Here’s what that subreddit fundamentally misunderstands. r/subredditdrama is a sub for collecting drama from *all* the subreddits around Reddit. That’s why it works. It’s content from *many* subreddits, discussed in *one* subreddit. Whereas that is *one* subreddit, to talk about *one* subreddit. All the content in there is unnecessary/incomprehensible
But the thing is, SRDD was always to cover stupidity going on here.
And yes, stupidity going on here happens.
Cause we have any sort of drama source from this. Either somebody coming from the popcorn to piss on us, people starting fights (a classic is this very thread, or leftists vs centrists, etc) and more.
There was a meme on Fark where any time an article about pitbulls or tipping came up, the first comment was always "PITBULL THREAD!!!" or "TIPPING THREAD!!!" and that was 20 years ago, so the internet never changes.
>>What a clumsy portmanteau.
In response to a rant about "pitards" is the funniest comment Ive read in a while and it has 13 downvotes? Pearls before swine.
The Reddit hater groups are always good for ridiculous, specific name calling. Pitards, carbrains, etc. You can have a sub called like r/FuckSamsung and people would be like:
"You want the new Galaxy Note? Okay 'sungboy, go to the store and tell Daddy Sammy that you want his Galaxy Scrote in your hands."
>"You want the new Galaxy Note? Okay 'sungboy, go to the store and tell Daddy Sammy that you want his Galaxy Scrote in your hands."
Absolute poetry. Beautiful.
I often wonder what makes people sub/post to subs focused on disliking something. I like architecture, so I’m subscribed to r/architecture. Why the fuck would you spend your free time on something you hate. I bet 90% of those people are not in a good place in their live.
And even though it’s been that way for like 3 years at this point, there’s still comments like “this isn’t cringe” on every post 😭 they’re so brain dead over there lmao
I mean, I can't really blame them, it's called tiktokcringe, that doesn't sound like a joke name like marijuana enthusiasts or whatever. If you've been subscribed there for years, then yeah that's dumb, but if you see it in all, I wouldn't blame such a reaction.
and yet doesn’t seem to be an issue for r/anime_titties
Considering some of the hostile responses when explained why it’s called tiktokcringe, I think a lot of commenters enjoy being obtuse
In her case, she's smart and knows what she's talking about. It's not "I FUCKING HATE HOUSES!!!", it's "these features are made out of goddamn styrofoam and will disintegrate like cotton candy in the rain" or "lawyer foyers are a terrible use of space and the opposite of cozy and inviting" or "I actually like this, but the house needs to not have 25 different 'this-es' going at once"
Hate subs are boring as fuck and full of weirdos, karma farmers, bots, or weird karma farming bots.
I think r/gme_meltdown r/buttcoin, and r/antiMLM could count as anti-subs and the primary motivation for participating is how stupid apes/crypto bros/huns can be.
But they all share a similarity in that they are about groups of financial predators who are constantly trying to attract new marks while manipulating each other. So other anti-subs will likely be different depending on the target of their ire.
People love rage bait, I can't stand it but some people constantly consume it. You'd *think* it's corrosive to your mental health to constantly consume things that anger you.
I usually skim the OP report for the funny highlights and what the comments are saying, I rarely dive into the popcorn headfirst lol. I'm more interested in the narratives going on in the parts of reddit I'm not involved in.
>I often wonder what makes people sub/post to subs focused on disliking something.
You realize that /r/subredditdrama is a sub focused on disliking things people post on other subreddits.
To be fair the vibe is more 'haha look at this ridiculous slapfight this unlikely community got in' than 'I FUCKING HATE THING WITH EVERY FIBER OF MY FUCKING BEING YET CONTINUE LOOKING AT IT OBSESSIVELY RRRRAAAAAARRGGHH!'.
I mean, any political leaning drama will bring that kind of srd users too.
Cringe on its essence is similar to that you describe "hahaha look at this weird shit, they are so weird but holy shit it's funny" but it will also attract the kind of people that goes "holy shit I hate this kind of people so much ARRRGHHH who are they I need to personally harass them".
still kinda cringe though enjoying drama but still looking down on the people it's about. Not saying I'm any better, just that everyone here probably has more in common w the people they read about than they'd like to admit
I love the SRD comments that are like “how could people spend their time in a forum making fun of people all day” like my brother in Christ please look at what subreddit you’re on
That’s were you’re wrong, I fucking love reading drama where people take shit way to seriously in some niche subreddit. Unhinged people on the internet are funny, especially when they get worked up about something truly unimportant.
Disagree.
While it is true that you will end up encountering opinions or subjects you may not like on SRD, fundamentally the focus isn’t on the subject matter, but, hear me out, the drama. And if you’re subbed to SRD, you presumably enjoy drama, the particular subject over which the Redditors are bickering over is relatively immaterial.
It’s certainly vastly different than hating cars and subscribing to arr/ FuckCars.
This isn’t so applicable to r/TikTokCringe, anymore (they allow all Tik Toks now, not just cringey ones), but it definitely applies to all those snark subs.
People join those subs just to snark at others and bitch about them.
It’s like they’re powered by hate.
