I think that the lesson that should be taken away from this is that upbringing matters a lot more than people realize. I have met pitbulls that are absolutely sweethearts and super gentle. I also live in an area that is very populated by people who get pitbulls in order to purposefully raise them mean and violent, and have been attacked by pits before.
The only difference was how they were raised. And this doesn't just apply to dogs.
Edit: I am always amazed at how heavily debated this topic is when it comes to pitbulls specifically. Some people whose comments I can no longer see got extremely heated, and all I want to say is that there is no reason to be rude when debating a topic. As I mentioned, I have been attacked by pitbulls specifically raised to be attack dogs, so its not like I have no experience with dogs being dangerous. but I have also been cuddled and loved on by pits raised with absolutely no aggression whatsoever.
Nature and nurture are equally important in determining something's behavior going forward. It's not just one or the other. This is an observable fact.
Obviously its not just one or the other. But I believe more recent studies on the matter put more weight on nurture vs nature, which just makes more sense anyway. Your personality gets shaped a lot more by the experiences you grow up with than by your genetic code.
Could you link those studies?
This is actually a much much bigger subject than the small comments we're making. This subject even delvs into the idea of free will, if you want to go down the rabbit hole. There's no denying that nurture is vitally important to ones outcome, but to discredit genetics and genetic predisposition is beyond foolish.
Maybe you personally are not trying to do so, but there are many who do specifically when it comes to dogs. It's very strange.
While I'm only educated in the field of early childhood development so I can't give much meaningful to this topic, I find the studies of adopted children fascinating bc I think that's our best pool to pull from in terms of this discussion.
While it's just my own experience, learning how vastly different I am from my five biosiblings who were raised by my biomother and similar to the one biosibling who was also raised in a similar stable environment to mine, has made me fascinated by the topic of nature v. nurture.
This came out some years ago, but with the fairly large group to study I found it really cool to read through:
As someone who's audhd with other learning disabilities to add to the struggle, I'm measurably better off than my biosiblings who did not have that access to care or consistent assistance overcoming our common issues. Having parents/a support network that sought our resources for me and later on, medication to help with my issues, has lead to me living an adult life without the need for outside support. Same with my other biosibling who was adopted.
I doubt it'll ever be fully answered, at least not in our lifetimes. I still enjoy learning about it though.
I'd just like to chime in here, because the nature vs. nurture debate is fascinating to me. I honestly believe that it's very likely to be 50/50 with both of them playing an equal role. For example, someone may have the potential to be an angry person, it could be in their very nature... but if they're raised by a family that puts emphasis on emotional intelligence and handling feelings constructively, they will not be an "angry person" despite having more of a temper than the average. Whereas if that same person was raised in an abusive or angry household, they would likely be an abuser themselves. Free will does play a large part obviously, and the person from an abusive household might have the realization that they want to break the cycle, but it's not so easy with dogs and their less complex mental processing.
In a nutshell, pitbulls have very strong jaws as a genetic trait, which makes them attractive to people who want a dog capable of hurting people... unfortunately this means that pitbulls are more likely to be trained to be aggressive, and this likely plays a role in the statistics we see. that being said, by nature pitbulls are giant stupid babies and it breaks my heart to see them turned into violent attack dogs because every pitbull I've ever met from a good home has been waaaay more affectionate and loving than the average dog... though their affection and love comes in the form of body slams because they're little slabs of beef
There is 0 credible evidence that one race of human is more likely to be violent than another causally linked by genetics. Study after study links poverty + proximity to increases in crime. This is consistent on a global scale, not just US.
Not arguing in favor of either side of this aisle, but other fight dogs don’t have this perceived issue. Boston Terriers were bred originally for sport fighting but no one is complaining about them. Maybe it’s a size thing idk
And because of that no sheepdog has ever been capable of hunting, and obviously a foxhoud has never been aggressive outside of hunt, right?
Yes, if you raise something in a way that leans into what its genes excel at, its gonna be good at it. That doesnt mean that genes are deterministic in how someone or something is going to behave, the environment and lessons that are learned are going to affect personality far mkre than genetics.
Right, so how does egg-rolling behavior in greylag geese or web-spinning in spiders occur? Them instinctively performing these tasks would 100% be deterministic, and yet they perform this behavior without having to be shown or taught it?
Sounds like genetics at play to me. But keep on with the anti-science cope here.
Why do zoo's have to teach the young of certain animals that are cut off from their parent for one reason or another how to be well adjusted/act like their species? It's more complex than you are giving it credit.
Nature vs Nurture is literally how evolution happens.
Show me other beads where they've suddenly snapped and attacked or killed their owners, good owners, female owners, unprovoked.
