On losing a pet

There’s a short story we were set to read during my Creative Writing MA. More a vignette really. It was about the happiest moment in someone’s life. A guy is on a train, his family are around him, his daughter rests her head on his shoulder. At the time he doesn’t realise it’s his happiest moment of his entire life, but bit by bit things fall apart. The story had a huge emotional impact on me, and when I chatted to the others in my tutorial group, it had the same effect on them. It’s about a happy moment, but the inevitability of that happiness is the rest of your life will always live in the shadow of that moment. As someone pointed out, if you are a parent, there will be a point in your life when you put your child down and, unless you’re a weight-lifter, or they remain much smaller than you, never pick them up again.

This morning the second of my two cats, Pash, was put to sleep. She had a severe heart episode on Sunday, which left liquid on her lungs. We hoped it would have been possible to manage her medication so that we could remove the liquid, but without dehydrating her too much. But there was no way to balance the two demands on her body. This morning her breathing was laboured from the water pressure on her lungs, and she still wasn’t hydrated enough. So with the vet we decided it was the right thing. It was quick overall. From having the episode to five days of care, to the end. She was 17. I’d had her since Easter 2008.

My elder cat, Sinta, had kidney disease. She was being treated and was on special food, and lasted seven months from initial diagnosis to a moment when she degenerated rapidly. That was Feb 4 2023. She was 16. I’d had her since 2006.

I initially had Sinta because my ex-girlfriend suggested it. We’d had an on-again, off-again relationship for 6 years. We’d row, split up, one or both would get lonely, and we’d get together again. The last split was amicable, but her suggestion I get a cat was (fairly transparently) that with something to prevent one of us from feeling lonely, we’d break that cycle.

It worked. It sounds cheesy, but it really felt like I’d found a soulmate. She’d climb onto my shoulder and happily sit there. Be content to just sit on me and we’d stare at each other. Come when I called her. The relationship felt more like one of Pullman’s daemons than a pet.

Then I got a full-time in person job and I thought she’d need a companion, so I got Pash. Which after an initial bit of conflict, also worked. There’s a painting of the two of them my father did, of them sitting next to each other on the windowsill looking out of the window. He’s caught their postures perfectly, their tails curling in mirror reflections of each other, Pash still not fully grown.

One of the things about autism: people are tiring. The constant extra effort in determining what’s going on, the wealth of information about emotions, expressions, tones, you’re expected to parse. The constant self-management of masking. Being away from them is a relief. They don’t make effective constant companions. Even if you find the perfect match in a partner, they’ll be autistic too probably, so they’ll need to withdraw for long periods of time. Which I understand, but also that can feel lonely.

Cats (and dogs – I suspect) don’t judge. You don’t need to mask in front of them. Yet they still come to you for comfort, they still need us, and are still comforting. Physically they have perfect fur, they purr (one up on dogs there), they’re warm, their weight is comforting as they lie on you. They vocalise enough but not too much. Both of mine had a wide range of sounds that could almost be a conversation. They’d play. But most importantly, they would always be there. When I went through a major depression after getting my PhD (no job, all my social contacts had withered, the one thing I’d focused five years on had ended, and there was nothing to take its place) the cats were there. During covid, they were there. They were my bedrock. For a lot of people, pets become part of the family, but for long periods of my life, those two were my family.

After Sinta died, Pash came into her own. Suddenly there was no competition for my affection. I’d get headbutts, she’d stretch her paws out and claw me in sheer happiness at being near me. Undisguised, unfeigned.

I knew my time with Sinta was limited, which meant much more focus on my time with them. There was one moment I remember, lying in bed, one each lying contented on a shoulder, purring in absolute bliss, and I felt utter contentment. And I know that is the moment that the rest of my life will exist in the shadow of.

I miss them, obviously, and that’s where a lot of the grief comes from. Knowing that they won’t be around to come up to me when I get home, or jump on the bed to be allowed in to sleep next to me, or sit on me and let me talk to them or sing to them (I’m sure Sinta loved my rendition of Klokleda partha menin klatch). But much of the grief comes from knowing that feeling of contentment, of just sheer happiness of having those balls of fur lying on me, trusting me, sharing their contentment with me, is gone forever.

