Category: Let's talk
Greetings.
I tried asking this question on Facebook, but to no avail—I'm noticing instances of people including their guide dog's name either in their email signature or even their display name. In one such instance, on some technology mailing list or other, I was initially, before I knew what this was, rather surprised to see what appeared to be a joint email address belonging to a surprisingly open gay couple—until I'd seen an email from this person that clarified that the other name was, in fact, the name of their dog. Now, since my previous attempt to get this question answered was met with responses that essentially read "WTF People do this?", I thought I'd ask here. Is there anything behind this? It seems a bit too widespread to be a series of isolated incidents, it doesn't seem to happen with folks and their pets, for example, and it doesn't happen with every dog handler, but I do truly wonder why people so frequently feel inclined to do this.
I think it's obnoxious when people include the names of their pets or other family members in the signatures on email, when those people or animals contribute nothing to the content. I include guides in with pets.
Well...I guess it boils down to the same mentality of people who make Facebook or Twitter accounts for their pets or guide dogs. I never understood that, either. Your pet isn't going to write its thoughts and feelings on the internet. That mind-boggling phenomenon is much more widespread than guide dogs' names in email signatures, at least from what I've seen.
I agree with the last post, and I have seen the occasional pet in the signature also.
Now, back to my days on the Rec.Pets.Birds newsgroup, yes, I said newsgroup, laugh if you must, at most you would see us clarify the number of birds or species list that one had, but not named as cosigners, more cataloged. I did see a rather raging debate once regarding pets having Facebook accounts, as to the legality since the pet is not a party who can sign for the account.
Email signatures would be obnoxious. But the advantage of them having their pet have a Facebook account is I don't have to friend it, and they can hopefully put all their pet poop posts on there. I don't know if that would apply to guide dogs, but I imagine it might.
I have no idea why people do this. I find it annoying. The only thing I can attribute it to is someone being overly attached to their dog. I know the bond between handler and guide dog goes really deep, and I get that. I used to have one. But things like this are someone taking that attachment too far in my opinion.
I don't get why people do this, whether with Facebook, Twitter, or email accounts, especially, whenn, as was said, the animal/other person has nothing whatsoever to contribute. although I have a live and let live philosophy, that sort of thing crosses the line.
totally agree, I think it's a waste of characters. but then I also feel the same on having blind or blinky in a user name.
I have a guide dog. I do not add her name to my emails but sometimes to cards but mainly just to her puppy raisers. I have added her name to a few emails but they were for a email list for guide dog handlers.
I do have a facebook account I made for her. I debated on this for quite a while before getting one. I decided to get one because I can post all i wish about her, put up all her photos of her on it and people who cares to really want to keep up with her can. She had a life before I got her and those people are truely interested in her. A lot of people on my facebook might not care to hear all about her. It is like having kids, not everyone wants to read all about your kids on your facebook.
I have a friend who had a guide dog for 14 years. She kept her dog until she recently died. She had a facebook page for her dog and it has become a tribute to her dog. It has helped her a lotwith the greaving process. That page is all about her dog. People posted photos they had of her on there, vidios, thoughts, and so much more. It is like having a grave for people, which we don't do a lot for animals, or a memorial for them.
It is a personal choice and some of us decides to do it and that is just fine.
I find that it is better to get to do a lot of my dog talk with others who wants to read it on my dogs page than to clutter up all my friends notifications with all my quotes and comments about dogs on mine.
Some people do take it a bit far, but they do with children too.
Something that guide dog handlers do that I don't is walk in and interduce themselves and their dogs. I only say,
"Hey, my name is..."
I don't say,
"Hey, I am and this is my dog..."
I also don't say,
"we" or "us"
I say I am or me."
I know this guy who would talk for him and his dog like that all the time then once i got mine, the people who knew us both asked me or hinted for me to do the same. I chose not too.
I decided to create a Facebook account for my guide dog. primarily, this was to allow my family and friends some sort of access to my guide dog from a distance and to get to know her. Muslims generally do not take too kindly to dogs and this is just my way of dealing with the situation. And, it actually helps.
It is also a way of promoting what guide dogs does for us, especially since there is no legislation that gives me the right to go where ever I want to over here.
In my case, it also helps the puppy walker to keep in touch with her (student).
A bit too much? Well, there are those who worship the technology they use or that thinks too much of themselves; I guess, it can be equally annoying.
I will also sometimes use my dog's name in an e-mail signature or post if I am sending a message to a family member or close friend but, I really don't bother with other people who decides to include the names of their dogs in their usernames or signatures. Noone is forcing you to read it.
Hanif
I agree. It makes about as much sense to me as creating a Facebook page or a Twitter feed for god, both of which I've seen.
But the difference is that the fake accounts for God, Jesus, politicians and celebrities are meant to be witty, sarcastic and humorous. I laughed the other day when Jesus tweeted, "Ugh only 12 people responded to my dinner E-vite" [get it?] Yet I rolled my eyes when David and his dog Scruffy emailed me. There's a difference between intelligent sarcasm and just being silly.
the last poster is correct.
I personally believe including the dogs name in the email sig is a bit much, and even having it as part of the email address (as I've also seen).
However, i created an FB account for my guide dog because i felt like it. My friends love it and those who it's not fore, don't have to add it; simple.
I even converted a friend who use to be kinda against the idea. Lol!
No-one is weird for doing this; it's just us. Incidently, I don't have a lot of time these days to maintain my dogs page so comtemplating deleting it. :)
Nicky expressed my feelings exactly on why we have a page for my husband's guide dog. So I won't repeat them, but the whole business of introducing oneself as we or us? That's a bit strange...
I agree with the last post. The "we" thing is a bit odd, honestly. We need to be viewed as independent individuals, not as some kind of dependent entity who requires a dog to be complete in some way. It sort of ties in with sighted peoples' idea that we should get guide dogs because we need a "companion".
I'm with you on the guide dog name in signatures. Kinda weird and creepy to me, but to each is own I guess. I also know people who always introduce themselves and their dog or refer to themselves as we. Not my thing. The dog and I are a team, but I am still an individual. Now, I do have a twitter account for my guide dog, but in my defense, it is more of an entertaining creative outlet to me. My dog has an interesting personality that I find humorous and I enjoy coming up with sarcastic things that I think my dog would say if she could talk. Her puppy raisers find it entertaining too, so it's a way for them to stay in touch as well as an outlet for my snark. But But, I totally get why it would be perceived as weird. That's ok.