242
submitted 1 month ago by Stamets@lemmy.world to c/funny@lemmy.world
(page 2) 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] HerbSolo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

My neighbours had a small hunting terrier when i was a kid, forgot the name of the breed. Fucking asshole dog tried to bite me every time she saw me although i went in and out there every day. Also she killed everything that moved, cats, birds, hedgehogs, ...

Neighbour was a hunter and those fuckers were bred to follow badgers into their sett and kill them. Badgers can be quite nasty themselves so most animals stay away, but not this breed. Only chance the badger has is to kill the dog, even if half of its nose is bitten off, it doesn't give a shit.

So I'm a bit sceptical about the whole "aggression is not bred" theory.

[-] Jax@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Bred for the size, trained for the aggression. I've seen typically passive breeds be overly aggressive in exactly the way that the breed is known for not being.

They're animals.

[-] IMongoose@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Have you ever seen a puppy of a working dog? Pointers will point. The training they receive is what to point, not how. Retrievers will retrieve, herders will herd, trackers will track. But when someone suggests that a dog that has been specifically bred to fight and kill, oh, they were just trained that way. No, they have been specifically selected for aggression and prey drive. It is at best naive and at worst deadly to think that a working dog comes as a blank slate and will only perform actions it has been trained on.

[-] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

Have you ever seen a puppy of a working dog? Pointers will point. The training they receive is what to point, not how. Retrievers will retrieve, herders will herd, trackers will track.

That's not how genetics works my guy. None of those things are heritable traits. Being smart, being trainable, those are traits that puppies can inherit. Being a good tracker isn't. That's learned behavior. If you've seen puppies pointing, retrieving, herding, or tracking, it's because they learned it from some other dog, animal, or human.

[-] IMongoose@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

? You don't think animals naturally know how to do things?

[-] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

That's not what I said dude

[-] IMongoose@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

A bird can naturally know how to build a nest but a dog can't naturally know how to follow an animal?

[-] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

Still not comparable to what I said.

[-] IMongoose@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

It is comparable.

I implore you to look up videos of working dog puppies. Duck hunters don't get retrievers because they like how they look, they get them because they have been selected over generations on their inherent retrieving drive, which is a natural trait of dogs. You are objectively wrong about these traits not being inheritable. These dogs need to be trained what to retrieve, or what to point, not how to do these things. My sister's pointer would point piles of shit, she had to train it to point birds.

I'm sorry but you are completely wrong about this topic.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HerbSolo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

If you're suggesting my neighbours trained her to be aggressive - they didn't - it was their family dog, they did the standard obedience training (sit, stay...) but no protection training. All their other dogs (german shepherds) were friendly.

[-] Jax@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Do you know how they treated their dogs? I'm not insinuating anything, I've just never dealt with a dog that becomes aggressive and I've owned both rotties and pitties.

[-] HerbSolo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Well I didn't watch them 24/7 if that's the burden of proof now. I guess they treated all their dogs roughly the same though and for some reason the one whose breeding description essentially reads " Psychotic mauler of all that breathes" behaved accordingly.

[-] Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

No, mainly just curious - like I've said, I haven't dealt with aggression in dogs.

[-] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

I have nothing but hate for people that breed problem dogs. Not just talking aggression. But a lot of races have very known medical problems.

Small short dogs very often get back problems. E.g. Corgis, yes they look cute. But very soon they will live in a world of chronic pain. That's not cool.

Don't even get me started on pugs or Chihuahuas...

[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago

The animals we create are ALL entitled to the exact same unconditional love and protection as our own children. The hatred you feel over a pet being bred with a shortened lifespan or discomfort should be virtually imperceptible next to your rage towards those who farm and consume pigs, cattle & dairy, chickens & eggs, sheep & wool, turkeys, fish, and other vulnerable individuals.

[-] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

No. I will continue to be more upset over the animals we breed and keep in chronic, prolonged pain over the span of 12-15 years for no other reason than our own entertainment. Than I am over animals we raised for slaughter.

That doesn't mean i think cattle should be kept in deplorable conditions or be exposed to unnecessary stress.

[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

What is your rationale? Are you saying that it would be better for those pets if we slaughered them after only a fraction of their natural lifespan (like the animals you have no such sympathy for) so they never encounter their genetic limitations?!

Chickens suffer the same sort of negative consequences of overbreeding, but to a degree orders of magnitude more severe. Why is it worse that a pug cannot breathe than that a chicken's bones cannot even support its own weight?

I suspect that the relevant difference is that you abuse chickens and wish to continue abusing vulnerable individuals who are chickens, but you've made the decision to stop abusing pugs, and so feel free to be critical about their treatment. Not to be unkind to you; that is just basic human nature.

[-] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

Or the less insane idea of not breeding them in the first place.

[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Which, pugs or chickens? Surely if one, then moral consistency demands the other as well.

[-] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

No animal, be it pets or animals raised for slaughter, should live in pain or be exposed to unessesary stress.

That should answer your question.

[-] Almacca@aussie.zone 0 points 1 month ago
[-] Lyrl@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

The oxytocin release lol

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025
242 points (79.5% liked)

Funny: Home of the Haha

7584 readers
71 users here now

Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.

Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.


Other Communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS