Total Pageviews

Monday, 25 May 2015

Christy Cornell commented on an article. May 14 at 11:31pm · Why are people bringing racism into a discussion about pitbulls? You keep using those words "racism" and discrimination, but in the context of a discussion about dog breeds, I do not think they mean what you think they mean. If so, which race is a pitbull?



PLEASE, could any one of these pitbull protectionist tell me, EXACTLY, which race is a pitbull?
Pitbull apologist are the first to throw little dogs like Chihuahuas under the bus. Pitters are always (preposterously) claiming Chihuahuas are more dangerous because they (supposedly) bite more than pitbulls do, so that's them making a "racial" judgement of the entire Chihuahua breed by standards of judging the actions of just some members of the breed. Well then, be consistent, answer which race is a Chihuahua?
Which race is a Dalmatian? Which race is a Greyhound?
Which race is a Labrador retriever? Which race is a Golden retriever?
If dog breeds aren't able to be categorized as human races, then are they new races of humans?
If you are going to cross reference human racism to a dog breed like a pit bull, either you admit that they are fully bound by the same definitions of human racism, or you admit that they are not human, or are less than human, thus the definition of human racism is not applicable to them. Therefore the lawful and ethical protections we humans set in place to prevent human racism are not applicable to them.
Be consistent, or just stop with the ridiculousness of comparing dog breeds to human races. You can't just randomly play the race card when it is advantageous to you. If you are gonna play the race card when discussing pitbulls, then pitbulls have to be a specific race to prove why a dog breed issue qualifies as a human race issue.
It is very offensive to compare a breed of dogs to humans who have actually been subjected to racial discrimination.
Or gender based discrimination. Or any other type of discrimination associated with the human race such as discrimination based on sexual preferences or even age.
If you continue to do this, answer this question. Which race is pitbulls? Which gender? Which sexual orientation, or sexual orientations are pitbulls? Do all pitbulls automatically qualify as elderly from birth or even from conception?
To qualify as human discrimination based on differences of race (or gender, sexual orientation, age, etc.), we have to note the differences which are used to qualify as being subjected to unfair discriminatory practices. To apply protections associated with preventing discrimination, we have to categorize (race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.) pitbulls if we are gonna equate them to categories of humans that have been discriminated against. Or are pitbulls somehow better than all other creatures and we gonna give pitbulls their own special racial category?
Where does the silliness of anthropomorphizing a dog breed end? Where does the offensiveness of this anthropomorphizing trend begin? It's hard to know, but I'd say it definitely started when pitbull apologist used it as a justification for the continuation of a breed that kills 20-27 people per year.
To the pitters who continue to equate dog breed to human race, can you not see how offensive that you are being? Such a callow pattern of hierarchy with your thinking, so I'm wondering if you must have learned your standards of valuing human life from a Disney movie. Hate to break it to ya, but not "All Dogs Go to Heaven".
It's no surprise that you value a breed of dog over the lives of humans.
How is it that these animal rights extremist think a dog breed is equivalent to any aspect of the human race? That is child like reasoning, poor logic, and very offensive to people who have actually had to face and overcome racial discrimination, or any other type of discrimination.
Animal rights extremist and pitters must think that it's a case of racial discrimination when we eat a chicken, but keep a parrot as a pet. Lol!
It's just bizarre how these over the top pitbull propagandists will start anthropomorphizing pitbulls. It's like these pitters don't realize that people (including ANY and ALL pitbull breeders) PURPOSELY discriminate every time a dog is bred in order to create or continue a breed. People CREATED dog breeds for a purpose. They did it AND still do it by breeding dogs in a discriminating way- choosing which dogs should be bred by the way of looks and behaviors. There wouldn't even be any pitbulls (or any other breed) if people didn't discriminate and didn't specifically keep on breeding pitbulls to pitbulls. Everytime a pitbull is purposely bred, the breeder bases the decision on looks and behaviors. If I followed the logic of these pitters and animal rights extremists, continuing to breed ANY breed (including pitbulls) would be racist.
The pit bull cluster of dogs is the only canine type in the world that has, and has always had, the infliction of pain on animals and humans as its sole raison d’être.
MONTREALGAZETTE.COM
  • Jackie Jenkins likes this.
  • Jackie Jenkins Absolutely, this is a work of art. how indeed, what race, what gender, what sexual orientation? Like you I want to know.
  • Christy CornellJust wanted to say that some of that comment should be credited to Dan Saegar ("If you are going to cross reference human racism to a dog breed like a pit bull, either you admit that they are fully bound by the same definitions of human racism, or you admit that they are not human, or are less than human, thus the definition of human racism is not applicable to them.") and James Hassinger ("Which race is a pitbull?") . 

