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
I would argue it’s not good or acceptable in dogs. At least I wouldn’t accept it if it were up to me. A good boy is a good boy no matter what his talents are or how many butts he sniffs.
It’s ironic that dogs, when left to their own devices, will form packs where they will bring loot back to disadvantaged members of the pack, and here we are being more needy than that.
That’s cute – I think humans do that too in smaller groups