When one ventures to reinforce and mock a cliche of another group with broad and unsupportable blanket statements–like the declaration, “There are no responsible breeders”–it helps that one isn’t reinforcing a stereotype themselves.
Leslie Smith is a San Francisco liberal, a vegan, and a pit bull lover. Child free at 40, the sounds of her last eggs dying can be faintly heard over the murmur of her exsanguinating heart. She channels Thomas Robert Malthus and Ingrid Newkirk, and she has clear hangups and hypocrisy regarding money. The only way she doesn’t drive a Prius is if she got a Honda Element for her dog. And you can bet there’s a “We are the 99%!” bumper sticker right next to a “Who Rescued Who?” paw on the back of it.
Can you guess how she feels about dog breeders? Yeah, it’s not a stretch. There’s more heavy breathing, foaming at the mouth and puddles of drool than a Dogue de Bordeaux mounting a St. Bernard. The product makes about as much sense, too: it’s bloated, angry, lazy, and stupid.
I’ve already discussed Smith’s rant against Nathan Winograd and the No Kill Movement, which in many ways suffers from the Narcissism of Minor Differences. Winograd is San Francisco liberal, a vegan, and a pit bull lover, but his argument about how to save pit bulls does not rely on a fantasy world where Hindenburgs–lightweight bags of hot gas bound to crash and burn–like Leslie Smith can wave a wand and make it all better with ridiculous non-solutions.
Leslie Smith, all that’s missing is the magic wand.
Leslie Smith has documented her slobbering hatred for breeders over several posts on DogTime and in this and following posts I will dissect her radical views and counter them. We’ll start with her statements from a post titled “There are no responsible breeders.”
As for breeders…
So with that logic, why doesn’t DogTime list breeders? Don’t those animals also deserve a happy home?
Indeed, they do. The difference is, breeders are actively adding to the number of animals in need of homes. Not only that, they’re profiting from the venture. While we are still euthanizing millions of dogs and cats each year, there is no reason to increase the companion animal population. And there’s no reason to help breeders stay in business.
There is an immense amount of stupid in this one paragraph, so let’s begin the reality check.
- “Breeders are actively adding to the number of animals in need of homes.”
No. People who acquire then abandon their pets are actively adding to the number of animals that need homes. That is the only trait which is both necessary and sufficient to quantify the cause of animals in shelters. Animals come into shelters when they are abandoned, stray, or feral, which itself is directly the result of an abandonment. Stray dogs are not in need of homes, they already have them and only need the chance to live long enough in the shelter to be reunited with their families.
There is no single source of animals that come in to shelters, but breeders are not a major source. In fact, everything about Breeders makes dogs less likely to enter shelters: they are purebred or designer crosses, they are sold for non-trivial amounts of money, they are meeting a demand with a supply, they are selling to an interested public not giving oops litters to friends and family, they are produced by people and for people who value their existence and want to produce more of them because they are not finding what they desire available in the market, etc.
Sure, there are pregnant bitches who get surrendered and even boxes of newborns brought into shelters, but these are bred by happenstance, not volition. I can even imagine that there are Breeders who abandon used-up breeding stock to shelters, and this is rather reprehensible, but it certainly can not be a major source of animals coming into shelters, nor do I believe that this is a popular quality of Breeders.
- “they’re profiting from the venture”
Here we have Leslie Smith’s icky feelings about money bubbling to the surface. I’ll note that she has no problem cashing checks and paying her rent by aggregating other people’s content and putting ads on it, a parasitic middle-man business model that adds very little value to the system. In the corporate world, she’s clearly a taker more than a giver. Should we question her handful of articles because, dog forbid, she profits from them? Should we condemn her shelter volunteer work because she funds that volunteerism with ill gotten gains from capitalism?
Do I really need to defend the concept of profit and money to people who have IQs with three digits?
Many Breeders counter this charge with “But I don’t make a profit!” but losing money is not necessary to being an ethical and quality dog breeder and I’ll cover the issues surrounding this charge in a later post.
Dog Breeders create value that does not exist spontaneously in nature. Dogs were and are produced by the effort and minds of men, nature only provided the raw material of the wolf from which we have shaped and improved and customized many dog breeds for the survival and pleasure of man. When breeders accept payment in a consensual act of mutual benefit with buyers, they exchange equal value which itself represents productivity and value that has been created and now traded. That money is what rewards the hard working and the innovative, that money is what puts bread on your table, that money represents the good will and trust of mankind that we can all survive, thrive, and benefit by trading our genius and labor through a medium that itself has little intrinsic value other than to serve as a token of that trust. This is a moral good.
- there is no reason to increase the companion animal population
There are numerous reasons to increase the companion animal population. Every demographic measure speaks positively to this. The human population is growing. The number of households is growing. The percent of households that are welcoming pets is growing. The number of pets per household is growing. The number of cared for pets has gone nowhere but up and there is no end in sight. This, while the number and percent of animals entering and killed in shelters has fallen precipitously for decades. People are spending more, providing more care, and placing more value on companion animals than ever before. There has never been more to celebrate and less to bemoan about companion animals in human history. These are the good old days of the human animal bond!
