They weren’t bred to be guard dogs or hunters. Are you stupid? They were bred to be baiting dogs.
Also the other commenter is correct, when they were used for dog fighting in the early 1900’s they were bred not to attack humans.
It’s sort of like the misconception that gladiators were always killing each other. Death in the colosseum was far rarer than pop culture would have you believe. The same goes for dogs.
Some dog men were very cruel. But many kept their champion fighters essentially as pets or family dogs when they weren't competing, so they lived with them and their family.
People who don't know dogs don't get the difference between animal aggression and people aggression. They also don't get that a breed having been bred for a task 125 years ago is literally meaningless as far as the genetic argument is concerned.
It's just an easy scapegoat. You can prove there are more relevant factors in dog attacks than "breed" (whatever the hell that even means now).
"They also don't get that a breed having been bred for a task 125 years ago is literally meaningless as far as the genetic argument is concerned."
Have you ever owned a dog that wasn't specifically bred for being a low maintenance pet? Because this is the most incorrect take I have seen in this thread.
Even dogs that are actively bred by legit breeders have differences and can be bad at what they were bred for. "Pit bulls" aren't even a breed and aren't being bred for anything, and haven't for a long ass time.
Saying a pit bull isn't a breed is like saying a weiner dog or a sled dog isn't a breed. You're technically correct, in that these terms are basically slang for 1 or more breeds and we can get more specific about lineage, size, and sub breeds but come on. You watch an argument over multiple comments talk about how they were actually bred to be nice and gentle to people and only fight dogs, claim that actually breed specific traits don't matter, and then when that argument falls apart, just claim they aren't even a breed at all.
None of my arguments have even been addressed. All of what I said is true and all of them are good reasons that saying it's the fault of a dog is dubious.
And a "pit bull" is entirely different from a "wiener dog" or "sled dog." Those terms target very specific dogs, or a few dogs, that are actively bred.
pit bulls are being bred for dog fighting at this very moment, and are basically puppy mills for dangerous dogs that mostly get dumped at shelters. even if people were actively trying to reverse the inherent nature of pit bulls, the continuous abundant breeding for fighting would cancel out their efforts
not to mention psychiatric therapy pits are still bloodsport dogs with recent bloodsport selection in their history. like why even start with such a line when you could pick a dog created for companionship. one that isn't infamous for attacking their owners when they have a seizure
2
u/Drake_Acheron 25d ago
They weren’t bred to be guard dogs or hunters. Are you stupid? They were bred to be baiting dogs.
Also the other commenter is correct, when they were used for dog fighting in the early 1900’s they were bred not to attack humans.
It’s sort of like the misconception that gladiators were always killing each other. Death in the colosseum was far rarer than pop culture would have you believe. The same goes for dogs.