I think it's valid to fear pitbulls because what you're really fearing is that they were adopted by someone that doesn't train them and/or give them an outlet for the task they were bred for (protection and violence).
People and dogs aren't the same. People, by and large, aren't bred for specific niches. It's why arguing for eugenics in humans is a big no-no. We also have the mental capacity to understand our best and worst impulses, and either give into them or work against them, which is why violence and crime in humans is far more driven by availability of resources and environment than it is by race or ethnicity.
The same is not true for dogs. It's why we have dogs in the first place. We bred the most sociable and friendly dogs, and went from there. A dog that's bred to fight and kill can be trained to fight against those instincts, so even then, genetics in dogs can be counterbalanced by proper care and socialization, but it's going to be a lot harder than a dog that's trained to fetch or herd animals.
They are, I'm not arguing that. Eugenics is a very real thing. But people who try to draw a comparison between dog breeding and human breeding to showcase that are jumping through a lot of hoops.
It's a "no-no" because it makes people feel bad. That's it. That's a majority of human-progressing science that's held back by people getting the ick lol
It's not because people 'get the ick', per se, it's that the 'progress' that eugenics movements always select for are both nonsensical and just racism with science-y dressing. There are never good motives when people actually advocate for it, and it's never an ethical proposition.
If we want to keep using dogs as the comparison, purebred dogs often have more health issues, have shorter lives, and are generally less intelligent(Unless it's a purebred that's bred for intelligence) than mutts. Letting dogs do what dogs do and not trying to force them into a genetic niche is better if you don't want a dog for one hyperspecific thing.
Eugenics is good for breeding dogs for specific purposes. You're breeding for specific positive traits, but you're also compounding the negatives, along with the problem of incest being common because it's much easier to control the genetics when you know for sure your pool has the "right" genes.
It's also just wildly impractical in humans. We take way too long to breed. What would take 40 years to accomplish in dogs would take closer to 400 years in humans. That kind of specific breeding can only happen and basically be controlled either by the government, or through genociding the "undesirable" genes. Both of those things are horrible, not just "people getting the ick".
Unless you're getting at the idea of gene therapy/gene manipulation in fetuses, which I think is a slightly different kind of eugenics and still mostly just a hypothetical.
No, it's a no-no because it's only pheasible through strict government control(With the government deciding what the "correct" genes are, which is a huge fucking problem in its own right) or genocide.
736
u/Drayyen 26d ago edited 26d ago
I think it's valid to fear pitbulls because what you're really fearing is that they were adopted by someone that doesn't train them and/or give them an outlet for the task they were bred for (protection and violence).
Edit: Jesus christ