About Adolf Hitler, dogs and being a scary person

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by water, Sep 26, 2004.

  1. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Dr Lou:
    I think it is not so much race as attitude. My ex-ex-ex roomate had a Jamacian boyfriend/dealer and my dogs were cool around him.

    Dogs sense nervousness/fear/hostility. Blacks tend to be nervous/afraid/hostile around dogs. Maybe because they associate dogs with whites. In the States, big dogs -- shepherds especially -- have been historically used to hunt down runaway slaves, attack civil rights marchers, ferret out drugs and so on.
    In fact, there is a South African breed called the Boerbul that was developed specifically in response to the Apartheid era's needs.

    It just amused me that this person assumes that since Hitler's dog acts that way, Hitler must have been a bad person -- but if that's true, then blacks are criminal sorts and Hitler was right.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. water the sea Registered Senior Member


    You said
    "I think it is not so much race as attitude."
    so how do you combine this idea with
    "It just amused me that this person assumes that since Hitler's dog acts that way, Hitler must have been a bad person -- but if that's true, then blacks are criminal sorts and Hitler was right."
    -- it's inconsistent.

    Once you blame the dog's behaviour on the attitude of the person approaching the dog, and a little later on the race of that person. And you have stated that race does not equate attitude.

    If some people, in this case blacks or Hispanic, have a negative atittude towards dogs, this could be due to a number of observable reasons (like never having dogs at home, viewing dogs as a status symbol, being prosecuted with dogs, other negative experience ...) and this shows in the way they approach the dog.
    Of course, at the same time, we must consider the dog's life experience, and that the dog may have certain negative preference for certain people due to being hurt by them.

    But that a dog shys away the way Hitler's did -- one can tell (or should be able to tell) whether a dog wishes to be approached by one or not.
    And why approach it and force one's caresses on the dog if the dog doesn't want them?!

    -- This is the part I don't understand. I see people treat animals as if animals were some kind of robots, as if animals had not their desires and wishes.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. gendanken Ruler of All the Lands Valued Senior Member

    'cause we're both mammals and warmth is our trademark.
    Plus, I love the bitch.

    Furthermore, if you 'coo' at her and pat her head as opposed to smack her on the side or, for lack of a better term, give her a 'noogie' she steers away from you and, in children, she takes it as a sign of fear.
    Which is why I don't let her around children or other people- almost mauled a little boy once.

    So there *is* merit in this:
    On me, docility is alien but she tolerates it because we're familiar.
    But on strangers, specifically children, docility becomes timidity and it stirs her predator instincts.
    The way a criminal attitude (usually in blacks or hispanics) stirs a German Shepherd’s, or a feminine one stirs other breeds not as 'cuddly wuddly' as Poodles.

    You say roughly the same here:

    All we have to go on for Mr. Hitler is Miss Blondi.

    Fraggle Rocker:
    Yeah, this imbecile listened to that same imbecile's 'advice':


    His girlfriend was just as 'adviced'.

    Never heard of the 'king' tale and it sounds like an Old Wife’s one.

    Bulldogs, from my understanding, were bred from mastiffs but made smaller over time, why? Don't know.
    But their name, like the terrier who is named because of the jobs they were bred for ("terra" which is "ground" in Latin and crawling through game after holes was their specialty), I do know comes from their job as well, baiting bulls.
    Just as I know they are not descended from rottweilers.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Dr Lou Natic Unnecessary Surgeon Registered Senior Member

    It wasn't actually a king

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    but the origins of bull baiting are from the serious work of the butcher's dog which occassionally involved catching bulls by the nose.
    The butchers dog wasn't a breed, breeds didn't exist back then, only types which could perform a function.
    So its accurate to say bulldogs didn't descend from rottweilers, just as its accurate to say bulldogs didn't descend from the english mastiff.
    When it says bulldogs descended from mastiffs it means mastiff-type dogs, specifically those used by the butchers of the time. The rottweiler apparently descended from germany's mastiff type butcher's dog. Get it?
    I'll try to dig up some sources, even though it's my pet hate.
  8. gendanken Ruler of All the Lands Valued Senior Member

    Well, keep hating it.
    Now give.