    I was very impressed by the original comments made by Dan Saeger and James Hassinger , so I expanded upon their thoughts and added all of that to some of my own comments. Dan and James are smart advocates that can hold their own against any pitter. They deserve credit for a big part of this comment. 
    smile emoticon
  • Jackie Jenkins con-grads to all it is brilliant
  • Craig Brown You guys are overthinking it. Stupid people say stupid things.
  • Jackie Jenkins you do have a point
  • Christy Cornell Lol! As usual, Craig shows up and cracks me up with his (succinct) comment. 

    Come to think of it, I could have saved a lot of time and just used Craig Brown's comment. wink emoticon
  • Serafima Yan Yep, agreed with Craig Brown. Overcomplicated.
    As my husband said, one has to be an idiot to have a pit bull, so do not get surprised at what they say or do. They bring "racism" and "discrimination" arguments, because they think that makes them look "progressive", sort of fighters with "injustice" and
    some liberal minded people fall for this because the idea of justice is very attractive.
  • Craig Brown Please don't let me discourage you from studying the mind of a nutter. I just dont see trying to use reason to figure them out. Do you think they pause to use it before they vommit any of their comments? Every day is opposite day for them.
  • Serafima Yan To make it easier we can say, that human races were created by the natural selection of the fittest in the process of evolution. Pit bulls were created by unnatural selection of the meanest by breeders. That is the difference. As to "animal people", there is nothing wrong with them, and love for pit bulls has nothing to do with love for animals, as millions of animals are mutilated and killed by pit bulls.
  • Craig Brown I have this one stored for that.
  • Craig BrownNever confuse a pit bull owner for someone who loves animals, it just simply does not add up.
    In 2013, the animals killed included about 12,000 dogs, 8,000 cats, 6,000 hooved animals, and 17,000 other small domestic animals, primarily poultry.
    ...See More
    • Serafima Yan Yes, I hate when they start blaming "animal extremists". Pit bulls kill animals and breeding is a cruel practice to start with. Love for pit bulls has nothing to do with love for animals.
    • Serafima Yan And poor animals have no chance to defend themselves against pit bulls, as they have no guns or weapons.
    • Serafima Yan So the arguments that pitbullies value dogs animal lives over human lives is wrong. They do not. Such an argument is offensive for animal loving people.
  • Serafima Yan I love animals, and I hate breeders, especially breeders of dangerous dogs. And let me tell you, I would prefer a good animal to a shitty human in a heart bit!
  • Christy CornellCraig Brown 

    Simmmaah down! 


    smile emoticon
  • Christy CornellI've seen very few pitters be influenced by ANYTHING we say to them. Jesus Christ, Buddha,Mohammed, Jack Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama could all come together and tell them pitbulls aren't meant for pets and pitters would still argue. Lol! So if anyone thinks this long comment was written for changing the mind of pitters, they are mistaken. I don't post my comments for the pitters to see. That's a lost cause. I post my comments as rebuttals to what pitters say and I post them for the undecided and the fence sitters to see.

    This pre-written comment is basically a blanket rebuttal to cover most of the arguments I see from pitters. I grabbed a bunch of my past comments, added them to what Dan and James said and just threw it together as one blanket rebuttal. It's long, sorry, I know, but it's not meant for the general pitter who is stupid enough to actually equate a dog breed to a human race. It's meant for anyone neutral who might hear some of that pitter garbage and be influenced. If its too long for them to read, then too bad. This is how it ended up. If they aren't the type to read a long comment, maybe they can be influenced by something someone else says that's shorter. I like using prewritten comments because it's fast. I keep them ready to use, stored on my phone and in some of my groups. As much as I comment out on the non-BSL pages, I'm not gonna actually reply individually to all the different arguments I see from pitters. To steal a quote from Craig, too many stupid people saying stupid things. smile emoticon

No comments:

Post a Comment