After reading Serpell's "People in Disguise", I've began to view pet ownership differently. Don't get me wrong, I've never really bonded with animals and perhaps this is why I can see things a bit more objectively when it comes to the human-pet relationship. Part of me feels like there's nothing wrong with owning a cat or a dog but the "People in Disguise" article certainly begs to differ. In fact, when it comes to human and their pets the relationship is mostly beneficial for the human. Of course the pets receive some benefits such as love and food but overall, the benefits are geared more so toward the humans and the harms are more associated with pets. When I saw this picture (the one above) I instantly saw this as one of the harms the human-pet relationship can turn into. This poor dog was subjected to what I deem the harsh side of anthropomorphism. Muzzles are used to keep animals quiet because humans do not like their sounds or sometimes find it annoying in their households. So, the owner of the dog above tapped and muzzled the dogs mouth closed because it was doing what comes natural to him: barking. This of course is the extreme side of the pet-human relationship. A more mild form of anthropomorphism in the human-pet relationship is the clipping of an animals claws or genitals. Many might not see this as a problem because its a means to stop their furniture from getting tattered but what about the animal? Doesn't the animal have the right to maintain what they've natural grown? I'm not saying that owning pets is bad, though honestly I don't think I could ever own another living creature, but there's definitely a fine line between what animals should be allowed to have/maintain and what humans can and can not do to them.