    I understand there were no 'breeds' in more ancient times as we know them today, insert a juicy proverbial DUH here, but phylogenetically we can say the bulldog breed of this day can be traced to the proto-breeds of mastiffs.
    But if we're dealing only 'probablies' then both of us are right.
  9. Dr Lou Natic Unnecessary Surgeon Registered Senior Member

    Source; http://www.american-bulldog.com/a_peek.htm

    Source; http://www.thepetpantry.com/breeds/info.asp?breed=87

    I looked at rottweiler histories and seeing as how all of them said "no one really knows" I feel its not necessarry to quote any of them.
    The 3 most common beliefs on the origin of the rottweiler are that it a) guarded the butchers from attack while they drove cattle from town to town b) herded the cattle and kept them in line, capturing any that strayed away (butcher's dog) and c) Pulled the meat carts for the butcher from town to town (draught dog).
    Personally, I find C very unlikely. I think A might have been expected of them but their real job would have been B IMO.
    I know real people who use dogs to capture unruly bulls and scrub cattle, and breed them for this purpose. Randomly crossbreeding over many generations to make the dog most perfectly suited to this task ends up with a dog similar to the rottweiler, not the same colour or anything, but basically the same sort of size and build.
    For this reason I'm confident the rottweiler descends from the cattle droving/catching mastiffs of germany.
  10. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    It's not quite such a woo-woo sort of thing. Since you were born you've heard fairy tales that originated in Europe, seen picture books about the lovely European countryside, and seen wildlife programs about the charming European wildlife. We have the same experience in the USA. Brainwashing. We don't get it quite as bad as you do because in many places our flora and fauna are quite similar to Europe's.

    Too similar in some cases. About 120 years ago some idiot who was homesick for England brought back 80 pairs of house sparrows and set them loose in New York City's Central Park. They quickly drove dozens of species of native sparrows and other passerines out of their ecological niches. They are now the most common bird in North America and have colonized South America. From the Alaskan tundra, where they are fat and almost white, to the Arizona desert where they are tiny and sand-colored, to Tierra del Fuego (I don't know what those look like). The same thing that happened in your country when that other idiot brought over his bunny rabbits.
    How funny to read that. In America we regard your animals as positively exotic. Many of us dream of traveling there, not to see the wonders of Sydney, the quaint aboriginal art, or a performance by Angus Young on his own turf, but to visit one of those quasi-wild animal reserves where we can pet the wombats and the wallabies. Americans who have never seen a live kangaroo love them as much as our own bison. You guys have a really special place there. Of course the occasional heart-warming film like "Danny Deckchair" that makes Australia and its people look like 18th-century Switzerland doesn't hurt either. And actually Mrs. Fraggle and I, the world's oldest metalheads, would love to see AC/DC play to the home crowd.
    But not for the reasons suggested. Different ethnic groups exude different pheromones. If you don't believe me just ask the lady at the cosmetics counter. She'll tell you that in general white people, black people, Asian-Americans, etc., can't wear the same perfumes. Top-end perfume is chosen to blend with your natural pheromones to create a unique but pleasant scent that is for you. What works for people of Chinese ancestry does not work so well for people of European or African ancestry. Dogs' noses are about 1,000 times as sensitive as ours and they can smell pheromones that we only sense unconsciously. A dog that's only been around people of one ethnic group will interpret the new smell of someone from another ethnic group as simply from a competing "pack" and will react accordingly. Raising dogs in a cosmopolitan place like Los Angeles where they were routinely introduced to our friends who hailed from every corner of the globe, they had a much more expanisve definition of their "pack" than dogs that grow up in the back woods of Mississippi, or perhaps even in today's Australia which is probably not quite as racially integrated as your filmmakers want us to believe.

    Of course in the bad old days certain people deliberately trained their dogs to dislike people of other races, and the practice is unfortunately not so ancient to prevent me from hearing about it in my own lifetime. But unless you buy your dog from a guy who looks like an extra in "Deliverance," she's probably not that kind of dog.
    Since you don't live here you can be excused for choosing a very inaccurate example. I can't speak for all of Latin America, but Mexican culture has a very dear place for dogs. It almost seems that there are more dogs in the Latino neighborhoods in L.A. than anywhere else. After all, it was the fierce Aztecs who gave us the delicate little chihuahua, not vice versa.
    Uh, no he sure didn't. He was striding off into the forest looking for bears and trying to make friends with them. Bears have quite a bit of pride and they don't take kindly to confrontations or somebody deliberately invading their territory. They are intelligent enough to know the difference between a wandering leaf-peeper keeping to a trail that smells of ten generations of humans, and a Steve Irwin wannabe deliberately leaving the beaten path, thinking every bear is Winnie the Pooh just waiting to invite him in for a small smackerel of something sweet.

    I trust the forest rangers who tell us in interviews in major newspapers that the American brown bear can be sucked up to and you have a good chance of escaping an encounter without a scratch if you assume the most humble posture your body is capable of and never look him in the eyes. I've heard the same thing said about gorillas. One of the reasons gorillas in zoos look more bedraggled than schoolteachers is that everyone who comes along stares them down.

    We've all done dumb things and it's always a shame when one of us pays the price for all of us, but I'm sure glad it was him and not me. About 30 years ago I was riding my motorcycle across South Dakota and came upon a herd of bison that was on both sides of the highway. I just slowed down a bit and motored right on between them. I learned later that I'm lucky to be alive. About ten years before that the hyacinth macaw at the L.A. zoo and I became quite fasincated with each other, him hanging on the bars trying to get his head out closer to me. I stuck my finger in the cage to pet that soft-looking down. He rather gently but forcefully took it in his beak and shoved it back out into my territory. Having watched our own much smaller blue and gold macaw devour a steak bone, I realize I'm lucky to still have that finger.

    As for mastiffs, I can't find who said it, but mastiffs did not originate in Europe. They are one of the ten or twenty ancient breeds that were first developed in central Asia when humans got the hang of animal husbandry. Their pedigree goes back about eight thousand years to the same era as the Lhasa Apso and Pekinese. At least somebody at the time foresaw the need to create dogs that were bigger than the ancestral wolf instead of nothing but lap dogs.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  11. water the sea Registered Senior Member

    I don't understand this.

    P1: Warmth is the trademark of both of you.
    P2: Both of you have the aversion for human caress.
    P3: You love your dog.
    P4: (I assume your dog loves you too.)
    C: Hm?

    If warmth is the trademark of both of you, then why the aversion for caress? One would think that if warmth is your trademark, you would like warmth. But now you have an aversion for something that you consider to be your trademark.

    Now that's a dissonance!
  12. Dr Lou Natic Unnecessary Surgeon Registered Senior Member

    She never said she had an aversion for canine carress, and gendanken doesn't actually smell or look like a human being so her dog tolerates only her, you can see how it all works out if you know the small details.

    No, I think it is (I'm a nutjob).

    Thats the thing, I regard them as positively exotic as well.
    Freakish, americans come to gawk at them and ponder over their peculiar features, but then they leave. I'd probably do that too.
    European animals just feel right. They aren't my favourite animals. The nature documentary geek in me is much more fascinated with the african and south american animals.
    But "home" to me would be a large woodland estate with foxes and badgers and herds of ungulates and wild boar and the rest.
    Its hard to explain, but it feels very woo-woo. I think the wild boars here in oz would feel it too.

    Yes, thats what I suspected.
    On the subject of dogs knowing best, I think their anti-multiculturalism stance should be given the credit it deserves.
    I'm actually a fan of exotic poontang, and competent team mates on the basketball court, but I think I could sacrifice such things for the greater good of every animal sticking to the environment that produced it.
  13. gendanken Ruler of All the Lands Valued Senior Member

    I've talked about this elsewhere.
    There is both a qualitative and emotive difference between a caress and a touch.
    A caress appears timid and unsure of itself yet bargaining for something without outright doing it- which comes off as disingenuous.
    The image- a man discoursing on quantum physics or Kerry's debate with his hand on my lap. Rubbing it and calling his superiour 'sweety'.

