I think you're right -- that happens a lot, although among the people I know who have lavished child-appropriate affection on their animals, most were quite clear that they wanted children. However, I can speak with some authority on this with respect to myself, at least, because it is me and my own personal experience, and I assure you that I do not mix up my animal companions with children. It's cool to have these funny little creatures around, particularly coming to greet me when I come home, or purring when I pet them, but I don't confuse the signs of affection with true love, particularly at dinner time.

There's actually quite a gulf between affection for animals and that for children. I don't have to dress my cats or worry about their college education or whether they're socializing with their peers properly. I feed them, but not the way you do a baby. I just put their food and water on the floor in a bowl. You wouldn't do that to a child. I don't read to them or encourage them to read more and watch television less, or to join clubs at school. Hell, I don't send them to school. I keep them locked in the house. If my animal companions were children I would be arrested, despite the fact that I am extremely fond of them and treat them well, but in an animal-appropriate manner.

Also, query what becomes of the animals-as-substitutes-for-children theory with respect to people who have both?

I acknowledge that your thoughts contain some truth, but I don't agree that all non-child bearing human companions of animals are using the animals as child substitutes. Nor would I agree that non-child bearing humans without animal companions are naturally unaffectionate. Nor would I agree that all people are meant to be parents. Some are not, and I am happy that I know and accept this about myself rather than not knowing or denying it and bringing a child into this world because of ignorance or guilt. It's better for everyone if those of us who do not see ourselves as parent material don't bear children.

Peace.