More pet ownership drama
Yoshi August 21st. 2006, 10:49pmThere have been a few more twists and turns in the pet ownership drama of the past few weeks. We still have kept Yoshi. While the pet rules are still posted on the elevator wall, we’ve been taking him for walks by putting him in a bag and carrying him down. Only one square headed security guard ever says anything to us when we walk him. The same security guard that harassed us moving in, and the same guy that was telling us to get rid of our dog due to some unknown Korean pet ownership law and or "group vote".
On walks with Yoshi, my wife has been other pet owners were they live and if they know anything about pet ownership rules in our apartment. Summarizing what people say, if there is a law, no one else in the country enforces it except this particular security guard. Our apartment has a bad reputation from pet owners as being particularly strange about it’s pet enforcement. No one seemed to care, or thought it would be a big deal.
By chance we caught a taxi driver that happened to live in our apartment as well. We asked if he had pets, and he went into a long tirade about how he proudly fought against pet ownership in his apartment building. He was a "leader" for his particular apartment building in the complex, and that he had "decided" that there would be no dogs. We asked if it had been put up for an apartment wide vote like we had been told it had by security guard, and he said that it had not. In fact, he seemed to think that a vote wasn’t needed to tell people what they were and weren’t allowed to do in their apartment. Basically, he said that it was up to him and whatever his group decided.
From what was explained to me, these apartment leaders are self-important people that basically pick a cause to champion so they can justify their salary as they decide things in the apartment complex. Trivial stuff like "Garbage recycling day" or "How much to spend on cleaning per month" wouldn’t occupy their time or be worth paying someone to decide, so they need something else to do. They tend to be strictly conservative and prohibitive. The guy seemed like a total dick.
Anyway, since the only security guy that harasses me has lied about every single justification for not having pets, and the entire issue hasn’t been voted on according to this "leader" guy we met, I’m not really worried anything is going to happen. We’re being as polite as possible while still owning a pet. We’re not going to have our fun spoiled by a bunch of undemocratic guys that can’t deal with dogs. Even if it was put up to a vote, we still won’t give up our pup. Resistance!
2 Responses to “More pet ownership drama”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.














August 22nd, 2006 at 1:41 am
Viva la revolucion!!
I don’t even like dogs…in fact, they disgust me…but I wouldn’t presume to start some sort of oligarchy in my apartment building to force people not to have them.
Given this, and the whole “it’s okay until we get caught” mentality you told me about during your visit to the States, I wonder how South Korea sustains a democratic government at all.
August 22nd, 2006 at 9:46 am
The whole “do as elders say” element of this culture is always going to be somewhat incompatable with the idea of “do what we all decide” democracy anyway. When your culture and your political system are in disagreement, you get this sort of result from time to time. It’s good because generally people just ignore authority and people are to busy to keep tabs on everyone as it is.
Given their history with Authoritarian leaders both here and to the North, it’s understandable that a passive democracy is viewed as something of a benefit. 99% of the time this is a huge benefit to me.
Buehler vis a vis Rooney: “A: You can never go too far. B: If I’m gonna get busted, it is *not* gonna be by a guy like *that*.”