Animals should definitely not wear clothing

With apologies to Judi and Ron Barrett

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because it would be disastrous for a porcupine

If a porcupine wore a shirt it would wreck it because it would riddle it with holes. Why waste material on clothes if the first time they're worn, they are wrecked?

skin needs to breathe.

many human beings suffer from vitamin D deficiencies because of a lack of exposure to the sun. (as a result of covering up and overuse of sunblock)

Body language is an integral part of communication often covered by frilly garb.

It is unfair that animals be subjected to such cruel unhealthy censorship.

human beings across cultures have been mutilated/damaged and have mutilated themselves all for the quest of looking good(which is a subjective concept); spare the animals please.

The fashion trends of the last 10 years have tended towards ripped jeans and garments. Human beings buy new clothes which have deliberate rips in them. Why then does it seem so ridiculous for a porcupine to give its clothes this ripped effect? The reality is, it is not ridiculous at all for a porcupine to rip its own clothes.

clothes with holes for each one of its spikes will fit; all kinds of netting, frills, maybe non-toxic paint?

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because a camel might wear it in the wrong places

A camel has two humps, and besides the fact that no clothing would fit him, he would look ridiculous wearing two hats, one for each hump.

there is a rug-type saddle(sometimes with a shade) used for camel riding therefore a camel's dress is only a way of stamping servitude.

Camels need to roam free in the sun naked without human beings enslaving them and reducing them to caricatures.

But how do you determine whether they want to wear something or not?

This is assuming that clothing has to be in human format. However, should animals be open to the clothing industry, then the industry would cater for all the animals and all their individual features. It is perfectly possible and feasible for tops to be made with provision for two humps on the back.

Some camels may feel uncomfortable about their nakedness. At the moment, they have no choice in the matter at all. At least we should keep the options open for them.

Body language is a clear indicator of whether a camel is comfortable or not.

However it is difficult to read when the camel is covered.
Which means we should not dress them.

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because a snake might lose it

Imagine a snake with pants. Unless he wore a belt (which would obstruct his movement) the pants would fall off him right away, as soon as he started to slither. Useless.

A sock creates friction making it difficult for a snake to move at all. A snake could opt for a slithery slippery fabric but that would come off(much like its skin does so often)

A snake's skin is much too beautiful to be covered by anything.

A snake`s skin functions are clothing, since a snake sheds its skin at different time during the year. A snake doesn`t need or want to wear anything over it. You try dressing a snake without being bitten the first time; before the poor thing is subdued...

A snake can't move in a sock; there's too much friction to allow slithering, or comfortable slithering; at least.

A snake would fit comfortably in a very long sock.

the pulchritude of the skin only warrants its protection.

a snake could wear a snake-skin pattern sock. then it wouldn't make much aesthetic difference.

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because a mouse could get lost in it

We wouldn't want a mouse to get lost/trapped inside a hat, just because it is human size, not rodent size, would we?

the hairs on a rodent's body are used for many reasons covering those hairs can have fatal consequences.

A trip to Iran,Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan might answer that question.

Doll's clothes would fit on a mouse.

Clothes would not necessarily completely cover the mouse's body. How often do people actually dress to completely cover their bodies except in the depths of winter?

but in the Middle-East white clothes that cover everything are used for protection from the sun/heat/sand. White surfaces(case in point what Arab Sheikh`s wear) reflect heat of a person much better than skin-color; whatever it may be.

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because a sheep might find it terribly hot

Sheep are already equipped with quite a lot of wool. If you supply a sheep with a sweater and a scarf, if he wouldn't faint at wearing his own hair, he would faint of heat!

shave/shear the wool and dress the sheep in a T.

Better yet anything the sheep`s comfortable in.

sheep have all genders;they're not all masculine. Maybe the distinction would be easier for you to make if Sheep dressed according to natural sex or gender(though it would be difficult to figure out which sexual category a sheep wishes to be included in).

You don't say; that's an awful lot of fainting for a sheep.
I've never even heard of fainting or dehydrated sheep!

Perhaps just boots"?

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because it could be very messy for a pig

It is a well known fact that pigs are very messy eaters. It is also well known that pigs like to roll in the mud. Can you imagine how hurt the feelings of a tailor will be when he sees his newly maid shirt stained by slop and mud?

Pigs roll around in the mud to cool off. Putting clothes on them would make them more needy to being in the mud. The ideal would be to keep the pig cooler and clothes do not provide that.

I know people who eat like pigs. I know people who like to roll in mud. We do not discriminate against these humans; we allow them to wear clothes. The treatment of pigs should be much the same.

We all wash our clothes.

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because it might make life hard for a hen

How would you like it if you were trying to hatch an egg, and it just stayed in your pants? It's almost as uncomfortable as diapers!

and what will natural predators feed on haven`t we done enough harm to nature, we`re still describing cutting off the food supply of other animals as innovation/revolutionary?

This could actually be a revolution in the art of laying eggs. Hens could wear pants that were reinforced. The reinforcement would catch the egg and the hens could carry the egg with it at all times. This will result in the safer keeping of eggs, ensuring that predators are kept well at bay and their eggs will be safe.

Maybe hens need a little toughening up they'll live longer.

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because a kangaroo would find it quite unnecessary

What a waste of cloth for a pocket, when a kangaroo already has one!

A female kangaroo needs access to her little ones in her pocket, if she`s covered up it will be difficult for her to reach down and taken them out when she needs to.

The fundamental problem with dressing animals is that they cannot undress or dress themselves when they feel like it and unlike babies with soiled diapers they can`t cry either.

Why have one pocket when you can have many more? The Kangaroo obviously likes having a pocket having evolved to have one so they would surely be very enthusiastic about getting more!

Animals do cry, furthermore whats wrong with a shirt? It wouldnt cover the pocket and they might even have an extra one :)

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because a giraffe might look sort of silly

A giraffe, with it's long neck, would have to wear about eight ties to compete with the rest of the animals, thereby making it look quite ridiculous.

long necks in humans; have long been considered symbolic of handsomeness.

What do you think of tribal women who wear multiple golden necklaces to lengthen their necks? they probably think 'you' look ridiculous.

A tie doesnt go up and down the neck, but rather around the base line, Whether its a giraffe or a horse it wouldnt make much of a difference

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because a billy goat would eat it for lunch

Again we must examine the poor tailor watching his clothes being ruined so soon after they are made by a hungry goat.

Clothes would not be economically viable food for goats and also wouldn't be particularly healthy for it.

A baby cannot actually devour its clothes. Its teeth aren't sharp enough. We would take an item away from a baby if it could devour it and it wasn't suitable food.

And what is wrong with feeding a goat?

or an item being bi-functional?

babies put everything in their mouth and all over their clothes , do we stop dressing them? no

a baby might not be devouring its clothes, but they sure do ruin them! Diapers for example are disposal clothes, but we still provide them with diapers

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because a moose could never manage

Let's say it this way: antlers and suspenders don't work well together.

counter-to-counter bone marrow in humans produces blood, antler marrow may serve the same purpose. Antlers are used to survive and fight and then mate. How will these animals pass on their genes without Antlers?

have you yet not learned that tampering with the natural order of things has dire consequences?

Also who are we, to impose our definition(as if the human race has one existing unanimously agreed-upon definition/standard) and values of what is civil upon these poor animals?

In France dueling was and perhaps is; thought to be very cultured; indeed!

How would you like it if someone put you in a cage and mated you with a donkey, horse,lion and/or a tiger? I certainly don`t find that at all civilised/civil/civilized!

rare instances and attempts to repeat those instances...

The antlers would make handy coat and hat racks.

How about pants/shorts/skirts/bottoms?

or shoes/boots.

counter: the marrow in deer antlers is a delicacy in Taiwan why not chop those off and then dress the animal?


These animals (not just moose and deer) can adapt to and evolve in civilized conditions. When we take them out of the wild; we give them some culture; an understanding of etiquette; they must understand the importance of clothes and civility. Do we not get haircuts,clip our nails, wax/shave/bleach our body hair?
chopping off those awful things is not a high price to pay to be in-vogue/dapper.

they don`t need to tussle to get a mate; we`ve bred donkeys with horses and lions with tigers without allowing any wild uncultured dueling whatsoever.
we don`t force them to mate; just that there have been instances of crossbreeding.

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

... because it would always be wet on a walrus

A walrus would always slobber on his clothes, which, we all agree, is no small matter.

it would still get wet from the mucky water a walrus splashes about in.

The walrus could wear a raincoat. Alternatively swimwear. Or else a wet-suit could be very useful in the cold waters in which they live.

A hat would look perfectly dandy on a walrus :D

how about a swim-cap or goggles?

Babies slobber, spit up, throw up all over their clothes, yet we continue to put clothes on them

Animals should definitely not wear clothing

Yes because... No because...

all the yes points are horrible

You completely avoid animals that you normally see clothing on

ie. Dogs
ie. Monkeys

yes, humans are animals. Whoever made hits needs to rethink and rewrite this whole debate. Not to mention my dog has a sweater. Why? Because his fur is very thin and winter is too cold for him. This keeps him warm enough to go play in the snow with the other dogs. Your arguments are horrible and are based off of fictional thoughts that are just silly

Debates > Animals should definitely not wear clothing