Stray Dog Controversy and the Dangerous Comparisons

The decision to capture stray dogs in Delhi has ignited a wave of online petitions demanding its reversal. A common argument made by social warriors is that government shelters are not well maintained, also small in size and will not provide the dogs with a decent life. But beyond that a disturbing argument has emerged where some have started comparing the action against stray dogs to the government’s inaction on rape cases. The idea that if rape cases still exist why can’t stray dogs remain on the streets. This is not just logically flawed but also deeply insensitive.

The problem with this comparison is two sided. First it equates women who have faced one of the worst forms of violence imaginable with dogs being taken to shelters which is an entirely different context. Second it trivializes both issues. Rape is a violent crime that demands its own separate protests laws and focus while stray dog control addresses public health and safety. Linking the two not only deviates the conversation but also ignores the actual problems each issue poses. It sends a message to the families of rabies victims and the survivors of sexual assault that their pain can be used as a rhetorical tool in unrelated debates.

This is not unique to the stray dog debate. Such diversions happen often. Whenever a concern is raised instead of addressing it some people switch to "whataboutism". If you can do this why not fix that first. This mindset freezes progress because it replaces action with endless comparisons. In this case instead of debating how to humanely handle the stray population the focus shifts to unrelated crimes and the actual victims are left without solutions.

Some even argue that only a few people have been killed by rabies as if the number makes those deaths less significant. That reasoning risks trivialising the seriousness of the issue. A human life lost to a preventable cause should not be devalued simply because the number is smaller compared to another tragedy. Rape victims deserve attention and justice through a separate and strong movement just as rabies victims deserve solutions to prevent more deaths. Both issues are serious in their own right and neither should be used to downplay the other.

What if the same style of argument was applied elsewhere. How cute does an animal need to be to get public sympathy. What about cows, goats, hens, fish and other living beings that are killed every day. They also deserve a life. When framed like this, it becomes clear how absurd these comparisons are. They do not solve the problem instead they take away the seriousness from the actual issue at hand. The conversation should be about finding real solutions not about defending one problem by pointing to another.