Instinct is very real and isn't uniform across dog breeds.
this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025
448 points (79.6% liked)
Funny: Home of the Haha
7272 readers
481 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:
-
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
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...
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.
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.
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.
Or the less insane idea of not breeding them in the first place.
Which, pugs or chickens? Surely if one, then moral consistency demands the other as well.
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.
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.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Ah yes, those pesky chihuahuas and their bite force of 235 PSI and 60% fatal attack rate 🙃
Aggression and danger are often inversely correlated.
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
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.
load more comments
(13 replies)
Yeah those little rat dogs got it in for everyone
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.
Ofcourse you can breed aggression, its so absurd to claim that you cant.
Yeah. That's just shit being thrown at the wall to see if it will stick.
The real question is, who's throwing the shit? It's either some troll trying to convince morons to believe something that isn't true, or it's those same morons looking for something to justify their stupidity.
load more comments
(78 replies)
im pretty sure aggression is bred in for some dogs for thier purpose of being a gaurd dog, or something as bull baiting. also cats can be unpredictabally aggressive.
load more comments
(6 replies)
view more: next ›