NextDoor's standards were already lower than Connor McDavid's chances of ever returning to the Stanley Cup Final as an Oiler. And now, they've sunk to even new lows with this:  they are now condoning images of animal cruelty. Yikes.

So here's how this started. Recently, while I was surfing the net, I stumbled upon a NextDoor post from a woman named Bridget Fagan. In it, she posted a photo of an injured cat and goes on and on claiming to be sympathetic to the poor animal. The fact that this was posted is egregious; the animal is in pain and injured, yet Bridget posts the photo after her son snaps it. And it was done all for praise and attention and all else, and even worse, there's a lot of comments actually congratulating her. Blech. Even worse:  not one person questioned the validity of Bridget's story about the cat being hit by a car. They simply saw an injured cat at an animal clinic, and just started praising Bridget without any doubts SMH.

Here's the link to the images of Bridget's post:  https://imgur.com/a/Bo6wzRf

And the images are all archived, and here's the link:  https://archive.is/RrQ3T

One of the people delivering the saccharin comments is Karen Fredenhagen, who happens to own Kingsley Animal Hospital on Kingsley Ave in Orange Park, Florida. She's hurling so much praise to Bridget and her fellow attention wh**e son without asking ANY QUESTIONS. Bridget's claim was that the cat was struck by a car. Yeah, sure...

Here's the link to Karen's comments:  https://imgur.com/a/xDT1JFV

And that's archived as well, here's the link:  https://archive.is/VKYUi

It's painfully clear that Bridget Fagan's doing this for clout and attention. The sad part:  she's getting it--a lot of praise. Even worse, the comments that call her out are erased by NextDoor, who also claimed that Bridget's actions didn't violate community guidelines. Great:

Bridget's story about a car striking that cat is very suspect. The cat looks too clean. If that cat was hit by a car, that poor cat would look much worse. The image would be more graphic. Why was there no blood other than that one speck by the cat's foot? If the cat was moved from the original spot, why does it look so clean around the cat at that point? Wouldn't there be more blood coming out of the cat? Wouldn't the cat be more distorted than it is? My theory:  Bridget's son probably abused that cat and Mommy Dearest is covering for him. He also moved that cat for the sole purpose of taking that picture, and in that time, the cat could have already been in transit to an animal clinic and most likely saved. But he just had to get that picture! I wouldn't put anything past those two. Bridget's son should be ashamed of himself for taking a photo of the injured cat, Bridget should be ashamed for posting it, and NextDoor should be deeply ashamed for condoning this sh*t. Shame, shame, shame.

Here's my video calling out this latest incident:  

And sadly, this is NOT the only example of someone posting a picture of a cat that is injured or worse on NextDoor. There is a disturbing trend of people on NextDoor posting pictures of injured or deceased animals. Another such incident was called out in a blog, and here's the link:  

This also isn't Bridget's first time posting grotesques photos of injured cats. Here are archive links to more pictures of injured cats posted by Bridget. WARNING:  These photos are graphic in nature; please view at your own risk.

https://archive.is/sHlp0

https://archive.is/xKpcK

https://archive.is/fpHSf

What I've shown is just a small portion of the posts of similar nature that I've seen on Next Door, not just in Jacksonville, FL--as I have pointed out here--but elsewhere as well. What's pathetic is the common thread in all of them:  the annoying over-anointing of the people taking such photos, dubbing them heroes and saviors without any question!