Instinct is very real and isn't uniform across dog breeds.
Funny: Home of the Haha
Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.
Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!
Our Rules:
-
Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.
-
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:
-
/c/TenForward@lemmy.world - Star Trek chat, memes and shitposts
-
/c/Memes@lemmy.world - General memes
Yeah those little rat dogs got it in for everyone
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...
Pretty much all purebred dogs will have a greater chance at health complications than mixed breeds.
Same goes for humans.
Or Frenchies. I briefly wanted one until I considered having to watch it struggle and suffer across its life.
It's also really stupid to buy dog breeds with known medical problems. Surgery for your dog is not cheap. Your loved pet will suffer. Buy another breed without known problems
But X breed is so cute!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
snaps picture for instagram
Ah yes, those pesky chihuahuas and their bite force of 235 PSI and 60% fatal attack rate 🙃
Aggression and danger are often inversely correlated.
In a hypothetical situation where every dog breed is banned except for Chihuahuas, would the amount of deadly dog attacks be:
- More
- Less
- Equal
If dog breeds weren't a factor, the correct answer could only be "equal". But nobody in their right mind would make that claim.
Thus breed is a factor.
No because you're no longer basing it on tendency to be aggressive but ability to do damage. These are 2 very different things.
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.
So I’m a bit sceptical about the whole “aggression is not bred” theory.
Good, because it's a load of bullshit perpetuated by idiots with agendas.
Even if this were true, it's not just the aggression. It's also the biting power. At the end of the day, I could stomp a Chihuahua, but I get scared when my own 90lb German Shepherd comes running towards me because he is terrible at slowing down.
Yeah, we can breed dogs however we want to, so why not breed dogs that are less dangerous? Not to mention less prone to health issues just because we think they're cute when they have a nose so small that they can barely breathe. Dogs breeds aren't sacred, most of them are a very recent phenomenon. Breed for positive traits, both for them and us.
There already are my dude. Plenty of dog breeds that are just what I like in a dog; goofy, lovely, loyal but not territorial/protective and nothing that could seriously hurt anyone. The other characteristics comes down to subjective preferred traits and, for example, whether you're a first time owner or experienced with raising and socialising dogs.
But you can't ignore instinct. And some have instinct that's just not compatible with your personal live. Ie. don't get a shepherd if you live in an apartment in a city.
And some have instinct that is not compatible to keep as pets.