Highlights: In a bizarre turn of events last month, UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced that he would ban American XL bullies, a type of pit bull-shaped dog that had recently been implicated in a number of violent and sometimes deadly attacks.

XL bullies are perceived to be dangerous — but is that really rooted in reality?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    149 months ago

    To clarify, you are directly equating dog breeds with different races of humans so you can paint op as a eugenics apologist, and win an online argument about dogs? Did I get that right??

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Yes, all these ban pitbull people are eugenicist apologists. That’s facts. They might be useful idiots, but they have been tricked by pseudoscientific lies about genetics and behavior.

    • Zorque
      link
      fedilink
      -89 months ago

      I dont see anywhere in the comment saying they’re making direct comparisons to specific human racial segregation. Just making an analogy using human racism as an example.

      I can see how someone might misconstrue that if they didn’t like the argument, though.

    • hiddengoat
      link
      fedilink
      -99 months ago

      Breed restrictions are a soft way of telling certain people that they’re not welcome by forcing them to choose between their pet and living in a given location.

      It’s redlining via an external factor that isn’t considered discriminatory. Some idiots look at a hard number “2,000 deaths in 30 years, OMG DANGER!” and refuse to accept the fact that per capita there are more dangerous dog breeds out there. But not by much, because the odds of you being killed by a dog are so preposterously low as to be irrelevant to your daily life.

    • @Forester
      link
      fedilink
      -99 months ago

      I am merely reading the man statements at face value. Quote" “It’s the owner not the breed.” And “Breed is not a reliable predictor of aggressive behavior in dogs.”

      Those statements just aren’t true. Dogs are specifically bred for certain physical and behavioral traits"

      If you do not see that as the definition of eugenics then I don’t know what to say in regards to your assessment.

      • 520
        link
        fedilink
        99 months ago

        We have been practicing eugenics on animals for literal centuries via selective breeding. We have shaped the designs of many a farm animal this way. Did you think poodles existed in the wild?

      • Pitbull dogs that were bred for fighting were euthanized if they attacked people. Also, most pitbulls were not used in dog fighting.

        So really you just sound stupid.

        • @Forester
          link
          fedilink
          19 months ago

          Sweetheart I’m not the one saying that the genetics of a being make up the beings responses. That’s you and your buddy. I’m over here saying that genetics does not define the responses of a being. For the uninformed this means I do not believe in the false science of eugenics.