Two cats apparently flew to Japan on United Airlines and, according to their owner, handled the longhaul journey well. That is nice, I suppose, but every time I see animals in an aircraft cabin, I have the same reaction: why are we doing this?
Cats Fly To Japan On United Airlines…
An Instagram reel (embedding was disabled, so I cannot include it here) shows two cats traveling to Japan on United Airlines, with their owner proudly noting that it was their longest flight to date and that they handled it well.
Good for the cats, I guess. Congrats to anyone seated nearby who did not have allergies, did not hear meowing for hours, and did not have to deal with a litter box issue at 35,000 feet…
But I remain deeply skeptical of animals in aircraft cabins, especially on longhaul flights.
United allows cats and dogs to travel in the cabin, subject to restrictions, with the pet remaining in an approved carrier under the seat. The fee is currently $150 each way.
Contrary to popular opinion, I am not anti-pet. I understand pets are family and as I type this, my beautiful bengal cat sits by my side, as she does every day while I work. I also understand that relocating internationally can require bringing animals along, and checking pets as cargo can be stressful, risky, or not even an option (though that wasn’t the case on this trip).
But the passenger cabin is not a living room. It is a shared metal tube where hundreds of people are confined for many hours. Some passengers are allergic and the rules say that the cats must remain in a kitty carrier (only dogs can be service animals).
And unlike a crying baby, which is a fellow human being, animals are a luxury, not a means necessary to propagate the human race…(another issue for another day).
I continue to think we have normalized animals in cabins far too much. The problem is that every viral video of pets on planes helps push the idea that airplanes are just another extension of home. Maybe I’m making it worse by highlighting it, but I draw your attention to this sort of foolishness often to underscore how the pendulum has swung far too much in the direction of tolerance for pets onboard. Isn’t it interesting that you don’t see this on any European or Asian carrier? What does that tell you?
CONCLUSION
Two cats reportedly flew to Japan on United Airlines and handled the longhaul trip well. I am glad it worked out (#sarcasm).
A quiet cat in a carrier is one thing we might have to begrudgingly put up with, but I cannot support turning longhaul cabins into pet-friendly social media stages…do you?
More whining.
More *meowing
With all due respect. For a single person, animals are not a luxury. They are part of my family. I could say that about children, couldn’t I? And you have a Bengal kitty. Nice. Mine are wonderful mix breeds from shelters. This obsession about pets on planes and at airports has gotten a little out of control. Let’s get back to a focus on travel. Thank you.
No, sorry, and I am sick and tired of selfish people (not you, speaking in general) who think that children are no different than cats or dogs, when the very survival of the human race depends on humans propagating. Enough of this insanity…stop equating pets to babies, as if they are both optional accessories.
I actually agree with liebling in that it is inane when people compare their animals to babies or children. Animals are not babies nor children and those with them know that.
Animals are great, and they are part of the ‘family’ for sure; however don’t (‘you’ in a general sense 2nd person plural) compare them to children. In addition to the felonies involved with leaving a baby home alone for a few days (which one can do with animals) the care and humanity involved is just different. The dopey Gen Z/A goofs who have not experienced reality (nor can handle it) tend to be the ones do it the most. In a sense I am glad the goofs in GenZ/X are choosing not to propagate (as Darwin notes, idiots begat idiots) to hopeful spare the world a generation of doom scroomling, feckless incompetents.
Right. Gotta chime in here. My uncle has pretty significant developmental disabilities, and as he entered middle age he became prone to depression until he got a dog. Owing to his situation, he’ll not be having children, so his dog provides him with companionship and an opportunity to show organization and responsibility for another life. While he might not be contributing to the survival of the human race, his dog is not a luxury.
Having a dog has also opened up his life up in a way that’s a blessing to him and others. He’s become a neighborhood fixture, his dog has enabled him to overcome his shyness to interact with others as they go on walks together.
I don’t think babies or cats/dogs are optional accessories. I would encourage you to consider that different people have different needs or abilities, and for some like my uncle, a dog or cat may essentially fill the role of a child in their life.
Who are you to judge the importance of my uncle’s dog to his life? Or to condescend to that importance because his dog isn’t a human?
There are exceptions to nearly every rule and dogs/cats can be a gift from God to the human race. The general principle still applies.
Fascinating that two cats flying on a plane without incident inspired Matthew’s tirade/article. But not even his clumsy preemptive exemption (he’s not anti-pet! he has a cat!) mitigates his subsequent descent into indulging the very attitude he disclaims. His lengthy screed is peppered with logical fallacies and a fascinating side trip into natalism as a justification for the superiority of infants over other people’s pets (an unnecessary contest; what pet owner argues for the superiority of pets over infants?). All this is clearly the product of a pet peeve that he attempts to dress up as a principled stand, an argument that never settles, lurching from nuisance to allergens to foreign carrier norms to the survival of the human race, as though any objection will serve so long as he stacks enough of them together.