I have a metaphor for grief. It’s the sort of thing Langdon Jones once described as antipoetry because it’s so banal. Grief is like a hydrofoil. While I’m busy skimming along, I’m above it all. I can work, write a blog post, watch TV, read a book, and it’s pushed away. But as soon as I stop, I sink into it. Waves of it come at me and every seventh one, or so, is so big it swamps me. Even after two years, I’d be physically hit by a wall of grief that Sinta was gone. Now both have. All you can do is let it drive you down, and hold on until you come up for air.

This time is, I think, easier. I’m not sure why. I think because with one cat there was still something emotional going on inside. This time, with none, I don’t think that connection with the emotions is working so well. I’m just on autopilot now. Maybe I’ll be wrong. It’s still early days. I didn’t save any of Pash’s fur from the last time I groomed her, so hunted around my room for traces of it. I gathered up a small handful of it, and yes, it’s soft and white, but there’s no emotional connection to or tactile memory of her in it. It’s just fur. I wanted to feel something from it though. It’s good to have the scrappy bits of fur though because if I didn’t I’d regret not having some so that I could have that connection. This is evidence that wouldn’t work. I haven’t been able to look at any photos or videos. Still can’t for Sinta. They might have a better connection to them, but that might be overwhelming. Like it would trigger this big ball that’s just inside that I can’t let out, but I want to let it out in manageable amounts. Maybe it’s there to stay.

A friend has talked about a ceremony for emotional closure. I’m not sure I want that. I’m not sure what would be left if I got closure. Today’s card on my tarot app says “Keep going, knowing that the journey does not end.” So — good advice. We’ll see.

<edit> I’ve come back in to change the names of my cats – I don’t remember if I’ve ever used them as passwords but it’s possible at some point over the past 19 years that I have.

I’m realising that the effort (on day 1) of getting through is added to by a sort of muscle memory of them. Lying on the bed anticipating one jumping up onto it, to an extent that I think it’s happened. Like a phantom limb. Opening the curtains and looking down expecting one of them to be looking through the window and to look up and give an acknowledging meow at me.

All those moments were small little lifts that brightened each hour. Now they’re not there. I keep leaning on something that’s absent, and keep falling. And much as that habit painful, the worry is that it’ll wear off and I’ll forget what that felt like. Just sharing my life that closely with another for so long that your behaviours are intertwined, not just your lives.

Also, why I’m writing this post. Main aim is – there’s probably someone out there feeling the same thing. It might help to see someone else understands it.

Privileging the corporeal

It’s still happening

This train of thought was triggered by this headline:

Couples who meet on dating apps are doomed science says

https://www.dazeddigital.com/life-culture/article/68440/1/couples-who-meet-on-dating-apps-are-doomed-science-says

Well, OK. That does not surprise me. But then the first line of the copy says: “A new study has found that people who meet their romantic partners online are less happy in love compared to those who meet in person.” Now that is a very different statement than the headline. What about all the people who meet online through other mechanisms than dating apps? What about all those who meet through community groups? Gaming? People you know mutually through social media? Or (my own experience here) social virtual worlds? Those are very different dynamics and aren’t mentioned in the article.

I posted about this on Bluesky (follow me @markchilds.bluesky.social) a month ago, and not only is it still annoying me (hence the blog) but also the news item is still appearing on my browser home page

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2492159-couples-who-meet-online-may-have-lower-relationship-satisfaction/ for example.

And this one is an earlier study that says the same thing, the news item is in 2023 https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/dating-in-the-digital-age/202310/unpacking-the-online-dating-effect. (Links to the Sharabi and Dorrence-Hall paper)

which also got picked up by the media, for example: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/18/relationships-online-mates

Now you expect this from reactionary rags like The Guardian, but New Scientist?

The original article doesn’t link to the research (shameful!) but does mention the lead researcher (Marta Kowal) so I tracked down the paper, assuming that the conflation occurred through sloppy reporting. But no – it’s in the original paper!

