Why Do Good People Do Bad Things to Animals?
Most people think of themselves as animal lovers.
They stop their cars to let a mother duck cross the street with her ducklings, share Facebook posts from their local animal shelter, and treat their pets like members of the family. Yet many of these same people wouldn’t think twice about stopping for a burger on their way home from work, splurging for a new pair of leather boots, or surprising their child with a pet hermit crab that dies in a few months due to improper care. So how can both of these things be true?
The answer is uncomfortable but important:
Harming animals is rarely the result of intentional cruelty.
More often, it comes from a combination of cognitive dissonance, cultural norms, misinformation, and economic barriers.
If we want to help animals effectively, we need to understand why good people (ourselves included) sometimes make choices that directly cause their suffering.
What is Cognitive Dissonance?
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary says cognitive dissonance is “psychological conflict resulting from incongruous beliefs and attitudes held simultaneously.”
Put simply, this means we feel uncomfortable when our actions don’t line up with our values.
So what do we do when we start to feel this discomfort? Our brain starts coming up with excuses.
“Humans are designed to eat animals.”
“A shock collar is the only way I can get my dog to behave.”
“Animal testing is necessary to keep humans safe.”
This thought pattern is a normal part of human psychology. It doesn’t mean that you’re a “bad” person. However, it does mean that we must take a step back and examine whether our beliefs are actually based in fact or simply niceties that our brain is telling us to ease our discomfort.
The Power of Culture
If you grew up in the United States, the thought of cooking and eating a dog would likely turn your stomach. Yet thousands of people attend the Yulin Dog Meat Festival in China each year. In the same vein, eating cow meat is seen as taboo or even illegal in some parts of India, while it is a common part of daily life for many Americans.
Though cognitive dissonance may lead some people to brush off the ethical concerns with the animal agriculture industry, there are many others who have never even considered the ethical arguments for or against it.
As a kindergartener eating chicken nuggets for lunch, you likely didn’t think “Was this chicken treated humanely?” Your parents ate chicken. Your friends ate chicken. People on TV ate chicken. Your growing brain absorbed all of this information and neatly tucked it away into the Normal folder along with wearing shoes, brushing your teeth, eating three meals a day, etc.
Malice or Misinformation?
We’ve already discussed how our culture and psychology can tell us that eating a chicken or cow is perfectly acceptable, while eating a dog or cat is vile and disgusting. Although it’s true that companion animals are viewed differently than “food” animals, they are often still seen as objects or commodities to some extent.
According to the American Pet Products Association (APPA), the pet industry in the US brought in $158 billion in 2025 alone, and this number is expected to rise to $165 billion in 2026. With so much money on the line, it’s almost inevitable for profit to begin taking priority over the welfare of the animals.
One example of this is the amount of misinformation surrounding proper betta fish care. If a half gallon glass bowl with some rocks and a plastic plant sells better than a proper betta fish setup (5+ gallon tank, low-flow water filter, aquarium heater, water thermometer, soft live or silk plants, LED aquarium light, etc.), companies have a major incentive to convince customers that the glass bowl is an appropriate or ideal habitat.
Most people truly care about their pets and want to do what’s best for them. The person with a betta fish in a small bowl on their desk likely bought the Complete Betta Fish Starter Kit from their local pet store. The person who walks their dog on a prong collar took the advice of a neighbor who swears it worked wonders for their dog. The person who sprays their cat with water to keep them off the kitchen counter remembered their parents using a spray bottle on their childhood cat and never gave it a second thought.
Animal welfare is a complex topic with an overwhelming amount of conflicting information circling around the internet and media. Unfortunately, many well-meaning people simply have not been exposed to reliable information.
The Individual Victim Effect
Humans are generally more motivated by suffering they can see.
A neglected dog tied outside a neighbor’s house or an injured baby bird in your yard is emotionally compelling and would lead many people to take action. However, the welfare of animals hundreds of miles away in industrial farming systems can feel abstract and distant.
As Joseph Stalin put it:
“The death of a single Russian soldier is a tragedy. A million deaths is a statistic.”
This cognitive bias is referred to as the Individual Victim Effect. The issue is not a lack of compassion. It is a result of human psychology.
Social Barriers
Sometimes even the people who have the knowledge, and desire to help animals are unable to do so due to various circumstances.
Animal welfare professionals frequently encounter people who love their animals but cannot afford veterinary care, behavioral services, or pet-friendly housing. From the outside, it may be tempting to view these people as irresponsible or negligent. In reality, many of these problems are symptoms of larger economic challenges.
Of course, this doesn’t erase the effect on the animals involved. The animals still suffer. But if we want to reduce that suffering, we must understand the reality of the situations people face. Simply placing the blame on the individual for their inability to provide for their pet misses opportunities to address the underlying causes and work toward a real and lasting solution.
A Better Question
When we see an animal harmed, often our first instinct is to ask: “Why would someone do that?”
Sometimes the answer is cruelty. But more often, the answer is more nuanced.
A more useful question may be:
“What factors led to this situation, and how can we change them?”
Understanding why good people sometimes do bad things to animals is not about excusing harmful behavior. It is about identifying the barriers that stand between people’s values and their actions.
If we can understand those barriers, we have a much better chance of helping both the people and animals most affected.