- there’s no reason to help breeders stay in business
Smith clearly doesn’t understand the vital fact that dogs can not be created de novo from raw materials bought off a shelf. They are not like Twinkies which can be halted now and reinstated some time in the future. It has taken tens, if not hundreds of thousands of years to mold the dog out of the wolf and the only thing keeping this most amazing of man’s inventions going is the maintenance of the gene pool from one generation to the next. This requires an unbroken chain of breeders and it’s a fragile system. Human events like World Wars were enough to wipe out entire breeds and put many others on the slow road to extinction through genetic bottlenecks. The proposal to ban breeding until all shelter animals find homes is a manifestation of this same destructive force.
A moratorium on breeding for even one year would have devastating consequences on the genetic health of all breeds, especially in relation to female contribution. It is very hard to maintain the genetic wealth unique to females in a population where females can only have a limited number of offspring and males can have almost an unlimited number. The fertile window of females is also much narrower than males and any moratorium would greatly exacerbate this fact.
Breeders provide a list of services and a network of human connections which directly combat the shelter problem. They produce a product that has real and perceived value, making it much less likely to be abandoned on a whim. They strive to produce dogs fit for the market demand, dogs that are easy to care for and which have good temperaments and sound health, which prevent them from being abandoned to shelters. They innovate and maintain previous innovation by experimentation to create breeds with unique characteristics that people can choose to better suit their wants and lifestyles, keeping animals in homes instead of leading to more failed relationships. All dogs are not the same.
The business of dog breeding is what has created and maintained EVERYTHING we value about dogs. No dog was created by the idiotic self sacrifice and equivocation proposed by the likes of Smith.
Tune in for further analysis of the dangerous arguments made by Leslie Smith who is unhindered by facts and unencumbered with reason.
Posts in this Series:
- DogTime Smears No-Kill
- DogTime’s Slobbering Hatred for Breeders I
- DogTime’s Slobbering Hatred for Breeders II
* * *
Comments and disagreements are welcome, but be sure to read the Comment Policy. If this post made you think and you'd like to read more like it, consider a donation to my 4 Border Collies' Treat and Toy Fund. They'll be glad you did. You can subscribe to the feed or enter your e-mail in the field on the left to receive notice of new content. You can also like BorderWars on Facebook for more frequent musings and curiosities.
* * *
Looking forward to part II.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
Sharing this everywhere.
Wonderful article! I am looking forward to part 2
Wonderful article but would you please consider removing the reference to the Prius. I can get at least 3 Borzoi (which are a lot larger dog than a Pit Bull) in my Prius and probably 4 in a pinch. I use the minivan if I have to carry a dog that needs to go in a crate. If she is living in San Francisco proper she may not even own a car.
Being considerate of the environment is compatible with breeding dogs. To hunt or herd one needs open space, pollution free sources of food and water, etc.
Also the less money you spend on gasoline the more money you have to spend on dog care and the things that go into producing high quality carefully bred dogs like the ones I breed.
Once I get past the second paragraph I like the article.
I was just out running errands in my much maligned SUV. Not one block from my house there is a Prius in a ditch buried almost to the roof in snow. I guess global warming has a sense of humor.
I love my old Dodge Ram 1500 for hauling hay & straw & picking up carcasses for dog food. And I love my new-to-me Chevy Tahoe Z71 4×4 (the boyfriend just bought it for me! I am keeping him.) for dog hauling & getting to any trailhead I desire for backpacking trips. And both pull my goat trailer just fine.
Well my minivan gets 17 ro 20 mpg and we live in the sticks which is why we also have the Prius so that I do not spend more on going to the market to get a gallon of milk than the milk costs me. However I do admit that the minivan is the one driven if snow is deep or when I need to carry 5 or 6 Borzois. The minivan is an expensive choice if I want to go grocery shopping or to the movies. That is why we have two cars with different capabilities in a two car household.
When I read the paragraph in question to my roommate she responded that actually it contained at least two other insults – childless while over 40. But I did not pick up on them since my choice for no children was due to not wanting children and feeling that teaching in a medical school and later a vet school would have more positive effect on the society than if I perpetuated my genes.
I am also a fan of Malthus. I do feel we have way to many members of at least one species on this planet for long term ecological stability. However this is based not on tree hugging or hating people but on a pretty strong background on biology and paleontology. Nothing like the long view. After all 99% of all species on the planet are extinct without descendants. Why should we (or wolves for that matter) expect to be different?
I think we can disagree with Leslie Smith’s attitude towards dog breeders without having to blame her world view on childlessness, being over 40 or saving money on gasoline or on concern about human overpopulation or environmental degradation.
