We live in increasingly accelerated times.
Climate changes were once measured or felt in centuries. Today it seems that we have them in years, in a very few years. he s. XXI seems to be a different century, qualitatively, from the XX century, for example, in the acceleration of events.
It took centuries for the decomposition of the British Empire.
And decades of Soviet communism.
However, we seem to be in more accelerated eras now. A substantial change in the concept of health, which until very recently was a ‘normal state’, ‘without disease’, today the laboratory industry and the medical administrations at their service present it to us as what would be obtained through permanent assistance and coverage, and with “vaccines” like the secure passport.
We seem to see the same thing with the fiduciary plot. The financial is supposed to be at the service of the economic goods that we are told we have, will have or would have. That global financial network, with dollars, yuans, pounds, euros, rubles, yens, which has given birth, like the grandmother, to cryptocurrencies, also seems to be decomposing at an increasingly accelerated rate…
And this of the increasingly accelerated rhythms (of transformation, change, liquidation) seems to also apply to the… human family.
From the traditional, multigenerational family, we have gone, in urban environments, rather compressed into increasingly smaller surfaces, to nuclear families, also called type. Until a while ago: pa, ma and children (optimally, two).
But the changes come galloping. A generation of monofilial couples appears, which ignores (either by supine ignorance or deliberately) the psychic disaster of China with its fifteen or twenty years of families with only one child (almost always boys, not because biology has decided to change our genetic structure, but because couples generally chose to have only boys as reinsurance of their old age, which increased infanticide on girls, with a substantial demographic difference between boys and girls, a consequent affective misery in the adult life of a good number of men, and Not least, a distortion of the socialization processes with only children…
But the passage from the typical family (of 4) to that of 3 (father mother offspring, a trio different from another very recent family scheme, also of 3 or 2 members; (single-parent families) took a few decades (not half a century, I would dare to estimate).
From son to dog
And a new family configuration is becoming increasingly visible and relevant: a couple with a dog. Young couple with dog. Partner that by its very nature; Scarce, insecure, or because of her increasingly conflictive view of the “state of the world”, she chooses not to have children (or at least postpones the decision to have them or not).
Therefore, non-erotic affectivity is released through the pet channel. It must be said in English, not only because the mental colonialism that governs us daily from the mass media marks us as a colonized society, but also because the phenomenon we are targeting begins in the place from which it has been promoted the most. current modernity; USA
The country with sumptuous and solemn cemeteries for your pets; the language in which the traditional “it” for animals (and things), which reserved she and he for humans, has been radically modified because nowadays she (she) and he (he) are used for bitches and dogs.
The couple with a dog generates a whole network of affectivities that undoubtedly reflects the needs of our present; the dog is faithful, unconditional, affectively secure, thus viewed, the dog gratifies its owner, who will surely not achieve such a degree of attachment from many other relationships (whether with humans, institutions or other animals, such as the cat, for example).
The couple with a dog comes to nurture a previous current, also on the rise, which was that of single people with a dog. Which is characterized by the same reasons that we have just attributed to the couple (or to one of the members of the couple). The most noticeable difference between single people with dogs and couples with dogs is, in our present contingent, that single people with dogs permeate all social layers and couples with dogs, on the other hand, seem to be more characteristic of well-off middle classes . It is as if the decision to have a dog and pour care, respect, affection, dedication into it were a kind of emotional luxury that young people who have a certain material solvency allow themselves, who, at the same time, adopt a restrictive behavior with respect to sons; and more generally such a restrictive conduct, perhaps of apprehension, before what is to come.
The dog, the human
The model we have tried to point to generates, in turn, new realities.
The dog, domestic, from time immemorial remained a dog. As we pointed out at the beginning, among the most pronounced traits of him, was that of fidelity. But in general, the dogs in the houses of their masters, even well treated, with their kennels, their food, retained their canine character. And the human’s treatment of his dog affirmed those qualities in the relationships themselves. Different from those that the owner or owner could have with other humans or other animals.
The dog in these new social configurations that we are pointing out; the human couple with a dog, the dog with a human alone, is somehow anthropomorphized. Both in the growing custom of dressing it and in the language used, the dog is increasingly treated as a human, not as an adult, but as a child.
And domestication, in animals as sensitive and alert as dogs, has its fruits. Dogs respond to this civility training, adopting the behaviors that are expected of them; wait patiently at the exit of a store, calmly cross a road, like a polite child.
If to the increasingly “civilized” behavior that we perceive in more and more dogs, we add the outfits and the aesthetic work on the coat, we have a whole new “dog” constellation.
In neighborhoods with higher purchasing power, where it is common for residents to know (or at least learn) English, it is increasingly common to hear “the dialogue” with the dog in English. And every time we see more corners of solace to celebrate the dog’s birthday, together with the dogs of other owners who at least find out about the date that does not say anything to the dog celebrated or to their occasional guests of the species.
To ingratiate themselves, not so much with the dog, which will not always accept the offer, but certainly with the owners or rather companions and cohabitants of other dogs, a whole toy industry has emerged that offers walkers, balls, dummy bones, rattles, circular stairs, raffles, tunnels, hourglasses, discs, beds, rubber toys, refillable balls, pieces for fitting and with a lot of mathematical optimism, logical fittings and puzzles, and with a lot of competitive spirit, weights… We suppose that to let off steam males, there are dog similarities to which our dog in a human environment can ride…
And perhaps the culmination of this growing identification of human and dog, which is strictly speaking the obtaining of a humanized dog, we have in the patient teaching that certain dog owners dedicate to the dog walking upright on two legs.
The dog, well groomed, responding to the English language, dressed with care, treated “as equals” (in Spanish or even better, in English), learning to have fun, “elevated” with its bipedal gait, has become a true perrijo (or perrhijo; the language academy has not yet incorporated the word; let’s give ourselves the freedom to choose).
Pending question: are humans, losing offspring, dehumanizing ourselves?
Rebelión has published this article with the permission of the author through a Creative Commons license, respecting his freedom to publish it in other sources.