fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2694 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2694 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[General Hospital]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Homestuck, The Other Woman, Pacific Rim, Naruto, X-Men]

__________________________________________________

04.

[The Ear, the Eye and the Arm]

__________________________________________________

05.

[Warehouse 13]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Alton Brown and Anthony Bourdain]

__________________________________________________

07.

[YU-NO: A Girl Who Chants Love at the Bound of This World]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Star Trek: The Next Generation]

__________________________________________________

09.

[Magic: the Gathering]

__________________________________________________

10.

[Smallville]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 046 secrets from Secret Submission Post #385.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 2 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

My controversial reply: some breeds were actively bred for added aggressiveness, and ignoring that doesn't do anybody any favors.

ayrt

Then maybe breeders should be trying to reverse that? Breed the dogs that are docile and friendly, desex the ones that aren't so no one can breed from them. We bred those traits into them, so maybe it's up to us to breed them out.

This.

EVERY animal should be judged individually. But that doesn't mean some breeds aren't more likely to have certain traits. Labs? Golden retrievers? If you feel comfortable generalizing those breeds, while recognizing that it's only a generalization and not a rule, then why pretend pit bulls or other breeds aren't more likely to have certain traits?

Demonizing a breed is stupid, of course. and I don't think there's anything to be done for it except be careful about what animals we are breeding.

I've known people who had pet pit bulls that were total sweeties who would never hurt anybody. they just wanted to play all the time.

What, like German shepherds?

Fun fact: animals used in dogfighting are specifically selected NOT to be human-aggressive, because handlers need to be able to wade into the ring and pull the dogs apart. They choose dogs that actively want to please their handlers, and will do as they're trained to do, even when that includes tearing another dog apart.

Yup! To call out the omg!so!oppressed breed du jour, I would never, ever, EVER own a pit bull. I've owned German Shepherds, Rottweilers, a Rhodesian Ridgeback and a Great Dane...I don't have an issue with all sorts of breeds that are generally perceived as scary. They're big ol' teddy bears. Protective teddy bears, but still. The only breed I've ever had any sort of issue with is pit bulls. My sister and I were both attacked by different pit bulls when we were kids. I have a friend now who bought a pit bull and had NO idea what he was getting into. The damn thing is so energetic/hyperactive and so strong that he's afraid to have guests over. Sorry, but. Some breeds have a bad reputation for a reason.

And yet pitbulls were nanny dogs, soooo...

And people should seriously consider whether they know how to train a dog with those traits before they get one of those breeds.

I do believe someone who knows how to handle one of the "aggressive" breeds can raise and train them well enough that they aren't an instant danger.

[ SECRET POST #2694 ]

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition