No I’m not a fascist (at least I hope not…)

I’m trying to understand why we’ve normalised the idea of eugenics in dogs (e.g. golden retrievers are friendly and smart, chihuahas are aggressive, etc.)¹ but find the idea of racial classification in humans abhorrent.

I can sort of see it from the idea that Nurture (culture and upbringing) would have a greater effect on a human’s characteristics than Nature would.

At the same time, my family tree has many twins and I’ve noticed that the identical ones have similar outcomes in life, whereas the fraternal ones (even the ones that look very similar) don’t really (N=3).

Maybe dog culture is not a thing, and that’s why people are happy to make these sweeping generalizations on dog characterics?

I’m lost a little

1: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/df/74/f7/df74f716c3a70f59aeb468152e4be927.png

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    36·
    9 months ago

    Applying our own filtering to animals, and hence taking them away from the path of natural selection, produces horrific suffering.

    If you think about it, by mapping “God” to “evolution by natural selection”, ie “the force that made our world”, it becomes apparent that “God is merciful” in that way.

    Pugs for example are abominations, forced to live outside “God’s” kingdom, and hence living in hell.

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      3·
      9 months ago

      Humans mostly pick their partners so it’s all selective breeding for us. Hell, arranged marriages are STILL a norm in some cultures.

      Saying one path or the other is god’s plan is assuming you know what god’s plan even is.