If you elevate your relationship with an animal to the level of a relationship with a human, I'd call that a lack of perspective.

I love how self righteous assholes with children (or aspiring self righteous assholes with children) immediately see their choice as the righteous one which "contributes" something automatically meaningful to society, community etc by default and assume everyone else would share their view.

I have pretty much given up on the human race

If you follow a sociological model, the preference of animal company to human company would be a pretty unambiguous symptom of alienation.

Or maybe it demonstrates a lack of perspective?

They grow out of it.

And all your effort contributes nothing meaningful to society, your community, or even anyone else but you. So forgive the rest of us if we don't quite see the big deal here.

Considering there are non-American white populations around the world that don't have anywhere near the barbaric racism of US society, do you think there might be a bigger factor than skin colour at play?

You feel smug when people ignore you? Explains why you're smug all the time.

The fact that my not having answered has bothered you for days really makes me feel important.

OH THANK GOD WE'VE FOUND THE ANONYMOUS INTERNET COMMENTER RESPONSIBLE FOR MODERN DAY JIM CROW. I've been looking for that asshole everywhere.

When it's a no-name model or faceless fashion line, we have no problem calling it appropriative, oppressive, exploitative, and so on.

"Sir, we are 'they'."

Have you realized yet that I used "pet" precisely because I doubt that you are as vociferously defensive of all human celebrities as you are here, even though they are all human, and that you are objectifying a stranger too, in your own way, by deciding that she needs your defense?

I never said it was your doing - my original comment was directed at Burt up there. You're reference to "pet celebrities" in your defense of the objectification of minority celebrities (which no one forced you to make) is definitely problematic, and your insistence on digging a deeper hole about how it's okay to…

So...you didn't read the quoted portion of my original post? The part where I pointed out exactly the scope of my criticism?

I'll answer your question with another question: why are you so ardent about defending your right to reduce people, particularly (in this case) WOC and members of the LGBTQA+ community, to stereotypes for your amusement? A trans woman joking about how someone else looks like a trans woman is still offensive, and…

I can see your problem - you think celebrities can be "pets" that one can claim as "theirs". I can't say I understand, since I see people as, you know, people, not just vectors of certain stereotyped traits and behaviours.

OH GOD THANK YOU I THOUGHT I WAS GOING CRAZY

You know she's a person, right? Not some sort of mystical totem you can claim as your own.