Can confirm, tried to hang around the CraftSnark subreddit, discovered a subsection of people with a passionate dislike of crochet the craft and people who crochet
Needless to say, didn’t feel very welcome there
Right!?
Literally saw a comment bitching about watching someone teaching a newbie how to knit and because they were being encouraging to the newbie and saying that their finished project didn’t need to look perfect, the poster condescendingly proclaimed that the teacher must have come from crochet
The knit community scares me >> which is unfortunate as someone that wants to learn to knit
Omg but crochet and knitting are both very different forms of weaving. Do oil painters have similar beef with watercolor painters and painters who use acrylic???? Lmao wtf
The one I see on /r/all that I just don't get is the sub dedicated to hating Hilaria Baldwin. Like, why do you even know who this person is, much less care, much less care so much that you spend your time examining the minutiae of her life to find something to snark about?
Some of those subs were funny for a bit and then became a weird negative circlejerk.
Freefolk being one of my favorites for the final seasons of GOT, then like a week after the show ended it went pretty far off the deep end.
Same goes for r/childfree. I used to be an avid user before I grew up and learned not to project my problems onto the world around me.
I still hate kids, but I'm not going to rant about it.
I don’t think it’s a productive or healthy use of your time. Like I get you can care more about one thing but at a certain point, the opportunity costs become too great to justify.
Had a friend in college who spent his free arguing with flat earthers online. Literally every day. Told him to try and find enjoyment doing something else and he said “I am capable of caring about many things at the same time.” That’s the only time I’ve heard that sentiment outside the internet. Makes me disbelieve anyone who says it on Reddit because this dude spent a good 2-3 hours a day arguing with flat earthers.
It’s absolutely unhealthy to spend so much of your time complaining. Think about what that does to your mental programming? Always being negative. It’s no way to live.
It's the same for all the circlejerk subs. OK you don't like whatever sub, just unsubscribe and move on, rather than beating a dead horse over what you don't like about it.
Occasionally /r/freefolk gets suggested to me as a sub and there are still people upset over Game of Thrones ending poorly?!?
> Why the fuck would you spend your free time on something you hate.
Because to them, hating something others like makes them feel smarter and thus superior to the people that like it.
are pitbulls like Chihuahuas where they were bred for a purpose but they were instead adopted as normal pets and now everyone has one despite their health conditions not for being a pet but their original purpose
I'm pretty sure that Chihauhaus were bred to be pets. Much like the Xoloitzcuintle dog breeds *like* them existed in Mesoamerica, but nowadays they have pretty minimal amounts of native dog genes and they've been bred to look like that as the breed has otherwise gone extinct in the meantime.
Pit bulls are 4 breeds and their related mutts in a trenchcoat, so it's more complex then that even. Some were bred for dog fighting, some for hunting, and one was legitimately a show breed designed purely for appearance.
But now they've been mixed into the pit bull designation and all you can really bet on when getting a pit bull is 'big dog with some cosmetic distinctions.' Any breeding distinctions are long gone.
Pretty much. But in the case of pit bulls they (and related breeds) were originally bred to fight in pits against other dogs or bulls (often to the death). Hence the name. That's probably part of why they're so controversial.
They were bred to fight other dogs, not bulls. Their *lineage* is a cross between dogs bred to fight bulls and bears, and terriers. It was found that smaller more agile dogs were better at dog fighting.
If you've ever seen a terrier ratting then you'll understand why they're so lethal. They kill rats with a terrifying efficiency (no pun intended). When you combine the terrier agility and ferociousness with dogs bred to kill large mammals, like bears, you've got an animal that is rather scary. A pitbull.
This animal artificially selected for killing other artificially selected fighting dogs is ofc the ideal family pet.
There are videos that are like 20 mins long of a team of probably a dozen terriers and half terriers killing hundreds or even thousands of rats as farmers dig up the top layer of the soil.
1. Its interesting to see a working dog at work
2. Its interesting to see ratting dogs who specifically wont eat the rats, merely grab, shake, kill, move on.
3. There are a lot of different ratting breeds and mutts and intermixes that all succeed to various lengths, but the prey drive is immense.
4. I get anxious watching because the pitch forks used to open up the loam and tunnels are so fucking close to the dogs.
Yes I know the exact video you're talking about! It's fascinating. The rats barely get chance to think about running away before the terrier is on them.
I for one, like to provide a link to the video I’m talking about, so people can watch it, without just reading me describe it.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5_qUdwfxBVQ&pp=ygUQdGVycmllciByYXR0aW5nIA%3D%3D
My brother has this super cute, tiny wirehaired Jack Russell terrier. She's smaller than most cats and just a sweet little girl.
One day she found a rat nest in the wood pile. She massacred them in seconds without a peep.
I mean my cat was soooo docile he let me trim his nails and people thought he was a rag doll because of how much he loved being held like a baby…the first time I found a dead mouse in my bathroom I thought my cat accidentally smothered it because he loved to lay on that bath mat.
Then I started finding mutilated mice left on the bathroom floor like a grisly crime scene.
Animals are fucking crazy but I trust my 60 lb dog more than my 15 lb cat lmao.
Yehhh terriers are adorable until they find something small to just viciously murder.
My mate's have some kind of giant patterdale terrier mutt which is the size of a small lab with the temperament, prey drive and general energy of a terrier. It's insane haha.
Honestly think any justification for genociding an entire species of dogs is horrifying, Maybe make sure those who own pitbulls have training to handle them but maybe we should not mass murder animals.
On one hand, pitbulls and other dogs bred for combat are genuinely more dangerous than other breeds and most of the people who get them are criminally underprepared to train and manage them, resulting in a ton of completely unnecessary fatalities and injuries.
On the other hand, people on r/banpitbulls are legitimately insane, talking about and treating pitbulls like they are fucking xenomorphs who exist to hunt 5 year olds.
EDIT: At the end of the day I think the best way to handle this problem is a severe crackdown on back alley breeders. That shit needs to be highly regulated and heavily punished. If getting a pitbull required you to go through training and certification then rates of incidents would fall through the floor. Not to mention how many of those scummy piece of shit breeders treat pits like fashion statements for people who want to look hard, which are the absolute worst group to possibly own a pit.
> If getting a pitbull required you to go through training and certification then rates of incidents would fall through the floor.
This does leave the problem of what to do with the glut of these dogs that would sit in shelters with nobody to adopt them.
IMO thats where breeders being regulated would come in. If they where limited on the number of litters they could produce a year then that would cut down on overstuffing.
Definitely need to crack down on backyard breeders, but shelters should also stop marketing these dogs as family dogs or downplay the level of training and work it takes. Bite histories should also not be hidden for the sake of making an adoption like they are all the time.
> Bite histories should also not be hidden for the sake of making an adoption like they are all the time.
The problem is that shelters are owned and operated by people who fundamentally like dogs and want them to have long happy lives. If Kristi Noem type people ran shelters obviously we wouldn't have that problem, but Kristi Noem type people don't usually choose to work at an animal shelter. (edit: don't usually choose)
If they truly love an animal they will not lie about bite history, people not knowing about an aggressive history means they won't train with the dog and then the dog is put down because they bit someone
Yeah I get where shelter staff people are coming from - I'm an animal lover myself and love dogs lol. But human safety has to come first and it's just so unfortunate when injuries or deaths occur because adopters weren't properly informed. There has to be some kind of regulation around behavioral euthanasia criteria and adoption history transparency that shelters are forced to follow imo.
I'm not one of those people screaming eradicate the pitbulls, I've known plenty of sweet pits, but for all dogs with a documented history of dangerous behavior.. just doesn't make sense to adopt them out and cover up the history. Plus I can't imagine a life of being so anxious that you attack shit due to genetic wiring or trauma is fun for the dog either.
> On one hand, pitbulls and other dogs bred for combat are genuinely more dangerous than other breeds
Is that actually true, that there’s something genetically distinct enough?
Its both a presence of specific behavioral traits and a far stronger bite force than say, a chihuahua.
The "lock jaw" thing is a myth, but the grain of truth is that pitbulls behaviorally are far more likely to bite and hold onto a target than other dogs. Combined with their mass, instinct to do tearing motions, and strength, they are far more deadly in a bite than something like a Collie.
When other dogs bite, most of the time its meant as a "fuck off" that goes too far. When attack breeds bite, its an instinct trained to kill.
Yeah, my dad used to be a vettech and said that it's less the fact that they're more aggressive but more that when they are the ability to do severe harm is higher
(Though several less hated breeds have similar aggression and ability yet don't get the same hate but whatever)
> a ton of completely unnecessary fatalities
This is not even close to being true. According to the CDC, there are 33 fatal dog attacks per year, which is a very rare occurrence that is responsible for less deaths than lightning strikes or even deer caused vehicular deaths for that matter.
Now, that being said, for every fatality, there’s an estimated 16,000 dog bite related emergency room visits.
But when we’re talking about dog attacks, you just can’t lump in fatalities.
Dog attack deaths are basically vanishingly rare, even if pit bulls are responsible for 60% of them.
There's also the issue that people are terrible at identifying dog breeds. The average person will look at a Rottweiler or Boxer and claim it's a pit. The only "pitbull" attack to make the news in my area was an obvious Rottweiler, but the cops can't tell the difference and so it turned into a whole anti-pitbull discussion with demands to ban a breed that wasn't even involved. (There are [tons of "guess the pitbull" websites](https://www.k9rl.com/can-identify-pitbull/). Most people will fail to identify them correctly.)
Meanwhile I've had all kinds of dogs and now pretty much stick with pits because they're easy to train (if you get them young), good with cats and kids, and the shelters are full of them.
I live in a city that LOVES pitbulls, there are a number of rescue organizations that bring dogs in from other states to adopt out, I see them out and about everywhere.
Where I’m going with this is, I know of one (1) attack that has happened in the twenty years I’ve been here. I just kinda feel like with the number of pits and pit mixes here, there would be a lot more attacks if they were inherently dangerous as people claim.
I don't really like either side of the debate, at least the diehards.
Some of the pro-pitbull arguments feel really disingenuous when it comes to the reality of large/fighting dogs. I love big dogs like Huskies, but I also know that poorly trained and socialized ones can be dangerous. My own childhood husky was a big friendly dumbass who did end up ripping the ass out of someone's pants when they tried hopping our back fence.