You’re so great with AI, but your suggestion this is an “unnecessary contest” is discounted by the comments in this post…
“You’re so great with AI, but your suggestion this is an “unnecessary contest” is discounted by the comments in this post…”
Telling that you’ve chosen not to respond to much of the substance of my comments, but rather to lob an implied accusation of AI authorship (which is incorrect) and to contend that this is a contest (if anything, it’s a one-way contest: none of the commenters argue that their pets are more important than children, whereas you argue the opposite).
It fascinates me when people who boast of their religiosity and the virtues of their faith turn out to have such tendentious perspectives, articulated with such an acid tongue. It’s clear that you’re not here to have a reasonable conversation, but rather to shout down anyone who doesn’t hold with your odd natalist anti-pets-in-plane-cabins agenda.
Disappointing and a rather poor witness.
With respect, can I ask you if you actually read the other comments? Because you say “none of the commenters argue that their pets are more important than children” but I read them differently, like the very first comment.
I don’t have a great deal of respect for those who are content to let the human race die so they can live hedonistically. I hope that is not you…
But this 55-comment post which includes your comments shows that I’m very happy to have a reasonable conversation over this, including with you who shows via your made-up infantile email addresses that you only seek to demean. It’s the pot calling the kettle black!
You also seem awfully sensitive to my religious affiliation, which I never “boasted” about but apparently makes you very insecure. Tolerance is a two-way street and I’m not sure how I could have been more objective (cf. tendentious) in presenting this story, which included a link to the source and picture…
Grace and peace to you, Publius.
Todd S did use your phrase (“With all due respect”), and I’ll admit, I immediate thought of you!
I never use “with all due respect” because I figure, what does that even mean? Is any respect due? Are you insulting me?
I just say “with respect.”
Or, “may it please the court” has a nice ring to it… bah!
This article is spot-on.
Unsurprising that many commenters try to place their cat or dog friend at the same level as a baby or a service animal (not an emotional support animal). This degrades sympathy for those who need genuine service assistance, and it is not the law.
Current regulations mostly let you travel with your pet. Unlike the Japan cat video, keep your cat or dog in its carrier the whole flight. Be mindful and courteous of the rest of us crammed into the same cabin. If being in the carrier is too stressful for your precious, leave them at home.
you must be fun at parties
I save all my griping for the blog, except when it comes to politics! 😉
I would much rather share the plane with those cats than most children. I say this as a dog person.
I’ve seen the owner on multiple social media accounts and I really dislike the way he exploits these cats. He drags them all over NYC on his backpack, shoulders etc. Sometimes he has 3 cats all hanging off him in some form. Some nutjob is gonna grab one of these cats and do it harm and he won’t be able to stop them. He should get his clicks inside his house and quite subjecting animals to exploitation.
You have contacts at United and other airlines…. why don’t you put them on the hotspot about crap like this? Publish their reply and if it is nonsense like I suspect it will be, then call them out on it.
I’ve never understood people demanding peanuts be banned from plans due to allergies when cat and dog allergies are far more prevalent.
Because most people who are allergic to dog and cat fur have relatively mild skin and sinus allergies to them, whereas most peanut allergies carry the risk of potentially fatal anaphylactic shock.
In that context, it makes perfect sense.
Mine is not a mild allergy. When I am near a cat, I am itchy all over the entire body and my lips swollen. It would be a nightmare for me if I ended up sitting near these cats on a long haul flight.
Let’s face it, those cats were better behaved than some passengers.
By the way I miss the deranged passenger posts lately. Is the demise of Spirit partially responsible?
The “usual suspects”?
least the cats fit into a carrier, not masquerading as a service animal. On the separate issue of medical treatment I am surprised treatment of cancer exceeds a threshold of compassion reserved for humans that can at least understand the end goal of surgery, chemo and other intervention. In that way they aren’t family and should be given palliative care.
With that view, pets are safer under the care of a sitter, not traveling to please their owner.
I’m with Matthew on this one. And that’s coming from someone without children and who considers their pet a member of the family. Despite how I see my kitty, I recognize what is best for her and for those other paying passengers. If the trip we are going on involves a plane or train she stays home. And if she were to join us, she would never leave the domain of her carrier unless necessary.
Except for true service animals I do not understand why or how a pet owner can remove their pet from their carrier during a flight. That is just cruel to the animal and inconsiderate of your fellow passengers.
Pets are living beings that have their own psychology, fears and innate issues. And they most certainly are not accessories to increase attention upon oneself.
It’s not unusual that lots of kids grow up to threaten and even murder their parents,beat them when old and senile,help them along to the grave to claim their inheritance,etc.I worked many years with social services,the reality is usually not a Hallmark movie.Most animals don’t attack their owners even if abused.If a spouse is a ball and chain,children can be a prison cell for at least 18 years,or a lifetime if they have disabilities.Having them is not always a great thing.,people who always imply it is are a lot like the couple who kiss in public and Instagram,then fight light mad when nobody is watching.