I have observed that lack of empathy for fellow humans combined with a strong need to blame someone (anyone) for the fate of abandoned animals is a very common aspect of people who become involved in animal rescue. There is often an intense need for there to be an evil person or class of people to blame.
I think this is due to some character flaw in the rescuer but I suspect it is independent of wanting to help the environment or being childless.
In December 3 “Setters” showed up in my local pound and one of my employees at the kennel asked me to go check them out which I did. They were there because their owner had died in her home and when the police came the neighbor told the police that there were no relatives. So the dogs went to the shelter. It happened that after I took them we foudn a rabies tag on one of them and fairly quicklycontacted a relative through the dog’s vet, From the relative to the attorney for the deceased to the person designated to inherit the dogs. No one to blame but I did get to feel good about getting them where their owner wanted them to go.
“I think we can disagree with Leslie Smith’s attitude towards dog breeders without having to blame her world view on childlessness, being over 40 or saving money on gasoline or on concern about human overpopulation or environmental degradation.”
Christopher isn’t blaming her attitude on her age, her lack of children, her vehicle, or her hair style. He’s stereotyping her, just the way she has stereotyped dog breeders. That some of her actuals fit into the stereotype is just a (happy) coincidence.
Stereotyping is a major factor in vilifying a entire of group of people. It’s actually necessary TO vilifying a group, because once you start seeing people as individuals it’s much harder to shove them in a box with a label on it.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
As a childless, never-hitched 43 year old female myself, I can happily, willingly attest that almost all stereotypes have at least some basis in truth. And quite honestly, most of the extremeist neurotics I have met in AR or rescue, have been females with no kids or bad relationships with their kids; the moms frequently commenting on how they would have never had their children, had they known the joys of dog ownership first. I suspect their fragile emotional states could not cope with the challenges of raising the complex species Homo sapiens.
As for me, once I realized that the “biological clock” was nothing more than the pressure you put on yourself once time is limited, I released the pressure valve and was a very happy woman. You CAN have a life filled with people and normal social events without them. Heck! Easier to fly out of town! And you have more $$!! 🙂
Now I’ll admit, my Honda CR-V – my small urban solution to the SUV – has it’s share of stickers. “I love my Australian Kelpie.” “No Farms, No Food.” “Support Organic Farmers.” “My dog digs Cape Cod.” “Provincetown.” Any serious guilt pushing there? Hope not. I just think of these things as cute bits of expression and decor! Okay, the farms thing. Well, I’m sure there will be farms, but whatever. I like American Farmland Trust. ‘Nuff said. 🙂
Anyone here ever had a Toyota 4-runner? It’s my next dream truck!
P.S. A friend wanted to give me an “I adopted my dog” car magnet. I said “No thanks.” It was toooo SMUG!
P.S. A friend wanted to give me an “I adopted my dog” car magnet. I said “No thanks.” It was too…… SMUG!
I think he is stereotyping the people who are regulars of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT) group on Facebook.
URL: https://www.facebook.com/groups/2208130372/?fref=ts
Me and my girlfriend have no plan of having children, due to economic and ecological reasons; but both of us agree that group has more than the lion’s share of dumbasses. Secretly, with some of the stupid comments made in the group, we think “thank goodness they are not reproducing.”
If dog breeders are going to be stereotyped heavily by someone who is an animal-rescuer, then they themselves are open season to having stereotypes being flung at them.
Dave recently posted..For One Allele
That sort of nihilist misanthropy is a hallmark of everything Ingrid Newkirk believes (and is what informs PETA’s death-cult-like philosophy of ‘death as the ultimate kindness’ for pets). It doesn’t surprise me at all that it’s also a common thread connecting most of these sanctimonious AR-types.
Re: Prius
I hope you appreciate that I used the Prius because it has been used repeatedly as a political statement and even self-righteous status symbol of those same people who demagogue and denigrate SUVs. People who have never lived where it snows and who make moral judgement about other people’s fuel efficiency for easy self-congratulations. Hopefully you are not one of those people, and hopefully you’re a person who will actually see a positive return on your investment. There are many who don’t. The performance of the Prius versus the cost is never balanced and they wasted money (which is the same as throwing away value, sort of like being fuel inefficient) on a political statement.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2008/09/18/overrated-is-the-prius-really-worth-it/
Audio clip only despite being on YouTube.
South Park creators talking about their inspiration for their SMUG episode on hybrids!
Come ON people now! 😀
First, they’re factual.
Second, I didn’t denigrate a single one of those demographic truths.
Third, “There can be no offense where none is taken.”
Fourth, I think these demographics are actually relevant. They are part of a world view and existential behavior which as coalesced to condemn all breeders.
That she is a woman, look around, the dog world is overwhelmingly biased in this demographic, 9 out of 10 dog blogs I read are written by women, the vast majority of dog breeders are women, etc. If this along is grounds for offense, then we’re sort of at an impasse.