My uncle/coworker both had rescue pit mixes that were ~~vicious murderous bastards~~ overprotective, but I've also other family/friends who have pitts that are friendly little dumbasses. If you train/socialize them well, they can be fine dogs, the problem is a lot of dog owners in general are actually kinda shit at that even if they're not abusive or training their dog to be hostile.
Yeah like I get wanting to put a stop to the horrific levels of inbreeding. But sometimes you'll just come across a normal looking picture of a dog online with people saying it should be destroyed because it isn't a poodle or golden retriever. Basically anything vaguely mastiff gets clocked as a pit bull.
> “A lot of the time, the Bully breeders are trying to hide how inbred the dogs are,”
Meanwhile you've got [Doughboy across the pond, who is 2x Pimpy 3x Bape and almost 100% inbred.](https://x.com/Kholdseid/status/1783352376243421640) Pimpy son opp.
Trying to hide how weird and fucked up their dogs are is a new thing in the world of pimpy son opp breeding. Especially bully breeders.
> while another in South London has Frank Sinatra as both its maternal and paternal grandfather.
Putting some of these dogs down would be a mercy, they're practically all horrifically inbred to the point of painful deformity at best and constant suffering in the worst cases.
[Look at this family tree.](https://x.com/Kholdseid/status/1783352376243421640)
It's a racist concept from back in ye olde days of the 1900s-1960s where if your family ancestry had a single black ancestor at any point in the family tree, you were black, and therefore "subhuman" to racists at the time. It was even used in law as part of rulings against interracial marriage.
In this instance, it's people arguing that any dog with a single pit bull ancestor is forever a pit bull and should be treated as such, which oftentimes leads into those people saying it should be put down.
TL;DR: Racism.
More specifically, it was a legal segregationist principle in the US that if you have even a single black ancestor - aka "one drop of black blood" - you are legally considered black. It was only outlawed in 1967, thanks to *Loving v. Virginia*.
It wasn't actually a law until the early 20th century (Wikipedia says Tennessee adopted it first in 1910); before that states had (for lack of a better phrase) "less strict" definitions of how ancestry affects race. The fact that this happened after the end of the Reconstruction Era and onset of Jim Crow laws is not a coincidence.
My dog also has pitbull in his genetics, and the greatest danger he poses to people is his lethal farts. He's 30lbs of pure, North American Couch Potato.
Since a lot of people are bringing this up, there's several reasons people have argued that anti-pitbull users and their arguments are often racist.
The first is that there is [high overlap ](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/s/zWL9HRg0Qq) between the anti-pitbull subreddit and other racist or prejudicial subs on Reddit.
The second is that breed specific legislation (which often target Pitbulls) has been shown to have a disproportionate [impact on POC ](https://issuu.com/lowcountrydog/docs/lowcountry_dog_magazine-_june_2021/s/12555948) specifically because of insurance and housing.
The third reason is because many academics have pointed out the historical basis behind Pitbull bans was rooted in racism and how [it carries over today](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271671737_The_Dangerous_Individual's_Dog_Race_Criminality_and_the_'Pit_Bull') The paper *The Black Man's Dog: The Social Context of Breed Specific Legislation* by Ann Linder, touches on the aforementioned impact of BSL and also goes into evidence that racial bias is a driving force behind it.
>Regardless of whether minorities are more likely to own these animals in practice, the perception that they are may still be a driving force behind the laws, coloring the decisions of legislators.
[Race, Racism and the Law ](https://racism.org/articles/basic-needs/propertyland/2334-the-black-man-s-dog-the-social-context-of-breed-specific-legislation)
[The Black Man's Dog ](https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/32171-25-1-third-articlepdf)
Exploration of the [history of the breed ](https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/26109029) and their reputation shows that race and class were major drivers behind their stigma.
>Brilliant… A powerful and disturbing book that shows how the rise of the killer-pit bull narrative reflects many broader American anxieties and pathologies surrounding race, class, and poverty…
[Pitbull: The Battle over an American Icon](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_Bull:_The_Battle_over_an_American_Icon)
Of course this doesn't mean everyone who advocates against Pitbulls is racist or that any opposition to the breed is inherently racist. But there is a definitive overlap, one that has been noticed and *studied*
A lot of the people who show up and "innocently" remark "gee golly, isn't it racist to equate anti-pitbull stances with racism" are *often* part of the anti-pitbull brigade and are attempting to bias the discussion and strawman the actual argument presented. (not all people, some are genuinely curious).
It's important to note that many POC (certainly not all) have raised and began these discussions on their own about the impact of BSL, the association of their race with owning Pitbulls even when it's not substantiated by statistics and the historical context of maligning the breed. No one is saying that discrimination against Pitbulls is "dog racism" or some equally ridiculous claim. And acknowledging (through research on racial bias) that some malcontents associate Pitbulls with PoC is not the same thing as advocating for that association.
People who are caught up in bullshit moral panics like that tend to have very socially conservative views.
There's not strong scientific evidence that breed predicts behavior and basically no veterinary organizations support breed bans.
It's basically a way of concern trolling and feeling superior without having to do much research.
