I had to post this. This was such an outstanding piece of writing concerning pit bulls. Dogsbite.org is the most illerate website I have seen outside of the big boys such as HSUS. Watching daily I am still shocked as to how many serious attacks these dogs deliver. And the American public never ceases to amaze me with their stupidity about these dogs. I'm also including the comments to this piece because they are a hoot.
In response to the recent mauling of mailman Jeff Glen, a DogsBite.org commenter has left a beautifully articulated response. Commenter Doug draws on the parallel example of the equine world to discuss the genetic heritage of pit bulls. Both animals underwent performance selection over many years to produce an unmatched breed: the ultimate canine warrior and the fastest horse on earth. Neither animal was selected on the basis of "human friendliness."
Pit Bulls Were Selected to "Win"
"In the beginning, human aggressive dogs were slaughtered or abandoned, they didn't develop within the fold of domesticates. Human friendliness was a necessary trait for all dogs, regardless of type. This wasn’t hard because early canines were pack animals, they had to work and get along with others. Humans were a simple adaptation for this social trait; broadening the definition of a pack member or leader was not a colossal leap.
Pit bulls never benefited from special selection for human friendliness; this potential characteristic already existed and was passed to them from their genetic predecessors. The only feature of their character that needed to be maintained was a modicum of pack loyalty and subservience to a pack leader (owner/handler.)
The myth of any special human friendliness by pit bulls is merely that – a myth. As in all animals bred and developed for competition, many faults are acceptable… so long as they can win. Winning is job one.
A parallel example of performance selection exists in the equine world. Anybody familiar with the race world knows that Thoroughbred horses rule the track. There is no other breed in contention beyond 2 furlongs. So you would think, if you subscribe to the so called “logic” within the mythology put forth by pit bull advocates, Thoroughbred horses must be the most tractable, gentle saddle horses ever created. After all, their purpose is to carry a rider; they don’t run these races by themselves! And Thoroughbreds have been in development for over 300 years – surely they are the most rider friendly of all horse breeds, aren’t they?
No one in the horse world would ever make such a claim about Thoroughbreds! The original stallions from the Mediterranean and Middle East were crossed with native horses to make them more manageable, but speed under saddle was and continues to be paramount. Many character faults are forgiven, so long as the horse can run!
And so it is in the TRUE history of pit bulls. Winning pit bulls that could be managed, even marginally, were always – ALWAYS – bred. No dogfighters ever forsake a winning lineage because of manageable human aggression. A winning pit dog need not be a family dog, anymore than a Thoroughbred needs the gentleness and versatility required for Junior 4-H horse shows.
The pit bull advocates have attempted to rewrite the history of pit dog selection. Their version is a fairy tale – a complete lie. Pit dogs were selected for strength, stamina, and aggression. If they happened to be tractable for their handlers, it was a fortunate happenstance carried over from their predecessor canines – definitely NOT a primary consideration in the development of winning pit dogs.
This pit advocate lie is a failed absurdity. The frequency and severity of attacks on humans make the truth self evident, regardless of how many times the lie is repeated."
Anonymous said...
I would also say that the idea that pit bull breeders "cull" so their dogs can be "handled" by humans is also a fabrication, in the sense that these dogs are not "handled" in any way recognized as dog handling by society.
Pit bull fighting dogs are more like livestock. They live their lives on a chain or in a small pen or cage, separated from humans and each other, primarily brought out to throw in a ring to fight or to breed perhaps, but not "handled" to an appreciable degree by humans
And I also saw something in the comments for that news article that was ridiculous. Someone commented that the pit bulls must have been "abused" to get them to fight. Abused? It is in these dogs' very DNA to fight and kill. If anything, it takes "abuse" to get them to STOP fighting, as in DEATH.
Anonymous said...
No No! The poster has it all wrong!
Pit Bulls are magic dogs!
Bred via the fighting pits killing bull, bears and other dogs, yet good with kids!
Easily identifiable when being sold or pit bull subsidies are being handed out, but impossible to identify after a mauling!
Great at weight pulling which has nothing to do with chain breaking, fence busting and leash snapping capability!
One of the smartest breeds, but never used for complex herding, retrieiving and bonfide service dog jobs like sight assistance!
Not human aggressive but used by drug dealers for guarding drug houses!
Owned and bred by "Dog Lovers" who see nothing immoral with the desired breed standard of explosive dog aggression!
The same as every other dog except for requiring a breakstick!
They're Magic!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
To the statement about culling, no they don't cull. The "culling" is putting the puppies out to the unsuspecting public. Since pits are known for their large litters, there's money in them thar culls. And if they can't sell them, they go to the local liquor store and trade them for a beer.
For the life of me, I don't know why every "animal welfare organization" does not call pit bull advocates on their lies and misinformation. It is pit bull owners and advocates that are in need of education and who are responsible for the deaths of so many animals, mostly pit bulls. The truth is obvious, expert opinions not hard to find, and yet they continue to feed us fairy tales and get mad when we don't believe them.
