Dog friendly? What would you do?

Slightly off topic, as I have said, it has been suggested to me and my husband that people who don't like dogs are 'not nice people' or 'untrustworthy'. How completely ridiculous. I would never say that about someone who didn't like what I like. As someone else said, Hitler loved dogs.

GrannyRose15

To be clear.
I have walked with this group before with no problems regarding dogs, mine or anyone else's.
I am familiar with the place we were eating at and know they have a dog friendly area.
I did have the option of taking the car up to the meeting place before the walk where I could then have lodged the dog while we ate, but because I knew the cafe was "dog friendly" decided to walk from home.
If I walk with them again, and it's a big if, I will make sure either that I can eat with my dog, or take the car so he can be safe while I eat.
It's not as if no-one knows I have a dog, and as someone has pointed out - "Who goes for a walk in the countryside without their dog if they have one?"
It is lovely to know that there are lots of people on here who understand why I was a little upset by the situation.

Next time check with friends before setting off. Ask if others are taking their dog. If not go on the walk anyway don't lose friends and when you get home your dog will still be happy to see you regardless.

Anyhow as the OP hasn't come back we don't really know all the facts

Joseanne

Callistemon21

Juliet27

What a dog’s dinner this has become!!

? ??

Have we all gone barking mad to invest time on this? ?

Yes, totally.

Interesting to read though. It’s given me new insights into people’s thinking.

Well this bad nasty person is off to her stint at the Hospice now.
With people. Which is my preference ?

Yoginimeisje

I'd go home, your 'friends' could have compromised and sat in the conservatory at least! What did you do?

Lots of people have said “compromise “. I honestly can’t see how doing what the OP wanted would have been a compromise.

She would have got what she wanted and they would all have got what they didn’t want.

Surely compromise is when both parties get a bit of what they want.

So yes, believe they should have sat with her but in no respects would that have been a compromise.

Can I suggest it would have been the “Queen Bee” scenario in that case? One person dominating a whole group.

FannyCornforth

That’s not true, Lathyrus, it wasn’t worded in such a way.

It was a very ‘matter of fact’ report of the situation, and totally devoid of emotive language.

It was certainly not ‘phrased in such a way to encourage criticism’ etc.

This thread has certainly taken in a life of its own

Well we’ll have to disagree on that.

The three options she gave were all negative towards the other members of the group.

She could have posted “Now that gave them three options”. which is what her decision did and another poster has outlined those options in a previous post.

Then they chose an option that wasn’t what she wanted.

I’m afraid that if you put people in a position where they have to chose, they won’t always chose what suits you.

P.S.

If on the 15 pages of this topic, I have missed the solo dog/not solo dog, then I apologise.

I keep banging on about this, but have we ever been told the OP’s dog was the only one on this particular walk?.

Because if there had been other dogs, then to me it was obvious that the doggy people would have sat together.

But if hers was the only dog this time, never mind previous walks, then that is different.

At least it is to me.

Oh yes I've definitely known some Queen Bees ?

If you don't mind me saying, I suspect that there may be a 'Queen Bee' in the group that others follow. I have seen them in action in women's groups and sometimes they are the ones with the best social connections, nice house, good pension etc who set a trend for other women to aspire to. I am just saying as I have seen this at the WI with one lady whose word was 'gospel'. The others followed like sheep. This is an observation and has not affected me in any way but it has caused me to avoid that particular group.

I'd go home, your 'friends' could have compromised and sat in the conservatory at least! What did you do?

Callistemon21

Juliet27

What a dog’s dinner this has become!!

? ??

Have we all gone barking mad to invest time on this? ?

If there was at least one other person with a dog who could’ve eaten with that’s acceptable behaviour….but as you were the only one , they should have asked you to leave dog at home , before the event , or sat with you knowing you were alone. Rude people. Even though I don’t own a dog I would have spoken out, and said let’s all sit together , you would have thought one of them would have the manners to opt for the ‘doggie’ area. There are better friends to be found.

Sorry Juliet27 Don't know why I quoted you. You made me laugh though.

Juliet27

What a dog’s dinner this has become!!

Your point assumes that the group had an original plan Vintagejazz. That was never stated.

I've said it before and will say it again, this was a group that routinely and commonly walk dogs, including the OPs.

If I walked with a group who routinely took along small children then I would happily accept that when we got to our lunch destination we would eat in the family section or play garden.

As I said much earlier on this thread. Many interesting views and stances on this subject.

Was akin that should have read

@Richmondpark1 yes I know you were talking about Lathyrus.
I just don't agree with you.
I thinknthe OP misjudged the situation and was then upset when the group stuck to their original plan.

To me it washbasin to a group planning a walk, finishing up in a restaurant that had a noisy 'family ' section and an over 18s only section and planning to eat on the latter. Someone decides to bring a small child along and just assumes the group will now eat in the 'family ' section.

Juliet27

What a dog’s dinner this has become!!

? ??

Lathyrus "I don’t expect everyone to agree with me."

Also Lathyrus "If people could put aside their emotions and look at the facts they would be able to see that the situation was entirely of the OPs making."

What a dog’s dinner this has become!!

Were you in the group who ate in restaurant Lathyrus?

That’s not true, Lathyrus, it wasn’t worded in such a way.

It was a very ‘matter of fact’ report of the situation, and totally devoid of emotive language.

It was certainly not ‘phrased in such a way to encourage criticism’ etc.

This thread has certainly taken in a life of its own

This happened to me and I went home, one friend offered to eat outside with me, but I felt a bit awkward about that and insisted she went inside with the others . Fast forward a few yrs and a couple in the group have a dog of their own and everyone rallies around them as they are popular and are inclusive of the dogs needs. I am afraid I do not socialise with them anymore, I find them rood and have found other groups where I feel more accepted.

RichmondPark1

Lathyrus said
"If people could put aside their emotions and look at the facts they would be able to see that the situation was entirely of the OPs making. She choose badly. "

We don't have to put aside our emotions, this is an opinion based discussion group.
The facts are that many people disagree with you.
We don't all have to agree.
We don't all have to agree with you.

I don’t expect everyone to agree with me.

I’m just posting what I think.

Sometimes it’s helpful for people to be presented with a point of view that is not their own rather than just being encouraged to go on thinking in a certain way.

I do think the way she posted her experience was passive aggressive.

It was phrased in a way to gain support, encourage criticism of her friends and justify her decision.

As I said a moment ago, the situation was of her own making. She could have posted under “I messed up a lunch I was looking forward to”.

But she didn’t see it that way. The tone was one of “My friends were at fault”.

Obviously though lots of people see it that way. The fact that a dog was involved seems to have stirred up a lot of emotions on both sides. But the facts of what happened were clear.