>A lot of the people who show up and "innocently" remark "gee golly, isn't it racist to equate anti-pitbull stances with racism" are *often* part of the anti-pitbull brigade and are attempting to bias the discussion and strawman the actual argument presented. (not all people, some are genuinely curious).
It's the typical 4chin tactic of _"I'm not racist you're the real racist for thinking I'm racist."_ and JAQing.
Anti-pitbull people are typically racist, because they use the same "logic" and terminology when talking about pitbulls that's used to try to justify racism against black people. Those redditstats about the subs they're most likely to participate in further prove this. There's a reason their sub has a big overlap with reactionary rightwing subs. From what I've seen when I did some reseach on them, if you look at their profile, there's a good chance they also participate in subs that are typically heavily racist like 4chan, publicfreakout, greentext, stupidpol, noahgettheboat, averageredditor, politicalcompassmemes, etc.
They're most likely in this very thread with either their alt or main accounts.
Edit: Typo
On one hand, I get why pitbulls are so controversial. They were bred to be fighter dogs, and as such are dangerous if not in the hands of a responsible owner, especially when children are involved. But on the other hand, r/banpitbulls is some serious reactionary chronically online shit.
It wouldn’t be too bad of a sub if it were just a general advocacy/news sub relating to just how dangerous pitbulls can really be, but the people on that sub will see a picture of a pitbull and then go on angry tirades about how all of them deserved to be euthanized and will bigrade any posts that so much as mention pitbulls. It sounds like a pretty miserable sub to be a part of tbh
Disclaimer: I know next to nothing about dog breeds, my username is not Caninomancy. But isn't there an incident recently where a couple of pitbulls mauled a whole bunch of pregnant ewes?
Some might say "there are no bad dogs, only bad owners" and I'm inclined to agree, but is it really entirely the owner's fault when it's a complete massacre of livestock?
I mean if you don't train your dog and put it near prey livestock there's a chance it'll start killing them. See poor ol Cricket who got a bullet because the loon who owned him couldn't be bothered to train him. The only thing that changes with the breed is the size of the livestock killed.
Edit : https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/apr/26/trump-kristi-noem-shot-dog-and-goat-book More blatant reminder that a story about murdering dogs for killing livestock was in the papers not too long ago.
> The only thing that changes with the breed is the size of the livestock killed
I disagree, I don't think all breeds have the same level of fierceness. iirc certain breeds are genetically more prone to aggression, e.g., Akita vs. St. Bernard.
The problem with this is that there's different types of "aggression" and one is not predictive of the other.
You have prey-drive, which is the desire to chase (and/or kill) small mammals. This was selectively bred in some breeds (like terriers) and is less present in others (like Retrievers). This can sometimes be extrapolated to cats, because cats are small mammals and dogs don't always understand the subjective distinctions we draw between small mammal species. This means if you own a cat, some dog breeds come more recommended than others. But even some dogs with high prey-drive learn to co-exist with cats.
Then you have animal reactivity/aggression. Reactivity is often a bluster (common in timid or low confident dogs who will put on a big show to deter other animals coming near them but won't actually bite or attack). Reactivity can also be situational, like leash reactivity where a dog will bark at other dogs on leash but play fine off-leash. Barrier aggression is another form of it (becoming frustrated when there is a "barrier" like a fence between them but will be fine when the barrier is removed). True animal aggression is when a dog will actually bite/attack/maul other animals that are not prey. Bull-baiting dogs (like pirbull breeds) are theorized to potentially have a genetic predisposition towards animal aggression. This is reinforced in their use in dog fighting rings and back-yard breeders.
Human aggression is aggression towards human beings. Generally this isn't considered to be a result of selective breeding. It can be something that stems from certain conditions like rage syndrome. It's something you might also see in packs of feral dogs.
It's widely considered true that pitbulls are a high prey-drive breed (as are all terriers). It's theorized that they may be prone to animal aggression (for instance they may not be the ideal farm dog). It's not believed that they have a predisposition towards human aggression.
While some breeds have higher aggression, 'Pit Bull' isn't a real breed. It's a set of breeds and their intermixed mutts. Most pit bulls are so divorced from a functional breeding program their effectively just a big dog. Which ironically makes them slightly more dangerous than most large dog breeds because they haven't had anti human aggression bred out as strongly.
Did that pit bull hate sub just brigade the damn post or something? Yeesh. They’re powerful dogs that shouldn’t be underestimated, but they act as if they’re the spawn of satan 🙄
Anti-pitbull people brigade with lethal efficiency and really will not let go.
It's crazy.
Just a post of someone's pit that has never done anything, is well-adjusted and well trained? Insert hope you don't have a toddler screeching.
You're right, they are powerful and need extra care and thought that *some* breeds don't necessarily (but some others *do*), but there are a crazy number of pitbulls out there. The vast, vast majority of them never go on to maul a single person.
Edit: Like clockwork.
I'm so flabbergasted by the comment that anti-pitbull sentiment is a dog whistle for racism. Pitbulls, in my experience, are pretty much exclusively White People Shit.