That she is liberal, this is also highly correlated with the judgmental and anti-population world view, the crusader complex, the animal rights movement.
That she is a vegan, also a clear affirmation of her world view, highly correlated with both her gender and her political beliefs. This is also a philosophy and nearly a sine qua non for the AR extremists and eco-terrorist elements of the AR groups.
That she is a pit bull lover, I’ll be covering this in a future post, but another highly correlated element of anti-breeder hatred, crusader complex, issues with fecundity, etc. etc. etc.
Child fee (I’ve been told that this is a less pejorative term than childless) at 40 being a woman is also both factual and relevant. I also think it’s more probative than prejudicial. It’s an evolutionary fact that men and women are biologically compelled to reproduce and that our biochemisty and hormones and genetics can drive behavior and outlook. It’s also a biological fact that the window for reproductive success closes faster on women than it does on men. Given that the topic at hand is animal breeding and its undeniable and close association with human breeding, the unending debate over dogs-as-children, etc., shows that human philosophy governing human reproduction is highly paired with their philosophy on canine reproduction, the issue is topical. Leslie has either made a choice to not have children (yet) or has found herself the victim of circumstance. Either way it is not inconceivable that this informs her view of dog breeding, especially given how radical her views are. Radical views are not driven by mild passions, and few things have the power to inflame and fuel such radical views as does the complex human emotions surrounding children–their own and otherwise. If she has chosen to not have children, would that choice not also inform her anti-breeder sentiment. And if she has been denied a desire to have children, could not the emotional fall out of that also inform her bigotry?
As an unmarried, childless man in his 30s, I have no issues affirming that my own interest in dogs is driven in part by their satisfying my biological and psychological need to parent. This should not be a controversial issue.
While I have gone out of my way not to make the logical mistake of an ad hominem, as I have quoted and responded to the actual words Leslie has written, not just declared her wrong due to her demographics, I am also drawing a causal line between her demographics and her views. I do NOT think they are irrelevant.
This is an important distinction. Something can be racial without being racist. Similarly the invoking of her gender does not make this sexist or the other qualities in turn unthinkingly prejudiced. I believe that her demographics are topical and causal or at worst highly correlated and thus indicative of a common cause for both.
In a way, my highlighting her personal characteristics is less to inform the bottom half of the piece than to shine a mirror back in her face the same way one shines a mirror on people who are hypocrites. It is the act of exposing parallels and inconsistencies between philosophy and actions.
Yes. And I’ll expound on the quote from before “There can be no offense where none is taken.”
This comes from the connection between offense and insecurity, specifically emotional insecurity. Can anyone truly say that the reason that people are offended by my mere mention of this woman’s age and child free status in relation to her world view is NOT linked to their own insecurities about these issues and their own status (now or in the past)?
And let me be clear, I’m not knocking insecurity here. This entire blog is an exercise in working through my own insecurities (am I a good dog owner, am I a good breeder, am I ethical, am I wise, am I doing good?). If I had no insecurity this would be a waste of time as I would not ask for or require further input in shaping my views.
I think it’s ludicrous to think that we humans are so evolved that we can instantly and permanently transcend our own condition to think and reason and judge outside of our own nature. Babies don’t cry for world hunger, they cry because THEY are hungry. When adults cry for world hunger it can only because they know what it is like to be hungry, by some degree. You can not have empathy if you never felt the emotion to begin with. I don’t fight for dogs because someone else has them, I fight for them because I have them. If these fundamental connections didn’t exist there would be no meaning in life.
I can not campaign tirelessly to free the Xenon race from enslavement by the Jadorkian Alliance in the Gamma Quadrant if I do not know that any of them exist. I could not fight against enslavement if I did not know that slavery existed. My impression of slavery stems from my collected knowledge of it, and given just how historically and culturally removed that knowledge is I would have to admit that my understanding is likewise incomplete. I have not been a slave or enslaved anyone. So much of my world view regarding this issue is filtered by time and distance and people with agendas, good and bad, who have passed along that knowledge over time.
Demographics matter just like genetics matter. It’s insane to think that they don’t. We know better. Leslie Smith is NOT Michelle Duggar or Genghis Khan making the statements she is against animal breeders.
See, I didn’t perform the ad hominem. I outlined why she was wrong using logic and tackling word by word. I didn’t say she was wrong because she was a women or child free or a vegan.
But I did bring these qualities up. And yes, the reason is to highlight the connection between her world view and her demographics. I think this is important context and I do think there is a causal relationship, there is certainly a correlation. A guarantee? No. But regressing to the mean of her demographic? Affirming the stereotype? Yes. Verily.
I know this is controversial. I know my readership is predominantly women. I know it’s also predominantly liberal. But I’m not going to insult you by avoiding talking about the politics of this issue because people might take offense. Everyone knows that demographics is the pillar that politics rests on and this is as much a political issue as a philosophical one. AR fanatics aren’t just out to convert people to their religion, they are out to exert power via politics via legislation and activism.
