I was halfway expecting the cat to turn into a catgirl at the end of it. But nope that didn't happen.

It happens om the next page DW

.

Also, is this a dialect thing, using "kitty" instead of "kitten"? To me, there's a different nuance between the two words, but here the translation exclusively uses "kitty" where I'd normally say/hear "kitten". It also spells it "kittey" several times, which I've never seen before.

Kitty is just the informal of Kitten

Can anyone read the last couple of kanji on Kanda's tshirt on page 39?

It says neko (cat) ichi something something lol- I cant figure out those kanji..

goggle thinks it says old cat but im sure it doesn't.

pretty sure it says ねこ一番 (neko ichiban) so something like cats are the best

^Yeah you're right- that was one of the things I searched for but google never gave ichiban as a suggestion for 'the best' and the bottom kanji looks quite different- maybe because its on a creased t-shirt, but now I see the real kanji, it does look close enough to fit. Thanks.

last edited at Sep 22, 2020 7:51AM

-Passionate hand holding
-Mommies adopoting a cat

And the pair look. (ペアルック • pea rukku) Don't forget the pair look.

Really, there's absolutely no need for them to be wearing perfectly matching clothes with matching kitty-related pics or slogans... unless they're trying to make a statement about their relationship.

We recently fostered an abandoned kitten. She was really withdrawn at first, but now, she's playing, eating solid food and properly using the litter box.

Some friends adopted her, but for a while, she had two mommies! ^_^

Kitty is just the informal of Kitten

Unless this is specific to a certain dialect (hence my asking), I certainly can't agree with this statement. They have completely different nuances - a full-grown cat can still be a "kitty", while "kitten" applies only to, well, kittens. In contrast to the age-based description that "kitten" is, I'd describe the usage of "kitty" as one of endearment - you say it when being cutesy, like, "look at the cute kitty~" (in appropriately fawning voice), and to me it sounds very, very out of place in non-emotional statements of fact like "the mother abandoned its kitty". It can also be used when calling a cat (as in "Kitty kitty kitty! Come here!"), while "kitten" cannot. They are very much not interchangeable in the English I know.

They should've just called it a "pussy" and be done with it.

Much more potential for funny dialogues too. XD

as someone who's lived most of his life with a bunch of cats this manga really spoke to me.
also about the part about helping newborn kittens excrement is as painful and disgusting as it sounds but it's SUPER important and a lot of people that adopt kittens don't know about it :/

Cats and children are both better if adopted after toilet training.

I don't understand this manga at all. How is it Himari's fault that Shiro abandoned its kitten? Why is feeding a stray cat lumped in with abandoning one yourself? The messaging about taking responsibility makes sense of neglecting an adopted cat, but I don't see how it pertains to feeding strays at all.

Same here, can anyone explain?

last edited at Sep 23, 2020 3:16AM

Mah hart.. mah sole
Too cute

I've convinced myself of yuri on less evidence than this, so it's yuri as far I'm concerned

This is so powerful. This will be my new mantra.

I don't understand this manga at all. How is it Himari's fault that Shiro abandoned its kitten? Why is feeding a stray cat lumped in with abandoning one yourself? The messaging about taking responsibility makes sense of neglecting an adopted cat, but I don't see how it pertains to feeding strays at all.

Same here, can anyone explain?

Some people are pretty harsh towards this question. In their opinion, when you feed a stray cat but have no intentions to adopt it, you're just contributing with the abandon.

It's more or less the same mindset of those who say that if you help people who live in the streets (by giving them food, clothes, hygiene products, etc.), you're just contributing to their "laziness" for finding a job and such.

Of course there's a fine line between these two situations, but the idea behind both of them tends to have the same foundation: contributing to the "problem" and not solving it at all. Sad but true, unfortunately.

Some people are pretty harsh towards this question. In their opinion, when you feed a stray cat but have no intentions to adopt it, you're just contributing with the abandon.

It's more or less the same mindset of those who say that if you help people who live in the streets (by giving them food, clothes, hygiene products, etc.), you're just contributing to their "laziness" for finding a job and such.

Of course there's a fine line between these two situations, but the idea behind both of them tends to have the same foundation: contributing to the "problem" and not solving it at all. Sad but true, unfortunately.

Sounds like a serious - and in at least the second case, arguably willful - confusion of causal relationships.

I don't understand this manga at all. How is it Himari's fault that Shiro abandoned its kitten? Why is feeding a stray cat lumped in with abandoning one yourself? The messaging about taking responsibility makes sense of neglecting an adopted cat, but I don't see how it pertains to feeding strays at all.

Same here, can anyone explain?

Some people are pretty harsh towards this question. In their opinion, when you feed a stray cat but have no intentions to adopt it, you're just contributing with the abandon.

It's more or less the same mindset of those who say that if you help people who live in the streets (by giving them food, clothes, hygiene products, etc.), you're just contributing to their "laziness" for finding a job and such.

Of course there's a fine line between these two situations, but the idea behind both of them tends to have the same foundation: contributing to the "problem" and not solving it at all. Sad but true, unfortunately.

The two situations are nowhere near similar in that caring for a small animal takes nowhere near the resources of caring for a human being who has free will. People who feed stray animals of any type without the intent of somehow finding them a home or even bringing them into theirs are just being selfish. They get to feel better about themselves or assuage their guilt without taking any real responsibility for the well-being of the animal.