This is one of the weird parts of pitbull drama, some people say some crazy racist shit when pits are brought up but also some people only think of pitbull owners as the whitest white women of all time with a 80 lb pit named Cuddlebug
Pitbulls are generally associated with black people in the US, and the discussion around pitbull bans is heavily tinged with racism. [This article](https://medium.com/etc-magazine/the-inherent-racism-behind-breed-specific-legislation-7e3d6d1981fb) is a pretty good intro to the topic.
And then on the other hand, there are outright racist trolls using anti-pitbull groups as cover to post memes about how pitbulls are responsible for 80% of bites while only making up 13% of the dog population or some bullshit.
I took a glance in the ban pit bulls sub and people say a lot of things that are basically along the pattern “although they are X percentage of the population they commit Y much larger percentage of violent dog attacks,” which is a little too close to a dogwhistle for my liking.
Yeah, I took a look at Ban Pitbulls and honestly I'm not seeing the 'pitbulls are a stand-in for minorities' claim. There are definitely a lot more overtly racist subs on Reddit.
in SRD in these pitbull threads theres always people (always white) claiming any pitbull criticism is racist. Even though I am a brown person living among other brown people who own pitbulls in my own neighborhood. I guess I cant have opinions on these dogs.
I’ve definitely seen a bunch of racist anti pitbull memes it’s so weird. Randomly one month on tiktok I got a bunch of “golden retriever replacement” memes it was bizarre.
Whenever I see these threads I always bring up the time my mother was nearly killed by two German Shepherds and a husky. They were very obviously not pit bulls but I bet you'll never guess what animal control classified them as. Pit bulls.
Snapshots:
1. *This Post* - [archive.org](https://web.archive.org/web/20240517085552/https://old.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1ctmmwv/pitbull_puppy_adventures/l4dn9oj/?context=3) [archive.today\*](https://archive.today/?run=1&url=https://old.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1ctmmwv/pitbull_puppy_adventures/l4dn9oj/?context=3 "URL failed to archive; click to resubmit it!")
*I am just a simple bot, __not__ a moderator of this subreddit* | *[bot subreddit](/r/SnapshillBot)* | *[contact the maintainers](/message/compose?to=/r/SnapshillBot)*
I didn't realise that Mr Worldwide was such a contentious character.
Dalé
Dale is without the accent😂
True, but without it, I would have read it as Dale, like Gayle
Dalé Earnhardt Jr.
Sure but do Dale dale?
305
You'd be surprised, I remember the Kodak riots when Give Me Everything came out.
Picture that with a Kodak
MISSA WHIRL WHY *scats in Spanish*
https://youtu.be/RSJkb-PTXJs?si=R8Z5wkTVRPM2wG7g Mr. Worldwide indeed
I saw him perform Timber with Ke$ha and it was the dumbest shit ever. Fight me.
His song with Dolly is fire though. Fight me.
Not when he performs it on tour without her.
Ah yes, i’m sure this time it will get resolved
I'll see y'all in r/subredditdramadrama in a few hours.
There's probably 200 "see you in /r/SubredditDramaDrama" comments for every actual post in that sub.
That sub is unnecessary IMO We’re all already here. Duke it out.
So slapfights at high noon it is, pardner
What time zone tho?
*Yes*
One day it'll actually get posted... Eventually
Here’s what that subreddit fundamentally misunderstands. r/subredditdrama is a sub for collecting drama from *all* the subreddits around Reddit. That’s why it works. It’s content from *many* subreddits, discussed in *one* subreddit. Whereas that is *one* subreddit, to talk about *one* subreddit. All the content in there is unnecessary/incomprehensible
But the thing is, SRDD was always to cover stupidity going on here. And yes, stupidity going on here happens. Cause we have any sort of drama source from this. Either somebody coming from the popcorn to piss on us, people starting fights (a classic is this very thread, or leftists vs centrists, etc) and more.
There was a meme on Fark where any time an article about pitbulls or tipping came up, the first comment was always "PITBULL THREAD!!!" or "TIPPING THREAD!!!" and that was 20 years ago, so the internet never changes.
>>What a clumsy portmanteau. In response to a rant about "pitards" is the funniest comment Ive read in a while and it has 13 downvotes? Pearls before swine.
The Reddit hater groups are always good for ridiculous, specific name calling. Pitards, carbrains, etc. You can have a sub called like r/FuckSamsung and people would be like: "You want the new Galaxy Note? Okay 'sungboy, go to the store and tell Daddy Sammy that you want his Galaxy Scrote in your hands."
>"You want the new Galaxy Note? Okay 'sungboy, go to the store and tell Daddy Sammy that you want his Galaxy Scrote in your hands." Absolute poetry. Beautiful.
I’m crying this is so fucking funny
It’s hilarious with how angry it is.
it might be the fact that i'm drunk but i'm crying laughing at galaxy scrote
Someone forgot to take their galaxatives today
You’re a poet.
"pitnutters" is a close contender.
I like that because it sounds like an upper midwest dessert. "Im making some puppy chow, some buckeyes, and a batch of pitnutters in the oven"
Would
Ive seen “piggers” once
💀
Also a great reference to one of paul f tompkins characters on comedy bang bang
Captain Jean luc Picard
Why did I think this was going to be about Mr Worldwide?