Perhaps many female readers aren’t sensitive to the overwhelming female bias in the dog world being part of the majority, but the gender issues are not being injected by me, I’m merely shining a light on them from a male perspective.
it depends on what type of “dog breeders” you are referring to. Is the dog breeder who breeds occasionally, health screens breeding stock, ensures pedigree compatibility and searches for the correct home for their puppies? This type of breeder makes little profit from rearing a litter of puppies because the sole reason for having the litter is not to gain profit but to produce the healthy dogs you are referring to.
Is it the volume breeder who buys in “stock” and mates their bitches at every season to any dog without health screening, pedigree compatibility checks and who often sells whole litters to pet stores who then sell them on with no home checks or care about where they are going? This type of breeder makes a huge profit from their litters because they invest very little into them…apart from the initial outlay of buying in “stock”.
In an ethical world there is no place for the latter as these are no different to the types of breeder you decry for breeding merle to merle. They care not if they produce puppies with hereditary defects that will only come to light once the puppy reaches adulthood and the owners then have to fork out thousands of pounds/dollars to correct bad breeding practices.
You make no reference to the type of breeder you support or do you support them all? Are they all carrying out a community service?
There are “breed” rescues up and down the country that deal with the fall out from bad breeding and very few operate a kill policy.
The breeder who takes time to ensure their puppies go to a home where there is every possibility of them staying there for all their lives is doing a community service. They are providing healthy dogs that will become part of a family. The latter is dealing in misery and breeds only for profit.
In order to stand up for breeders one has to differentiate between good and bad. Your post doesn’t do that.
I feel that this lady has a right to an opinion, just as you have a right to yours. To make personal insults in paragraph 2 are completely uncalled for and, in my opinion, weaken your argument. Best stick to the facts of what she writes and not get personal. Her points are as valid as yours if you look at the type of breeders around.
Sadly, not all breeders care about what they produce or where they end up…they only care about the money coming in. Is it acceptable to support this type of breeder and continue in the misery? Indeed, one could say that these types are adding to the misery of shelter dogs because no care goes into vetting homes as suitable. Sadly, we live in a throwaway society and what pleases somebody one day may not please them another…and the puppy/dog is abandoned. If the breeder had taken care to ensure the correct home for the breed etc., then perhaps this would not be happening.
Please explain what you believe ethical dog breeding is? Due to the conformation issues in many pedigree dogs there could be a counter argument to say that letting those breeds “die out” would be the most humane thing to do.
Given that I have more than one draft on the subjects you raise, I’ll leave the bulk of my arguments for them and not take this thread off topic. But suffice it to say, I disagree with you that we need to constantly append “reputable” or “responsible” to the front of the phrase every time we talk about Breeders. This is playing into the AR game plan of turning breeder against breeder and making the default assumption one of corruption or exploitation or incompetency or evil.
It’s also a favorite past time of elite breeders to throw each other under the bus. This needs to stop. So you’ll have to wait for my further posts for more.
Let’s see: a post talking about what is essentially tribalism on the subjects part, and how her ‘tribe’ affects her perceptions, and along comes Annie, who wants to inject even more tribalism.
You ever notice how these people, including Annie, don’t ever realize that their insistence on categorizing is just ego stroking? On the Saluki list, there was a discussion on advertising on sites like Nextdaypets, and someone insisted that “standing next to all those puppymills” was an undesirable action. “I’m ever so much better than those other people I don’t even know and actually know nothing about but I’ve labeled them anyways to make myself feel better.”
I’m sure that Annie thinks her purpose is more noble than Leslie’s; after all, Leslie has thrown ALL breeders under the bus, and Annie just wants to select a few for squishing.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
Why does Chris have to specify what type of dog breeders he’s referring to? Leslie sure didn’t distinguish between the different types of breeders! I guess we expect more from Chris huh. 🙂
Hear hear Kate! In the American justice system, they say the burden of proof is on the accuser. In this case, is this not Leslie?
Don’t be silly. We all know that it’s perfectly permissible to make up your own facts and tar with a wide brush as long as your heart is pure.
Dog breeders do not have pure hearts, not like Leslie and her rescue friends, so it’s okay to lump them all together in a big slimy pile and just make shit up. The end (ending the purposeful breeding of dogs) justifies the means.
The really funny thing is, if you make the (very valid) comparison of Leslie’s view of breeders with, say, the religious conservative rights view of gays, and how that type of thinking is exactly alike, she’d probably have an aneurysm.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
I have fostered for two rescues recently–Shetland Sheepdog rescue, and Italian Greyhound rescue. The IG rescue is affiliated with the AKC breed club. The Sheltie rescue is not.
In all ways, the Italian Greyhound rescue is a more efficient and better run rescue. They also appear to be better funded (no doubt because the national club puts aside money for their operations, and locally-generated rescue funds go in to the national pot, for the most part). IG rescue mostly takes owner give-ups, but also pulls dogs from shelters.
