this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025
450 points (79.8% liked)

Funny: Home of the Haha

7272 readers
768 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Instinct is very real and isn't uniform across dog breeds.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 2 days ago (7 children)

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 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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

[–] jerkface 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day 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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Pretty much all purebred dogs will have a greater chance at health complications than mixed breeds.

Same goes for humans.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ah yes, those pesky chihuahuas and their bite force of 235 PSI and 60% fatal attack rate 🙃

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago

Aggression and danger are often inversely correlated.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago (17 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

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 (16 replies)
[–] [email protected] 234 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (26 children)

Ofcourse you can breed aggression, its so absurd to claim that you cant.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 117 points 4 days ago (55 children)

We have bite statistics. Every year, pit bull and pit mixes far outnumber every other breed for human bite attacks, consistently, and always make up far more than half (to the tune of ~70%) of all total bites, by breed. Every single year.

Yet people ignore statistics and are eager to jump on the pibble defense train. “My little angel would never bite anyone!”

Maybe. But numbers don’t lie. Just stop breeding them. It’s cruel to people, and it’s cruel to the dogs themselves, that the breed continues to be perpetuated. Breed-specific behaviors are visceral and strong, whether you have a retriever, a pointer, a herder, or a throat mangler. The breed behavior can be invoked at any time, relatively easily.

load more comments (55 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yeah those little rat dogs got it in for everyone

[–] [email protected] 67 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

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)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

No because you're no longer basing it on tendency to be aggressive but ability to do damage. These are 2 very different things.

[–] mysticpickle 65 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (13 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Technically it's correct, any breed of dog can maul a child to death, and every dog has some trigger which will cause them to bite. But you really can't argue with the epidemiology here. Pitbulls definitely kill an inordinate amount of children and pets.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›