Me and Mrs Melendez,Rob Reiner,for example.might agree,if they could.
Mr and Mrs Melendez,Rob Reiner,for example.might agree,if they could.
Incredibly dark, and very much outliers.
Not really,both parricide occured within the same community,per se.But I suppose actor James Handy murdered this month doesn’t qualify,it happened at his home,but apparently the girlfriends son did it., obviously he came with the arrangement Not his biological kid anyway.
My point is that those incidents are not the norm. Most aging parents and their adult children have supportive, yet sometimes complicated, but not literally murderous, relationships. Ideally, we can learn from these awful cases to not repeat them. The Rob and Michele certainly deserved far better. RIP.
Keep them in approved carriers for duration of flight.
I believe that unless the animal is designated as a service animal is ies REQUIRED to remain in the travel carrier. This whole subject as authored is pure clickbait.
Yeah…so why were the cats allowed out?
Cute critters but you’re completely correct.
Ugh… Pet exploitation for Instagram clout. It’s one step above posting pics and vids of kids every single day.
How do they get away with it? Airlines don’t accept cats as service animals, and service animals are the only animals allowed outside a carrier inflight. How are they doing this?
As cute as it may be, it’s against our policy to have pets out of their carrier during the flight. As a flight attendant, if I saw this, I would have to politely ask you to keep them on the carrier because it’s an official policy that I’m required to enforce….not because I want to, but because it’s in our flight manual and has been in numerous company emails and publications over the years. I’m not sure how this is allowed…
My question is what’s it to you? You just decided you don’t like it? Who cares?
I write often about the abuse of rules concerning pets onboard because I run into far too many such cases in my own travels.
You’re conflating the annoying online behavior of a small set of people with the people needing to safely transport a beloved family member. Have you ever considered that when people move to a new city and must do it by plane, that is the only safe option? Keeping a cat or small dog underneath one’s seat for a journey surely isn’t going to affect your flight, certainly less than the boorish drunken person or a rude fellow passenger leaving the bathroom a mess.
Save your “a passenger cabin is not a living room” to flyers who take off their shoes and walk about, let their kids run up and down the aisle or treat flight attendants poorly.
The comment was about pets not being kept in the carrier (allowing exception for wellness check).
Do not always agree with him but yeah they needed to remain in the carrier and not loose on a seat.
Silly felines for taking United. As Tim Dunn will tell us, Delta is the cat’s meow.
“Propagating the human race”. Such a right wing dog whistle.
So you come from the “you meant what I believe you meant” school?
So, is that an Ohio-thing?
I don’t know what city the flight departed from, but the shortest UA to Japan flight is 10.5 hours. Should a pet be in a carrier for that long? I think not. Should they be let out of carriers? Absolutely not.
Matthew, I read daily, usually enjoy your articles. Considering yesterday I was literally driving I-15 and noticed a car in the central median actively ABANDONING their collared kitten….. pulled over as soon as the vehicle immediately drove off. The animal was scared beyond belief and probably would have died within minutes…
“Animals are a luxury, not a means to propagate the human race”……. yeah about that human race that deserves propagating….
Kudos to you for rescuing the cat and those people should be thrown into a penal colony and put to work on an infrastructure project.
But again, there are always exceptions but that does not defeat the fundamental principle that the human race must procreate to survive and we all have an interest in that…
What if you are sitting behind a cat—you know, one of those breeds with very long hair—and the cat drapes its tail over its seat back and blocks your video screen? Do you (a) Ask the cat to keep its tail in its own seat, (b) Call a FA to ask the cat to do so, or (c) Stick chewing gum on the cat’s tail?
While I generally agree with Matthew Klint’s comments on this issue, I believe animals do not belong in the passenger compartment! Certified service dogs may be an exception!
These days even veterinary offices require most animals – besides dogs – to be in kennels. Why shouldn’t that be the case on an airplane? It is an enclosed, shared space and, to maintain safety and comfort, basic rules must be followed. Now, if only airlines would follow some basic rules to maintain the safety and comfort of economy class seating.
As far as the propagation of the human race being an objective we all have interest in, (1) I actually don’t have much interest in it, and (2) judging by our collective action/inaction it doesn’t seem like most have that interest either. By no means am I someone to chain myself to trees, but from a functional perspective, we as humans have exploited and ravaged our own and only home. Having more children might extend the life of our Ponzi-like economy and retirement structure, but it will not save us or our planet. Maybe SpaceX will save us. And maybe next time we could just avoid political clichés. Ha! The word “procreate” used in a travel blog!
Selfish.
I was ready to be upset about this until I saw the crocheted flower hats.
“not a means necessary to propagate the human race”
I don’t know about that. Isn’t taking a cute dog to a park a great way to meet women? Or the classic “accidentally throw the frisbee at the pretty lady while playing fetch” move. Better than meeting at a bar, right?
Love it!