Notes on Moral False Equivalency with respect to dog fighting

Notes on Moral False Equivalency with respect to dog fighting Disinformation and the uninformed public: The American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT) was raised and bred over many generations, but primarily in the last few hundred years, to display gameness in the dog pit. Prior to this time, animal fights more often involved animals of different species, e.g. monkey vs. dog, dogs vs. bear or bull, etc. Earlier still, the “games” involved people vs. animals as well. I have read that Europe was largely depopulated of their large animal population, especially the predators, by the Romans’ collection of these animals to use in their coliseum blood sports. Gameness, the urge to dominate exceeding the will to survive, is a quality revered by people, perhaps because it is in such short supply among our species. In any case, continual breeding of the gamest dogs to the gamest dogs eventually produced the gamest mammal ever known. (I say “mammal” because, again, I’ve read that game chickens are gamer still). For all the close breeding to produce game dogs, yet they are still quite rare in the general population of the APBT although certainly the average dog of this breed is much gamer than the typical individual of another breed with respect to dog vs. dog matches. That being said, many types of game animals exist. These are all domestic animals bred to display gameness in one venue or another. Examples are race horses, sight hounds, bird dogs, coon and pig hounds, herding breeds, etc. So at this point, I need to point out that “dead game” animals do not exist in the wild, since they would all be dead. Certainly some species in their various forms of ritual combat display some degree of gameness in order to assert dominance over their rivals, but these contests typically end in one contestant giving up, albeit tired and beat up, with neither animal killed. The reason is only common sense since one or both wild animals dying or disabled in a fight to breed with a female would weaken the species by elimination of perfectly viable animals. In some animals, the ritual is quite specific and ingrained so rattlesnakes, for instance, exclusively wrestle for a mate as opposed to biting each other and potentially causing lethal injuries. It needs to be pointed out, then, that in game animals of the domestic variety in every case the gameness of the animals is something that already existed to some extent in the wild predecessor but was enhanced by genetic reinforcement and selection for desired traits. Of course this type of genetic selection by people is not limited to sporting animals but has occurred across the whole gambit of animals, such as cattle, and plants, such as wheat, domesticated for human use. It is interesting to note that a race horse, for instance, is not much different and often not much faster than a barn yard horse, the main difference being that it has an innate urge to beat the other horse lacking in the barn yard horse. By the same token, a poodle similar in size to a border collie will not, however, herd sheep to the degree needed by the sheepherder. Much disinformation has been spread by conspiracists and their “true believers” like PETA and the ASPCA. Years ago, they were calling for literally exterminating the APBT for its own good! And information originally spread by humane organizations has advocated for various restrictions on the breed based on the basic concept of people training them to fight as the reason for the breed’s innate urge to dominate another dog. Mind you, there is no typical APBT. Some won’t fight unless first attacked. Others will fight just for the fun of it with little or no provocation. Still others cannot be induced to fight at all (what is termed a “cold” dog and can happen regardless of the parents or best breeding directly from pit dogs). In addition, the dog was never intended to express aggression towards people. In fact, when 2 dogs are matched, each owner or representative handler is in the pit with their dog as well as a referee. In past times, large crowds often watched as well including the background noise. A people-aggressive dog could not have maintained the requisite focus and intensity on this opponent, so peoplemean dogs were specifically eliminated from breeding programs (at least up until the present day). Rather sadly, we now have drug dealers, gang bangers, and other punks who will train the dogs to protect their stash or use the dogs as tools to enhance their “bad guy” personna. One thing about it, the owners are seldom anywhere near as game as their animals, which can be said across the human species. With few exceptions, people were never bred to be warriors and generally express reluctance to engage in human vs. human confrontations. Many people have a curious blindness. I recently had a discussion with a professed hunter who is rabidly opposed to dogfighting. She couldn’t really explain why hunting and fishing are OK. I’m pretty sure the deer and trout have a problem with it where they are aware of what’s happening. In many places, they disappear or migrate into national parks during hunting season. They aren’t stupid. No wild creature was ever bred to specifically provide food or fun for another creature. Evolution is often likened to an “arm’s race” with one species constantly upgrading its arsenal in order to stay a step ahead of the next species. It is a strange