There is a marked difference in the tone of the two rescues. The Sheltie rescue stresses the “sob sister” version of a dog’s background, a “how could they do this to this poor sweet animal” mentality. The IG rescue stresses what’s GOOD about the dogs, while noting what could be problematic for adopters (or what needs work) without going into great detail about the dog’s background. No hysteria, no condemnation.
The reason rescues have dogs is because people–individuals–for one reason or another, don’t want or can’t keep those dogs. From a rescue point of view, where they came from is immaterial except in order to determine how best to place them. IG rescue’s methods have been remarkably successful (the local rescue has run out of dogs to place with applications waiting twice in the last few months, and is now working with a neighboring state to help place their dogs). I attribute that to a general lack of hysteria about the whole process. The Sheltie rescue is nowhere near as successful in this regard.
I mention this in the next post in the series, but yes, the sob sister tactic might get you a donation, but who would want that dog? There is a difference in shaming people for handouts and getting them to want to adopt your dogs. Beggars get handouts, they don’t get dates.
When I was with Greyhound rescue the sob story dogs were more likely to be returned.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
Why call dogs abused when you can just say that they were untrained and neglected? People can see how to fix that. Train the dog. Love it and spend time with it.
ABUSE!!!!! That sounds too daunting to rehabilitate for most people once the dawwwww wears off. It’s also an excuse. You can’t as easily say “they didn’t train him, I didn’t train him, therefore return” as they can say “he was abused and I just couldn’t overcome that.”
Anyone should be able to train a dog.
This group was not very good on follow up and support. I am dead sure that that was a large influence on the number of returns.
But I will go out on a limb and say that when you take a dog because you feel sorry for it (to me, this is as much of an impulse purchase as, say, buying a puppy at the mall), and not because you’ve thought it through, you may well have different and possibly unreasonable expectations about behavior from the dog.
Going even further out on a limb, if you take a dog because you feel sorry for it, you may be anthropomorphizing enough to expect “gratitude” from that dog, and therefore somehow “grateful” behavior.
I was about to say the same thing. I’ve seen people with this attitude and it disgusts me.
Actually, that’s exactly what I was trying to say to without really saying it. I’m sure it’s not a conscious expectation in most cases.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
Yeah, I’ve heard people say straight out that a rescue dog will love you more than a bought dog, because somehow they’ll understand that you saved them.
:::sigh:::
Both the dogs I’ve fostered and the dogs that I’ve adopted/bought as adults (or relative adults) went through identifiable stages. 1st stage, 24 hrs or so, they won’t eat, they’ll stay in one spot for hours, they might want to be NEAR me but don’t want attention. 2nd stage they get really, really clingy (such that I want to murder them–like the IG foster I got on Friday–she wants to sleep on my head–going into a crate tonight if that continues, because I need sleep). That can take some time to come out of. I don’t consider that “loving” me more. I think the dogs understand to some extent what has happened, and are reacting to that. It’s an upheaval in their lives and it’s got nothing to do with being “rescued.”
Younger puppies, particularly those that already have stable personalities and good temperaments tend to make the transition from one home to another with much more ease. And of course it would make sense that that would be the case.
If I had a dog that understood such a complex concept, I’d send him to university!
I’ve personally rehomed two fosters so far (I could have been sucked into fostering many, many more but I’ve resisted so far because I feel my own dogs’ wellbeing is paramount).
I rehomed them both in under 2 weeks.
I used Craiglist for one, and transported another to Colorado (hey, Chris, you could probably look her up!)
People in sheltering would probably vilify me for my methods, but both dogs are happy, healthy, fulfilled and well cared for (I’m friends with both the adoptees and see frequent cute-puppy pictures).
I was effective because I gave a honest, straightforward, no-nonsense description of the dogs. For one, it was relevant that I got her and removed approximately 200 ticks from her, as she became sick a few months later and that was something to consider in her diagnosis. The other had no problems at all and I didn’t feel compelled to create any for him.
People want a pet, not a story. It’s been demonstrated over and over again (as a trainer) how detrimental that story can be to a new owner.
When I got my dog it was from a connection via a yahoo kelpie group. A farmer contacted me after reading my posts. I asked her a thousand more questions than she asked me, wanting to be sure the dog could adapt to my living environment.
By the time we were done, I was volunteering references and the lady laughed, saying she didn’t like harassing people and felt I would walk on water anyway.
I wish my pooch were a tad more confident in himself, but overall he’s been a great fit. The process didn’t go the way a lot of rescues would have liked it, but the important points were made and the down to earth communication gave the farmer and I a better understanding of each other than any formal, righteous judgment of me would have created.
Things have certainly gone far better for Tucker and I than they have for a lot of shelter “Pit bulls” and other dogs, mismatched by a questionairre or fly-by-night evaluation.