The literature review is even-handed – they reference studies that find no difference, or even stronger relationships if begun online (due to enhanced disclosure online). However, they then note that since those studies online dating behaviour has changed – there’s more of a swipe right / left culture – which leads to a more transactional mindset and gaming the algorithms. Also if you’ve scanned through a thousand opportunities and picked one, it’s going to make you wonder more about the 999 you didn’t pick and if perhaps one of those would have been a better choice so increasing the chances of dissatisfaction with the person you did pick. Fair enough.

They also acknowledge in their limitations “our binary categorization of meeting context—online versus offline—did not account for nuanced digital contexts.” Well true. But this caveat does not appear in their conclusions or their paper title. A simple addition of the phrase online dating apps would have made the distinction clearer.

And this conflation occurs all the way through the paper. They’re obviously talking specifically about the mechanics of dating apps, but throughout they describe this as meeting online. For example the Discussion section starts: “The present study aimed to better understand the increasingly common phenomenon of meeting romantic partners online.” No it doesn’t – it better understands the phenomenon of meeting romantic partners through online dating apps. Meeting offline involves the various serendipitous, low stakes, casual connections that can occur through the traditional venues like family, friends, work, school and the Oldenberg third places list (1997). They don’t just get you through the day – though these last group have declined. It’s the (I’m assuming) low stakes, random connections, where you’re not meeting with a potential partner in mind, but just doing stuff, then suddenly after a while thinking “hang on, this person I like a LOT” and taking it from there that makes those relationships so great in the long term (no evidence about in general, but that’s how it worked for me). Doing research like this either means comparing like with like – so all the serendipitous, third space type places online with the equivalent offline ones – or being very cautious about how the claims are framed. Particularly when the key distinction is something other than what you’re claiming. This isn’t offline v online, it’s serendipity v algorithms.

And the other reason why if I was a reviewer of this paper I would have rejected it. There’s no qualitative data. They surveyed a huge number of people, BUT DIDN’T TALK TO ANYONE. Essentially they have no real clue about what the data mean because they haven’t checked their thoughts with any of the people they surveyed. Even my undergraduate students do a better job than this – they understand the complementary roles of data in a mixed methods approach (in an interpretivist study) and why both are necessary for a fuller picture.

But this leads to a wider question – the glee with which the “journalists” pounced on the findings and spread them abroad. There is still (despite lockdowns) a widespread mistrust of online interactions – that for many people there is an in inherent inauthenticity to them. What Carl Mitcham (1994, p.298) calls “ancient scepticism”. It’s a distrust of technology. I see it at work where people say they prefer to teach in person because they can judge the engagement of their students better.

I’m here to tell you. No. You. Can’t. There is no evidence (unless I’ve been very bad at tracking it down) that perceptions of engagement actually correspond to actual engagement. All those nods and eye contacts DO NOT MEAN anyone is paying attention. In fact, students report all that performance around paying attention distracts them from actually paying attention. Admittedly anecdotal, but no-one has anything else to go on.

Sure I agree the apps are pretty dodgy, I would hate them, but the relationships you can build up through online communities, through gaming, through social virtual worlds, are real relationships and it’s disengenuous to criticise one through the guise of reporting on something completely unrelated, just because it happens in the same place.

References

Marta Kowal, Piotr Sorokowski, Adam Bode, Michal Misiak, W.P. Malecki, Agnieszka Sorokowska, S. Craig Roberts, Meeting partners online is related to lower relationship satisfaction and love: Data from 50 countries, Telematics and Informatics, Volume 101, 2025, 102309, ISSN 0736-5853,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2025.102309.

Liesel L. Sharabi, Elizabeth Dorrance-Hall, (2024) The online dating effect: Where a couple meets predicts the quality of their marriage, Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 150, 2024, 107973, ISSN 0747-5632,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107973.

Mitcham, C. (1994) Thinking Through Technology: the Path Between Engineering & Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Oldenberg, R. (1997) The Great Good Place: Cafes, coffee shops, community centers, beauty parlors, general stores, bars, hangouts and how they get you through the day. Marlowe and Company, USA: New York