I often wonder what makes people sub/post to subs focused on disliking something. I like architecture, so I’m subscribed to r/architecture. Why the fuck would you spend your free time on something you hate. I bet 90% of those people are not in a good place in their live.
This is just the general tiktok sub now, however I can’t confirm the mental state of its users lol
And even though it’s been that way for like 3 years at this point, there’s still comments like “this isn’t cringe” on every post 😭 they’re so brain dead over there lmao
I mean, I can't really blame them, it's called tiktokcringe, that doesn't sound like a joke name like marijuana enthusiasts or whatever. If you've been subscribed there for years, then yeah that's dumb, but if you see it in all, I wouldn't blame such a reaction.
and yet doesn’t seem to be an issue for r/anime_titties Considering some of the hostile responses when explained why it’s called tiktokcringe, I think a lot of commenters enjoy being obtuse
They have a pinned mod note about how it’s not just for cringe anymore on every post though 😭
Pfft ok, nevermind. I still think it's kinda dumb, they should've just made a new sub or something, I don't get why they didn't.
They asked the sub whether or not they should and the sub said that they didn’t want that
I figured they were talking about /r/BanPitBulls and not /r/TikTokCringe
If you're a fan of architecture then how can you not like McMansion Hell?
Fair point, love that sub/blog
In her case, she's smart and knows what she's talking about. It's not "I FUCKING HATE HOUSES!!!", it's "these features are made out of goddamn styrofoam and will disintegrate like cotton candy in the rain" or "lawyer foyers are a terrible use of space and the opposite of cozy and inviting" or "I actually like this, but the house needs to not have 25 different 'this-es' going at once" Hate subs are boring as fuck and full of weirdos, karma farmers, bots, or weird karma farming bots.
I think r/gme_meltdown r/buttcoin, and r/antiMLM could count as anti-subs and the primary motivation for participating is how stupid apes/crypto bros/huns can be. But they all share a similarity in that they are about groups of financial predators who are constantly trying to attract new marks while manipulating each other. So other anti-subs will likely be different depending on the target of their ire.
People love rage bait, I can't stand it but some people constantly consume it. You'd *think* it's corrosive to your mental health to constantly consume things that anger you.
Oh no, it is corrosive. It's just that poison tastes rather sweet.
A twink spider told me all about it
Do I wanna know???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcaaDTNP4d8 NSFW.
I mean isn't that kind of why we're here?
I usually skim the OP report for the funny highlights and what the comments are saying, I rarely dive into the popcorn headfirst lol. I'm more interested in the narratives going on in the parts of reddit I'm not involved in.
LOL, exactly. This is just one step away from a hater sub, but just a little more haha hater than hate hater.
It's different. We're *smug* haters, not angry haters
>I often wonder what makes people sub/post to subs focused on disliking something. You realize that /r/subredditdrama is a sub focused on disliking things people post on other subreddits.
To be fair the vibe is more 'haha look at this ridiculous slapfight this unlikely community got in' than 'I FUCKING HATE THING WITH EVERY FIBER OF MY FUCKING BEING YET CONTINUE LOOKING AT IT OBSESSIVELY RRRRAAAAAARRGGHH!'.
That's fair.
I mean, any political leaning drama will bring that kind of srd users too. Cringe on its essence is similar to that you describe "hahaha look at this weird shit, they are so weird but holy shit it's funny" but it will also attract the kind of people that goes "holy shit I hate this kind of people so much ARRRGHHH who are they I need to personally harass them".
still kinda cringe though enjoying drama but still looking down on the people it's about. Not saying I'm any better, just that everyone here probably has more in common w the people they read about than they'd like to admit
I love the SRD comments that are like “how could people spend their time in a forum making fun of people all day” like my brother in Christ please look at what subreddit you’re on
>SRD mfs being clueless part 2/50
I always thought this sub was for nosy people who like listening in on drama (Maybe that's just me though)
That’s were you’re wrong, I fucking love reading drama where people take shit way to seriously in some niche subreddit. Unhinged people on the internet are funny, especially when they get worked up about something truly unimportant.
Disagree. While it is true that you will end up encountering opinions or subjects you may not like on SRD, fundamentally the focus isn’t on the subject matter, but, hear me out, the drama. And if you’re subbed to SRD, you presumably enjoy drama, the particular subject over which the Redditors are bickering over is relatively immaterial. It’s certainly vastly different than hating cars and subscribing to arr/ FuckCars.
The drama is the main draw, the backdrop of the drama is immaterial
not really. Its pretty much the same and you look silly trying to differentiate them.
Not a fan of r/FuckDoricColumns I take it?
Ionic or fucking nothing.
This Corinthian erasure will not stand!
I'm furious that I clicked that.
This isn’t so applicable to r/TikTokCringe, anymore (they allow all Tik Toks now, not just cringey ones), but it definitely applies to all those snark subs. People join those subs just to snark at others and bitch about them. It’s like they’re powered by hate.
Can confirm, tried to hang around the CraftSnark subreddit, discovered a subsection of people with a passionate dislike of crochet the craft and people who crochet Needless to say, didn’t feel very welcome there
It really should be called KnittingSnark. I didn’t stay long either.