I tried to post a comment on that piece and they would not post it as it was not supportive. I am going to write something on my blog about it tomorrow that is not very complementary. That is a good site but to post the piece they did as fact is garbage in my opinion.
That's your choice PM, but you can post the comment here that you wanted to make. I will have to say that I feel the piece was quite factual. I've been saying this for years. I've had "dog fighters" in my family and I am ashamed of it. I was raised in the South where it is quite common. They did exactly what that piece said, bred them for "gameness". There were unwritten rules about pits in the South and I saw my cousin's dogs but never saw another pit until I was in my 20's. The reason you never saw them was that they were chained in the woods, away from the house, the kids, etc. And no one had them as a pet that I knew of because they were considered only for fighting. They weren't thought of as "dogs" so to speak. And if one escaped, a neighbor would shoot it, no questions, nothing, and the owner accepted this. Why did people shoot them on the spot, because they were scared of what they knew they were.
I, of course, being a dog lover hated this. I loved that big smile of a pit. But in my rescue work I have come across fighting pits and it ain't pretty. I think if anyone ever saw a pit go into a fighting fenzy, it would bring about a change of mindset on these dogs. Our mindset of dogs is sweet, playful, obedient, loving, and so forth. And a pit can solicit all those emotions until he snaps and you see this. If you are ever so unlucky as to see a pit attack, believe me you will change your mind. Their attacks are not like other dogs, not at all. Ever heard of a break stick? Are they used for any other breeds? No, they are used on pits because they don't let go, unlike other dogs. Most dogs bite and run, not pits, they want more. If you are in the way, you become the more.
I invite you to post your comments here and we can discuss.
I have gotten a couple of comments about PM's posting that I will not be posting. I am a fan of PM's blog actually and feel that he is seeker. So I am asking my friend who made the comments to allow this seeker to discuss the issue with us. I know you are emotional about this, I am too. But let's show our emotions in our responses to the newspaper articles and the comments blaming the victims of the attack. That's where I take it out.
I would appreciate us letting him express himself and us express ourselves in an educational manner about this subject. I do not consider PM to be a supporter of the pit bull industry. I know it is an emotional subject but emotions are not going to bring people around to realizing the truth about the issue. In fact it is emotions that is making it an issue. I'm emotional everytime I go to Dogsbite, I cry for the children. But I would rather take out my emotions on the fools that comment on the newspaper article and blame the victims. That's where my emotions show.
Thanks for the kind words. I will in fact post something more to clarify my position in regards to this matter. I feel that most likely the people at Dogsbite, here and I share many of the same opinions in regards to pitbulls and BSL. I have received some mail today labeling me a supporter of pitbulls, which I am not-at all. Maybe I am being a bit harsh on dogsbite, but I really feel what could be a very valuable message is diminished when they publish opinion as fact, and then do not allow any dissenting opinion. Again, posting on my own blog is totally open, say whatever you would like. When I write something, I am willing to be criticized, and relish the right to defend a point if necessary.
Thanks, PM, for your comment. I too feel that we have a lot more in common than not. I feel that you have only begun to explore this topic and the more you learn, the more you will see that there is a severe problem with these breeds.
It is hard, as an animal lover, to get past the fact that pits are too dangerous and need regulating, if not banning. I've always loved the big smile of a pit but I have never trusted them. Now that Dogsbite compiles the news stories, I am able to see clearly how big a problem it really is.
What really jerks me off is how pit owners defend the breed by always blaming the victim. They actually will blame an infant for a killing attack. And that shows the mentality of a pit bull owner I think. As someone who is trained to temperament test, and has spent 50 years in the trenches, I know that the comment on DogsBite is factual. Most people don't know that race horses don't make saddle horses and are actually dangerous even to the most experienced rider. My friend, Carla, a noted horsewoman who rescues race horse, has explained the same to me as the comment explained.
My red neck cousins taught me well about pit bulls. And then my field experience taught me about how the breed has become unstable. You have no idea how much it hurts me to know of a pit/dog attack. Man's best friend should not be killing children. I know about other dogs biting but it ain't the same as a pit biting. If it were, there would not be newspaper articles on a daily basis. All we want to do by giving out information is to alert people that this breed may not be suitable for them. We are trying to prevent more killings.
I was right about you, you do have an open mind. And that open mind will lead you to the ugly truth, be prepared, it is heartbreaking.
I posted responses to your comments over at by blog. I hope they clarify my position a bit. I think Dogsbite.org is a noble endeavor overall, and do not want to be seen as attacking it for no reason.
I know that PM or I would be all over your case. You are in a learning experience right now with your new blog. And I can't blame you when I have been guilty of the same thing. I, too, fell for all that crap about how great pits are. I adore pits but they can't be trusted. Only when I was made aware of all the maulings and deaths and the severity of those mauling, have I changed my mind.
Post a Comment