I’m glad several of you are repulsed by the opening paragraphs, I think that means you understand the point. See, personal attacks are off putting and make people defensive instead of rational and cooperative.
But I don’t make them into an ad hominem. I don’t say she’s right or wrong by who she is (or selected elements of her life). This is a mistake that she makes, repeatedly and with great scorn and derision.
I separate that with the photo and go into an analysis of what she said and why it’s wrong on its face and its own merits. But I want you to be offended or on guard with the opening. It doesn’t hurt that she’s affirming several stereotypes.
Frankly, one should be just as offended with Leslie’s blanket condemnations, but they aren’t simply because it’s become part of the culture to denigrate breeders.
Chris, I loved this post, and I totally get the point of the personal attacks on Leslie, but I’d still be more likely to share it if you hadn’t included those…
I’ll note that the things I’ve said are true to the best of my knowledge and I can make a pretty decent argument that they are not, in fact, irrelevant. Of course there is some ambiguity, for example, she might be bi-local-liberal with both San Francisco and Santa Fe being the likely places of part-time or full time residency (she does manage to show up in person in many DogTime photos in SF but volunteers at a New Mexico shelter). This would hardly change the flavor of cliche she’s living up to. I do speculate about her automobile status, as admitted, but this is more about extrapolating for facts in evidence and the nasty politicization of her attitudes.
What is actually offensive about what I wrote? Certainly nothing in the neighborhood of disqualifying an entire class of people from being moral agents!
That’s a pathetic cop out.
Be more specific, please.
“To make personal insults in paragraph 2 are completely uncalled for and, in my opinion, weaken your argument. Best stick to the facts of what she writes and not get personal.”
The personal insults are completely called for. Leslie Smith felt no compulsion to withhold personal insults when she wrote her article so why should she be shielded from the same?
Doing so shows weakness and a willing to bend over for the sake of peace. Why would any breeder that has been attacked by her article want to do that?
If this blog is aimed at readers with IQs in triple digits….I’m not seeing reasoned argument to account for that perceived level of intelligence just more personal insults! It’s very easy to insult from behind the safety of your keyboard….
Please don’t categorise me….you know nothing about me.
I’ll now leave you alone as clearly my input is irrelevant!
“Please don’t categorise me….you know nothing about me.”
And now you get the point. The tribalism Leslie is engaging in regarding breeders, and the tribalism that YOU are engaging in by insisting that there must be a simple definition for ‘reputable’ breeders, are exactly the same thing.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
I don’t think your input is irrelevant and I don’t think I’ve acted in any way to support that conclusion.
I hope you’d stick around for later posts where I can bring up these issues more fully. If you feel I am criticizing a position you hold dearly, I’d hope that you’d defend it instead of taking your ball and going home.
This isn’t a short concept to get across because it has so many elements, but Jess knows where I’m going with these posts as we’ve talked about these issues before. My basic thrust is that the language used against breeders is corrupt and that breeders themselves are participating in this corruption and that we have a civil war that is as as damaging as any war against AR or AW or other radicals. For example, you know those “What makes a Reputable Breeder” charts? The AR people don’t make those. They don’t care or even acknowledge that there are good breeders. Those charts are made by breeders to be used against other breeders.
That is a real element of this continued slander and throwing people who are much more like you than different under the proverbial bus … or feeding them to the proverbial lions just to stave off your own consumption a little longer.
This is a complex issue and I don’t have easy answers. For instance, many things I write on this blog can be used by radical groups against breeders AND THEY HAVE BEEN. How do I feel about that? Is it a wise strategy for me to demand that breeders clean our own house some and that some of the AR attacks against us are justified? Or should I just close ranks and defend the indefensible because it might be a better strategy for my own interests? No easy answers. MANY more posts to go before I even get the argument all out there for your consumption.
I can’t force anyone to stick around, but I welcome the feedback and being challenged.
Yikes! What happened to you? Did Ms. Smith turn you down for the senior prom? Attacking as you did (I know, you will just see it as a mention) her lifestyle choices is nothing more than bigotry and stereotyping. Having a difference of opinion is one thing; a full column of mostly ad hominem attacks is another.
I am not a vegan; I don’t drive a Prius; I have kids; and I have a rescue dog. And I think Leslie Smith’s position makes sense. She advocates for the animals we all care about and part of her solution indicts the behavior and contribution (to the problem) of breeders. She attacks an industry, not an individual (as you have done). I understand you disagree with her position and I can even conceive that you possibly could change my mind if your rant was limited to the facts instead of what appears to be a personal hatred of the author. Your message is lost in the rubble of your rancor.
You’re an idiot with poor reading comprehension, and you are obviously deficient in reason if you can’t think for yourself based upon the extensive rational, line by line, arguments that I make. You’re asking to be conned with pretty phrases instead.
2+2=5, you genius you. The world is round, asshole. Are you going to believe that 2+2 is five because it strokes your ego, and deny the earth is round because the presentation is harsh?