    A timid caress is what we feel from acquaintances. An honest touch or grasp is what we feel among friends.
    Surely you don't think touch is only defined as "caress"?
    So, just because one has an aversion to a caress does not in general mean one loathes all touch since a caress is only one form of touch.
    That aside, my pooch is a friend and can only be handled as one.

    Steve Irwin is one thing, but this guy another.
    I’ve worked in a zoo before and know all the general rules about handling the animals, though I was never allowed to- and Mr. Irwin breaks them all.
    Irwin is a provocateur- but Treadwell treated those bears with respect by keeping his distance and respecting the boundaries- did you read that the whole thing was caught on tape?
    He 'slovered' and played dead just as recommended and still got his head lopped of. His girlfriend, likewise.

    Would you say Goodall was invading the chimp's territory? There is a difference between her and Irwin as well.

    You've mistaken me for your mammy.
  14. water the sea Registered Senior Member

    Oh. I didn't know that *this* was the distinction you had in mind.

    You have come across as someone who shuns *any* human/animal contact, but gives herself in to it as act of unwilling yet desired surrender.


    I did not choose an inaccurate example! Sure, the average dog in my country sees and smells 0.0 non-Caucasians in his life (I myself have never seen a black or a Chinese up close other than on a Benetton ad) -- but dogs still display the whole scale of behaviour.

    I did say:

    I take this does not oppose the pheromones issue and pack belonging, and people training their dogs to dislike people of other races -- like you said.
  15. gendanken Ruler of All the Lands Valued Senior Member

    This is too funny not to respond:

    You, my dear, I could picture getting mauled on stage by a bunch of Negros on Ricki Lake who'd simply insist you were Hitler for saying that.
    I remember once saying “blacks” as opposed the singular “black”- all by mistake- and care to know what happened?
    Everyone I was speaking with(this was in a waiting room- people tend to get chummy in waiting rooms, simply insisting on knowing everything about you down to sniffing your damn underwear) - all got quiet on cue.
    Then they all slowly shifted away from me since I did not go back and correct it.
    Correct it??!!
    Correct what??!! An innocent letter??!

    To them, hearing the word 'blacks' from a non-black made me prejudice in that its supposed to make me think of them as furniture. Never mind that idiots are furniture and come in all shades but no- black people simply insist on their fucking martyrdom.
    Which is what I said in my other thread- you can't even *look* at people in general (usually minorities) the "wrong" way nowadays.
  16. water the sea Registered Senior Member

    Ah. There is no pc way to call a [black person/negro/African American ...?] anymore.
    Those who wish to feel vicitimized, will do so no matter what you say.

    As for the "innocent leter": what technically grammatically is only a plural form, may not have the same grammatical "innocence" as the singular.

    1. "I spoke to my wife."
    2. "I spoke to my wives."

    Sentence 1 is okay, but sentece 2 is *culturally* not okay. A similar principle seems to be behind "black" and "blacks".
    While addressing a singular person with "black" is alright, saying "blacks" is implying the *whole race*, and the black race is culturally traditionally seen as underprivileged (and it sure was); thus "blacks" does not mean 'plural of black', it means 'the black race', with the connotation 'the black race is underprivileged'. The connotative meaning took over the grammatical meaning in the plural form of the word "black".
  17. Enmos Registered Senior Member

    Priceless, Fraggle

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Do you write for a living ?
  18. tuberculatious Banned Banned

    i see that most posts were from 2004 and they actually contain information.

  19. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    For the past couple of years, yes. Writing and editing. Before that I always managed to get writing assignments periodically.
  20. tuberculatious Banned Banned

    I'm writing a novel on space chicks in space.
  21. Enmos Registered Senior Member

    Well, you do a very good job at it !

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  22. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Thanks. I work at it. I discipline myself and treat everything I write as something that will go in my portfolio. I'm sure I put more time and effort into the composition and typography of my posts than most members.

    Ironically I get more positive feedback from you guys than I do from the federal managers who are currently paying me to write.
  23. Enmos Registered Senior Member

    Your writing really stands out on this site, while your employers are likely comparing your to others in the same business.
    So it's not really a surprise that you set yourself off more here than in your business. But I've got no doubt that you're doing more than ok

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


Share This Page