The two situations are nowhere near similar in that caring for a small animal takes nowhere near the resources of caring for a human being who has free will.

I'm not really seeing the relevance here.

People who feed stray animals of any type without the intent of somehow finding them a home or even bringing them into theirs are just being selfish. They get to feel better about themselves or assuage their guilt without taking any real responsibility for the well-being of the animal.

...you do realise this is pure Nirvana fallacy right? "If you can't do something about the impossibly large big picture you shouldn't do such small things you're capable of either" which is bullshit reasoning and basically just an excuse to do nothing.

Also nice arbitrary assumptions of other peoples' motives.

I don't understand this manga at all. How is it Himari's fault that Shiro abandoned its kitten? Why is feeding a stray cat lumped in with abandoning one yourself? The messaging about taking responsibility makes sense of neglecting an adopted cat, but I don't see how it pertains to feeding strays at all.

Same here, can anyone explain?

Some people are pretty harsh towards this question. In their opinion, when you feed a stray cat but have no intentions to adopt it, you're just contributing with the abandon.

It's more or less the same mindset of those who say that if you help people who live in the streets (by giving them food, clothes, hygiene products, etc.), you're just contributing to their "laziness" for finding a job and such.

Of course there's a fine line between these two situations, but the idea behind both of them tends to have the same foundation: contributing to the "problem" and not solving it at all. Sad but true, unfortunately.

The two situations are nowhere near similar in that caring for a small animal takes nowhere near the resources of caring for a human being who has free will. People who feed stray animals of any type without the intent of somehow finding them a home or even bringing them into theirs are just being selfish. They get to feel better about themselves or assuage their guilt without taking any real responsibility for the well-being of the animal.

I said "some people," not "all people." I said "more or less," not "the same." And more importantly, I said "there's a fine line between these two situations." The mindsetーM I N D S E Tーis the only thing in common in these two situations.

There are many reasons behind not taking care of an animal you just saw wandering on the streets. People fear rabic and other diseases these poor beings may have; people are are allergic to them despite liking them; and so on. Not everything is based on selfishness, and things aren't black or white either.

The two situations are nowhere near similar in that caring for a small animal takes nowhere near the resources of caring for a human being who has free will.

I'm not really seeing the relevance here.

People who feed stray animals of any type without the intent of somehow finding them a home or even bringing them into theirs are just being selfish. They get to feel better about themselves or assuage their guilt without taking any real responsibility for the well-being of the animal.

...you do realise this is pure Nirvana fallacy right? "If you can't do something about the impossibly large big picture you shouldn't do such small things you're capable of either" which is bullshit reasoning and basically just an excuse to do nothing.

Also nice arbitrary assumptions of other peoples' motives.

A human being has the free will to determine whether they want a better life, and the motivation (or not) to make it happen. Getting help from people is great, and encouraged, but it is ultimately THEIR responsibility. An animal cannot make that choice, especially if it didn't grow up having to scavenge for food or learn to hunt. That is why it's relevant.

Also, I don't care what fallacy you want to attribute to it, it doesn't change the fact that not taking the time out of your life to even try to find a home for an animal that is without one and just giving it some food is a selfish act to make you feel better about yourself. There is no "impossibly large big picture." You either help, or you decide not to. Feeding an animal reinforces its dependence on people, and unless you plan to always go and feed that animal, there isn't a point. You're prolonging its suffering, and you might as well have used the time you spent giving it food to find it a home. I've never found a stray animal and simply given it some food and left. Every single time, I've either found its owner, found it a home, or given it to our local no-kill shelter. Acting like people aren't capable of doing something so small but meaningful is what's the real bullshit.

...you do realise this is pure Nirvana fallacy right? "If you can't do something about the impossibly large big picture you shouldn't do such small things you're capable of either" which is bullshit reasoning and basically just an excuse to do nothing.

Sometimes kindness is the greatest cruelty: by habitually feeding strays, you only teach them to depend on humans, allowing their hunting and foraging skills to wither and leaving them in the lurch should the kindness run out. An occasional act of charity is one thing, but anything more than that requires thinking about the consequences of your actions.

Unfortunately, this is a real problem with the world today: so many people push for things that seem good on the surface, but are sometimes even just one step removed from a reality of being worse than doing nothing.

Subtext... How disappointing

I fucking love cats

A human being has the free will to determine whether they want a better life, and the motivation (or not) to make it happen. Getting help from people is great, and encouraged, but it is ultimately THEIR responsibility. An animal cannot make that choice, especially if it didn't grow up having to scavenge for food or learn to hunt. That is why it's relevant.

Blaming people for being poor is honestly disgusting. You don't know people's situations or the circumstances that led them to be homeless. Maybe they have a medical problem that caused them to enter debt, or maybe their workplace went bankrupt and laid them off. Have some fucking empathy.

The cat has pp im quaking

Blaming people for being poor is honestly disgusting. You don't know people's situations or the circumstances that led them to be homeless. Maybe they have a medical problem that caused them to enter debt, or maybe their workplace went bankrupt and laid them off. Have some fucking empathy.

That isn't what I was doing in the slightest, but it's interesting that you'd immediately go there for some reason. My entire point is that animals do not have the kind of agency to change their situation that human beings do. I wasn't blaming anyone for anything, so maybe back off a little there, chief.

Mah hart.. mah sole
Too cute

same tbh