type of balance, since deer, for instance, are far more numerous than their predator, the mountain lion, so have a larger genetic base to work with in developing physical and mental traits that keep them one step ahead. On the other hand, by the very size of the population, the mountain lion is going to get his share of deer needed to keep the species viable (assuming people stay out of the way). Now many hunters claim that hunting is necessary to keep numbers down, but this is only true now because the other predators have largely been eliminated. Still I’m not sure how invoking death by firearm or fish hook on a wild animal determined to stay alive is better than allowing two animals, in this case dogs, to fight willingly and usually not to the death. So then the discussion turned to the fact that dogs are domestic animals. Yet so are the animals, cows, pigs, chickens, etc., that have been specifically bred for consumption. On the one hand, these species, like dogs, would not exist without people breeding them to eat yet, like wild animals, they don’t seem to have lost the will to live. They don’t appear to have learned to enjoy being shot or electrocuted, and I’m pretty sure they would resent the idea of being eaten if they weren’t already dead. And I’m not sure how a human carnivore knows that a “humane” killing method isn’t painful or traumatic. Yet the same person who is OK with eating a hamburger is rabidly opposed to dogs fighting each other, even though they are fighting willingly. They aren’t being fattened for slaughter like a pig, but are freely fighting to see who is the better dog, so to speak. And it’s interesting that, whereas many people say these dogs fight because they are trained to fight (which isn’t true, although they are trained to be in better shape and fight smarter), we aren’t talking about a war where all the dogs are simply released and start fighting it out. This is the human concept of war, where armies are pitted against armies, no holds barred for the most part, and the winner gets the spoils, a mostly human endeavor. Few species in the animal kingdom engage in war with their own species, ants being an occasional notable exception. Properly done, dogfighting is a sport. It occurs within a pit, or a small arena with walls. Each dog has a human working its corner. There are numerous rules and a referee in the arena to enforce them. A dog who appears to have lost the desire to fight must cross a scratch line and mouth the other dog (“come up to scratch”, “I dare you to cross this line”, “the line in the sand”, etc.) to prove it still wants to fight. If it doesn’t, and most fights are decided this way, the fight is over. Medical treatment is given. Probably the dog will be retired and not used for breeding, perhaps going to the family of a friend or relative, to live out a quiet life of ease. It probably won’t be shot or electrocuted or drowned, as Michael Vick is said to have done, from simple ignorance and not recognizing that a dog is a living, sentient being just like us. Some dogs are in fact euthanized, or culled, as are dogs of every breed where a standard is maintained, not to mention other domestic animals bred by people for various purposes. So what is not a sport? Taking a dog to a war zone and putting it in danger. Using it for police duty and putting it in danger. All to resolve problems people have created to protect other people at the expense of the dog’s life. And this same abuse of animals extends to other species: dolphins used by the Navy, monkeys and rats used for medical experimentation because it is “unethical” to do these studies on people. Somehow people can justify such barbarous purposes but when 2 dogs want to fight willingly and are protected by rules, this constitutes inhumane treatment. All this being said, I haven’t been personally involved in the APBT breed for many years and currently own a Pomeranian. However, the hypocrisy and selfrighteousness of ignorant people drives me nuts! I no longer actually condone dogfighting, but I certainly recognize that gameness wouldn’t exist if not for this breed. And I’m not sure why it’s OK for dogs to race against each other or chase wild animals or fight with cats, but they aren’t supposed to fight each other. Especially given that people have the right to fight each other under much the same condition as dogs. In boxing and MMA, we see the same arena, the same crowds, similar rules, the same brutality, and yet because the fighters are willing participants, most people are OK with it. Well the dogs of this breed are also willing participants and a breed we created ourselves for this specific purpose, and they deserve the same right to express and fulfill their lives, in my opinion at least, as we do. And don’t try to compare them to chickens used in cock fighting. These birds are not using their natural weapons. They are wearing razors where their spurs used to be. And don’t belabor me with the opinions of national humane organizations who often euthanize animals themselves and are primarily concerned with their bottom line, raising money, by preying on the fears and kind sentiments of unknowing donors. It’s pathetic. Learn for yourself with your own research the difference between truth and lies. Then make your own judgment based on your own beliefs, whatever that might be. But don’t purvey the ignorant attitudes of others simply because it is the easiest thing to do and sounds believable. Humans can do better.