So, caddis, you'd be OK with having the first joints of your fingers removed, right?"

Not mine, but I think it would keep the neighborhood kids from throwing rocks at cars. Maybe just remove their feet; they're mostly indoor kids anyway.

(This all pretty well ignores the fact that animals are not people... Wondering how many of the morals squad are vegans...)
posted by klangklangston at 12:46 PM on January 10, 2006

Not a vegan. Not even a vegetarian. And it's less about morals and more about responsible stewardship, and the fact that this type of operation isn't something I'd wish on my worst enemy, much less an animal that has limited means of communication and for which I am responsible.
posted by Medieval Maven at 1:31 PM on January 10, 2006

Right. So... responsibility ends at your door? Just, y'know, goading you a little after the histrionics.
posted by klangklangston at 1:38 PM on January 10, 2006

Let me just drop by this end thread and try to dismiss some myths being propagated here:
a) "I find your cat crapping my garden abhorrent" : Properly trained domestic outdoors cats usually don't crap or piss anywhere but in their own box. Add "neutered" for good measure. We have a pair of cats (two of seven stray cat kittens we took in when they were 2 weeks old, cared, neutered and found homes). They sleep inside but walk around the house a lot during the day - they have never been seem (or suspected of) using any of our gardens (front and back) as a bathroom and not one of our neighbors ever complained about it in their gardens.

b) Cats and drapery/furniture are natural enemies. Again, our cats, having the trees and their own posts, never use their nails in the furniture. Oh, yes, they try now and then, but a quick and firm "No" brings them back to their senses.

The undercurrent thought seems to be that cats are not trainable. That is a myth. Look, people can train far larger and dangerous felines to do all sort of stupid tricks, why would someone think domestic cats wouldn't learn? They not only learn to use a litter box and refrain from destroying furniture - they learn their names and come when called, like a dog. They learn the house habits and adapt. They know what time in the afternoon they should come inside. In short, they are cats, but they not dumb (and they usually won't play dumb, unless you let them).
posted by nkyad at 1:44 PM on January 10, 2006

while I don't want to get all that deep into this discussion, I'd like to say that the cruelest thing about declawing a cat is that they attach a tremendous amount of their individual identity and ability to handle stress to their claws. removing those claws traumatizes the cat in emotional ways that actually completely change the cat's personality for what I think is the worse.
posted by shmegegge at 2:07 PM on January 10, 2006

What the hell are we talking about here, Dr. Freud?
posted by found missing at 2:54 PM on January 10, 2006

Right. So... responsibility ends at your door? Just, y'know, goading you a little after the histrionics

No, you're just being shitty. I'm being forthright and honest about my opinion, which you view as hysterical and which I view as factual. I don't know, for example, that I agree that it changes a cat's personality as shmegegge states, but I do know that it's a bodily mutilation that is unnecessary because, as nkyad points out, cats are trainable, and there are other solutions to this problem. And, in spite of your opinion of indoor cats, I'm abundantly sure that mine are happier in one piece inside than they would be flattened in the road, which is a real danger where I live.
posted by Medieval Maven at 3:59 PM on January 10, 2006

I'd like to say that the cruelest thing about declawing a cat is that they attach a tremendous amount of their individual identity and ability to handle stress to their claws. removing those claws traumatizes the cat in emotional ways that actually completely change the cat's personality for what I think is the worse.

not in my personal experience
posted by caddis at 4:01 PM on January 10, 2006

"I'm being forthright and honest about my opinion, which you view as hysterical and which I view as factual."

Well, there's a start. Opinions aren't fact. And you're intentionally using loaded language because OMG THIS IS SUCH A BIG DEAL FOR YOU AND ANYONE WHO DOESN'T SEE THAT IS AN AWFUL BARBARIAN OMG!!!!111one.

I'm pointing out that a) if you really want to impose your morality on others, you might bother having a consistent one, and b) your morality is subjective and putting forth the level of vitriol that you did is no different from the myriad of other well-meaning hypocrites who do the same thing. If it's being a shit to poke holes in your emotional tirade, well, I'm being a shit. I'd consider that a lesser offense than being a boorish, disrespectful proslytizer.

(I'll leave alone the fact, and this really is a fact, that I have stated no opinion on indoor versus outdoor cats, but generally believe it's better for them to live their lives indoors.)
posted by klangklangston at 5:24 PM on January 10, 2006

If you want a loaded term, vitriol is one. I've given reasons for what I think, and they're fairly well supported. You view what I've said as emotional because you disagree with it. You are assigning emotional content to my words, which is certainly your prerogative, and I did use strong words. If you choose to call my comments disrespectful, particularly in the context of Metafilter, then that's fine, but based on my daily readings around here, I'm hardly being offensive. Strident? Sure. Boorish? No. And I'm not proselytizing -- I'm providing arguments against taking a particular action. There are way too many threads daily that are contain 100% more vitriol than I've supposedly put out that it's ridiculous. If you think my language is loaded, fine, but I'm calling spades spades -- if I cut off your fingertips, or your dog's toes, you'd call it mutilation. I make it a point to be as good a pet owner as I can be, and I participate in Ask quite a bit, and when cat threads come up, I post when I have knowledge and experience because that's what Ask is about. Unless someone can come up with, well, less emotional reason people in that thread were wrong, I don't believe anyone was.
posted by Medieval Maven at 6:19 PM on January 10, 2006

And if you kill an animal to eat it, that's murder. How high do you want to up the rhetorical ante?
posted by klangklangston at 9:15 PM on January 10, 2006

And if you kill an animal to eat it, that's murder.

No, that's delicious! [/troll]
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:18 AM on January 11, 2006

I prefer my cats deboned.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:08 AM on January 11, 2006