Say It Isn't So: Did Real Simple Really Mean To Say "Good Riddance" To Pets?

Real Simple is one of my favorite magazines. I can't wait to get it every month. I rely on the great advice the magazine dispenses about everything from cleaning to organizing to cooking to pet care. After poring over an issue of Real Simple, I feel a sense of accomplishment, like I have rid myself of the clutter in my apartment, cooked a delicious, healthy meal and ironed all of my clothes even though all I have done is read an issue of Real Simple. It's that good. But I was taken aback by an article in the August 2008 issue of my beloved Real Simple.

It starts on page 164 with a headline that reads: "In life, there are some things you want around all the time. As for the rest? It's time to say...good riddance."

Then comes the intro: "Weeds, a growling stomach, wasps at a picnic—no matter how hard you try to shoo them away, they keep coming back. Here's how to bid farewell to 18 things you want to eliminate from your life but can't figure out how."

Reading this, I get the sense that this article will help me figure out how to get rid of the bothersome things I don't want in my life, and it does. There are helpful entries on how to ditch a third wheel, eradicate coffee breath, fade a scar, get spinach out of your teeth and remove cat-urine odor among others.

But there is also an entry on how to "get rid of" a pet. To be fair, the advice is responsible in that it encourages the pet owner to find a new home for their pet, but given the tone of the article, which is all about saying good riddance to annoying, pesky things in your life, Fido and Fluffy don't fit into the mix, and the inclusion of pets comes off as mean.

Are the editors of Real Simple truly telling readers that they consider pets nuisances that need to be gotten rid of? By including pets with all of the other annoyances listed in this feature, that's what it sounds like they are saying.

I honestly don't think the editors and writers at Real Simple are anti-pet. But it was definitely an error in judgment to include pets in this feature. I am surprised that someone at the magazine didn't notice this and remove the pet entry before the magazine went to press.