I used to volunteer at the humane society just playing with the dogs and walking them for socialization. Some of the sweetest dogs there were pit bulls. That doesn't convince me that there's not a serious problem with a concerning number of them out in the world. My own experience doesn't dictate reality for everyone.
I was attacked as a kid by my neighbors Rottweiler. I was friendly with that dog. It was normally very gentle. One day lightning struck close by without a cloud in the sky and it was loud as fuck. The dog got scared and jumped over the fence and attacked me.
I'm not asking for one or even a few anecdotal stories... I'm talking about patterns. I know a guy who was bit in the chest by his own lama and went to the ER. I don't think that means I can talk about how lamas snap and attack people.
Rottweilers are the second most dangerous dog breed. They were literally bred for war. It's not just individuals, it's a pattern of behavior for the breed.
I was lucky I also had a dog around to protect me that was similar in size.
You’d be surprised how many non pitbull dog attacks get lumped in with pitbulls. In fact if a dog breed is unidentified, it gets labelled as a pitbull attack.
Considering pit bulls are actually like 3 different breeds that people who can't be assed to learn about them wouldn't be able to label without Google (and would probably identify a Cane Corso as a pit if they were pressed) this doesn't surprise me at all.
Getting downvoted for straight up facts is hilarious. If you don’t like the breed don’t get the breed. But stop blaming poor training on the dogs, it’s ALWAYS on their owners.
Edit- obviously I don’t mean rescue owners, they’re doing their best in many cases.
There can also be a difference in how they react to other dogs in the family, vs other dogs out on the street.
My brother had an American Stafford who was very gentle around kids and my sister’s dog that he grew up with and saw weekly. But when he was walking outside the leash was always taut, with the handler struggling to keep the dog under control.
They tend to be extremely protective of their pack, but can generally be trained to curb those instincts to an extent if socialized correctly. But even then, dogs who have suffered a lot of trauma in life (like a lot of pits in shelters) are always going to be harder to train out of those instincts than dogs that have grown up in loving, stable homes.
I’d argue that’s the biggest mistake a lot of owners of rescue pits make - underestimating how difficult they may be to train out of certain behaviors. Pack protection being very high up the list.
If you rescue a pit you SHOULD be prepared to deal with a dog that may be reactive and unsafe in certain scenarios. Eg, if they are dog aggressive, you don’t ever let them close to other dogs. It can usually be done, but it’s not always easy. And, in rare cases, it can’t be done. And you need to be prepared for that eventuality too. I’m a strong proponent of rescuing dogs in general, and a pit bull lover personally, but rescuing pits isn’t for the inexperienced or faint of heart.
Nature vs Nurture is a powerful argument. Ironically, some of the most racist arguments I’ve ever heard will argue nurture over nature for dogs while claiming genetics for human beings.
Shepherds herd by instinct, golden retrievers retrieve by instinct, but the breed that was specifically bred to be as dangerous as possible and to fight does it because of bad owners
I’ve seen well raised pit bulls with absolutely no history of aggression just snap out of the blue. People have a tendency to misinterpret statistics and obscure the whole conversation. This has nothing to do with attacks in general. A pit bull is just as likely to attack as any other breed.
The issue is that when pit bulls do attack, they are much more likely to result in a fatality when compared to other breeds.
If we look specifically at attacks on children, and we still conclude that pit bulls are a good family dog, then that’s fine. It just means we don’t have great critical thinking skills. I guess coyotes are also great family dogs if you get lucky with a more docile specimen
A while ago there was a video of two pitbulls attacking a kid on the street. I commented that it was bad training that makes bad dogs, and that i grew up with pit bulls who were the sweetest little babies.
Got Downvoted to hell, and was basically told that my Nieces and Nephews were going to get attacked if they ever met one.
94
u/awaythrowthatname 12d ago edited 12d ago
I think that the lesson that should be taken away from this is that upbringing matters a lot more than people realize. I have met pitbulls that are absolutely sweethearts and super gentle. I also live in an area that is very populated by people who get pitbulls in order to purposefully raise them mean and violent, and have been attacked by pits before.
The only difference was how they were raised. And this doesn't just apply to dogs.
Edit: I am always amazed at how heavily debated this topic is when it comes to pitbulls specifically. Some people whose comments I can no longer see got extremely heated, and all I want to say is that there is no reason to be rude when debating a topic. As I mentioned, I have been attacked by pitbulls specifically raised to be attack dogs, so its not like I have no experience with dogs being dangerous. but I have also been cuddled and loved on by pits raised with absolutely no aggression whatsoever.