• OfCourseNot@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Science

    Do you have a source for that? Because everything I’ve read says completely the opposite. The ‘science’ I’m aware of says that genetic tendency to aggression is very much a thing, even in humans.

    • rhombus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      It is a thing, but most controlled studies haven’t found pitbulls to be inherently more aggressive than other breeds, just more dangerous if they happen to attack. Any dog that is poorly socialized will probably attack someone sooner or later, they just weren’t bred to latch on and shred things with their jaws like pitbulls were. So maybe there is a discussion to be had about “dangerous” breeds, but it’s not a genetics one.

      • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        It is a thing, but most controlled studies haven’t found pitbulls to be inherently more aggressive than other breeds, just more dangerous if they happen to attack.

        Isn’t that the issue? From what I’ve heard, the big issue isn’t just that they attack, but they lock on and it’s hard to get them to release their target. Like, a small dog can absolutely bite you, but will it kill you? Is it going to rip a limb off? If you give it a good hit, is it still going to be holding on for dear life? You say other dogs just “weren’t bred to latch on and shred things with their jaws like pit bills were.” That sounds an awful lot like a dog that was bred to be aggressive or, at the very least, cause maximum damage when triggered. That’s something that needs to be considered when adopting or breeding a pet that’s supposed to not just be around people, but in the home.