I do NOT make ad hominem arguments. Nowhere do I say she is wrong because she is X, Y, or Z. The facts of her life speak to her tribalism and reinforcement of the PeTA clown stereotype.
And your suggestion that I’d have to be offended by a personal slight instead of the fact that she is a fucking monster with a horrific world view that is both authoritarian and psychotic, is amusing. Is it not enough that she declares what I do to be the epitome of immorality?
Good try, sport, but you’ll have to try harder with your next comment. Care to defend her position line by line? I’m game.
Well, I would be glad to have the line-by-line debate with you but since your argument is so compelling (after all, who isn’t convinced when addressed as “idiot”, “asshole”, “deficient”) that I think I’ll pass.
Bye Rick! Thanks for dropping by and contributing to the discussion!
He’s Rick James, bitch!
I am always highly amused by people who call dog breeding an ‘industry.’ That is like calling private animal an ‘industry,’ even through private rescue ranges from large, well-funded rescues who place many dogs and network heavily, to the person who finds new homes for two or three dogs in a year.
Rick and Leslie like to use the realllllly wide paintbrushes, don’t they?
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
Pros at being self righteous holier-than-thous, but not so good at the cognitive discussion stuff. In other words, typical AR blowhards.
It is far easier to vilify when you paint in broad strokes of black and white. That way you don’t HAVE to be cognitive. It’s lazy thinking.
Poking things in various places with an ice pick to see what kind of stuff oozes out is far more interesting than flailing about with a big brush.
Jess recently posted..Guest Post: Suzanne Phillips: Why dogs develop food allergies
Wow! This article is quite a Rorschach test.
Mr. James,
How DARE you insinuate that I would attend a heteronormal chauvanistic festival of date rape? Until there are no teens at home without dates, it is categorically immoral for anyone to attend one. No exceptions.
How DARE you consume dead animal flesh! Your dietary extravagance is mass murder and patently immoral. No exceptions.
How DARE you have your own children and contribute to the suffering of others. The world is overpopulated and children are starving and wallowing in orphanages.
Every day around the world, over 16 THOUSAND children die of starvation. Fifteen MILLION a year. While people you like you pay people to feed about 16 pounds of protein-rich grain and legumes to cows so that you can have your dietary drug fix and indoctrinate your ego-children into the same cult!
A third of the world’s population is starving RIGHT NOW. You are an immoral beast. No exceptions.
Don’t you dare try and get on my moral high ground soap box, there’s no room up here for murdering multiplying filth like you.
It’s all about The Man, ain’t it?
retrieverman recently posted..Gabby Giffords’ dog kills sea lion, people lose minds
her views sound very pro-PETA. With that statement ‘there are no good breeders’ etc, she is in agreement with PETA’s goal to phase out pets. Yes, get rid of the crappy breeders that don’t give a damn about animal welfare, but this agenda to destroy all breeders is disturbing
The personal attacks against this woman is offensive. The point you were trying to make by making them is childish and I agree- a cop out. You come across as a misogynist in this article. Be the better person and disagree with her politics, views, and such. But to make a mockery of her lifestyle, age, childlessness, and eggs screams immaturity and hate. Don’t spread hatred Chris, spread love and intelligence that we dog breeders and lovers can be proud of.
Honestly, the attacks ruin the article for me and turns me off this blog.
I don’t care if you or anyone else is offended, that is a consequence of your own biases and it’s happening in your own head and you have no right to NOT be offended. Nor do I care if it turns you off the blog. I don’t pander. Nor do I support any form of speech code or thought control or political correctness.
Nor do I see how it is in any way a cop out. I didn’t avoid making a more sophisticated point, this is a long post, a series of them in fact and I provide plenty of solid arguments. If anything your comment is a cop out. You’re complaining about form and provide no commentary on the substance. Yawn.
And I disagree that she should not be mocked. She is a horrible misanthrope (her own description of herself) and she has precluded an entire huge class of people from even being capable of being moral agents. This is about as evil as it gets in thought. To disqualify the humanity and morality of people with no exceptions. It is really just one step from there to justify any sort of atrocity against said people. She deserves to be mocked and she deserves to be hated.
What the fuck is wrong with hatred? This isn’t a Martha Stewart blog where I’m trying to fleece you out of $80 for a shower curtain in the new fall color my team of stylists have determined is in fashion. This is a moral argument and hatred ABSOLUTELY is justified. Why should I water it down and turn it into weak tea? She is making an authoritarian and absolutist argument, the same sort of psychotic bullshit that has lead to more people suffering and dying than any other form of thought.
I hate being declared a universally immoral person. I hate having my right to own and breed dogs denigrated, attacked, and put on the agenda to be banned. And I hate when conceited turds think it’s clever to scrawl off poison pen letters because their pibble-babies aren’t adored by everyone and they aren’t getting enough karma though their self hating lifestyles.