48 A Arluke and L Irvine One student explained that ‘he did not “think about hurting” a rabbit when he and his friend shot it with a BB gun Instead, the two of them focused on seeing the rabbit “flip”’ (Arluke 2002, p 412) The students recognised that their actions had ‘a serious edge that distinguished it from everyday play in general or normal play with animals’ (Arluke 2002, p 411) This ‘serious edge’ gave their actions a social function of instructing them in adult knowledge, such as keeping secrets and establishing boundaries (Fine 1986) Among children, play of this sort is ‘virtually inevitable There are so many needs and traditions connected with the doing of these actions that we would be hard-pressed to visualize a serious program that would eradicate these behaviors’ (Fine 1986, p 67) As children mature and their identities change, this kind of play loses its appeal The students left the abusive behaviour in the past, along with the adolescent selves that had enacted it They did not ‘view their abuse as a serious and stigmatising form of deviance, but rather as a folkway violation or lapse in good judgment’ (Arluke 2002, p 409) Some felt guilt or regret, but most forgave themselves and understood that abusing animals was something they did to gain status or go along with their peers The period during which their play had included abusing animals was ‘more of a cultural “time out” than a lasting sign of incivility or anti-social behavior’ (Arluke 2002, p 424) Despite acknowledging that they had harmed companion and other animals, the students did not identify themselves as abusers They saw their acts as ‘unrelated to their present selves and moral sensibilities’ (Arluke 2002, p 409) These results emphasise that not all acts of cruelty have the same meaning and significance for those who engage in them and thus require differing explanations Lumping together all instances of cruelty to companion animals as pathological precludes the possibility that the actions can be socially instrumental and normative, in the sense that those engaging in them may learn lessons about culture and values that the larger society supports and defines as essential This does not suggest that parents and other authorities should simply disregard acts of cruelty Rather, it emphasises that the context of the behaviour matters for how people make sense of cruelty, including the degree to which it represents a social problem or a predictor of subsequent crimes Responses to Cruelty Responses to cases of cruelty to companion animals can involve law enforcement officers, mental health experts, humane organisations and activists, legislators, media, pet owners, veterinarians, educators, parents, peers and the