Right!? Literally saw a comment bitching about watching someone teaching a newbie how to knit and because they were being encouraging to the newbie and saying that their finished project didn’t need to look perfect, the poster condescendingly proclaimed that the teacher must have come from crochet The knit community scares me >> which is unfortunate as someone that wants to learn to knit
Omg but crochet and knitting are both very different forms of weaving. Do oil painters have similar beef with watercolor painters and painters who use acrylic???? Lmao wtf
The one I see on /r/all that I just don't get is the sub dedicated to hating Hilaria Baldwin. Like, why do you even know who this person is, much less care, much less care so much that you spend your time examining the minutiae of her life to find something to snark about?
Hate is a potent energy source.
Some of those subs were funny for a bit and then became a weird negative circlejerk. Freefolk being one of my favorites for the final seasons of GOT, then like a week after the show ended it went pretty far off the deep end.
Same goes for r/childfree. I used to be an avid user before I grew up and learned not to project my problems onto the world around me. I still hate kids, but I'm not going to rant about it.
I don’t think it’s a productive or healthy use of your time. Like I get you can care more about one thing but at a certain point, the opportunity costs become too great to justify. Had a friend in college who spent his free arguing with flat earthers online. Literally every day. Told him to try and find enjoyment doing something else and he said “I am capable of caring about many things at the same time.” That’s the only time I’ve heard that sentiment outside the internet. Makes me disbelieve anyone who says it on Reddit because this dude spent a good 2-3 hours a day arguing with flat earthers.
It’s absolutely unhealthy to spend so much of your time complaining. Think about what that does to your mental programming? Always being negative. It’s no way to live.
Hate drives engagement
/r/FrankLloydWrong
Someone else already linked r/mcmansionhell to prove me wrong
It's the same for all the circlejerk subs. OK you don't like whatever sub, just unsubscribe and move on, rather than beating a dead horse over what you don't like about it. Occasionally /r/freefolk gets suggested to me as a sub and there are still people upset over Game of Thrones ending poorly?!?
freefolk isn't really a hater sub anymore. It's mostly GOT memes/shitposting and more fun discussion.
Outrage tourism is absolutely a thing.
And this is why I have a lot of subreddits muted on r/all
r/fuckbrutalism
> Why the fuck would you spend your free time on something you hate. Because to them, hating something others like makes them feel smarter and thus superior to the people that like it.
In my experience, every online community that exists solely to be *against* something is never worth participating in
It's the age old "stop liking what I don't like!".
are pitbulls like Chihuahuas where they were bred for a purpose but they were instead adopted as normal pets and now everyone has one despite their health conditions not for being a pet but their original purpose
I'm pretty sure that Chihauhaus were bred to be pets. Much like the Xoloitzcuintle dog breeds *like* them existed in Mesoamerica, but nowadays they have pretty minimal amounts of native dog genes and they've been bred to look like that as the breed has otherwise gone extinct in the meantime.
Pit bulls are 4 breeds and their related mutts in a trenchcoat, so it's more complex then that even. Some were bred for dog fighting, some for hunting, and one was legitimately a show breed designed purely for appearance. But now they've been mixed into the pit bull designation and all you can really bet on when getting a pit bull is 'big dog with some cosmetic distinctions.' Any breeding distinctions are long gone.
Pretty much. But in the case of pit bulls they (and related breeds) were originally bred to fight in pits against other dogs or bulls (often to the death). Hence the name. That's probably part of why they're so controversial.
They were bred to fight other dogs, not bulls. Their *lineage* is a cross between dogs bred to fight bulls and bears, and terriers. It was found that smaller more agile dogs were better at dog fighting. If you've ever seen a terrier ratting then you'll understand why they're so lethal. They kill rats with a terrifying efficiency (no pun intended). When you combine the terrier agility and ferociousness with dogs bred to kill large mammals, like bears, you've got an animal that is rather scary. A pitbull. This animal artificially selected for killing other artificially selected fighting dogs is ofc the ideal family pet.
There are videos that are like 20 mins long of a team of probably a dozen terriers and half terriers killing hundreds or even thousands of rats as farmers dig up the top layer of the soil. 1. Its interesting to see a working dog at work 2. Its interesting to see ratting dogs who specifically wont eat the rats, merely grab, shake, kill, move on. 3. There are a lot of different ratting breeds and mutts and intermixes that all succeed to various lengths, but the prey drive is immense. 4. I get anxious watching because the pitch forks used to open up the loam and tunnels are so fucking close to the dogs.
Yes I know the exact video you're talking about! It's fascinating. The rats barely get chance to think about running away before the terrier is on them.
I for one, like to provide a link to the video I’m talking about, so people can watch it, without just reading me describe it. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5_qUdwfxBVQ&pp=ygUQdGVycmllciByYXR0aW5nIA%3D%3D
Turns out there's loads of these videos on youtube! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH8ZssRGfSs Think that's the one I was thinking of.
My brother has this super cute, tiny wirehaired Jack Russell terrier. She's smaller than most cats and just a sweet little girl. One day she found a rat nest in the wood pile. She massacred them in seconds without a peep.
I mean my cat was soooo docile he let me trim his nails and people thought he was a rag doll because of how much he loved being held like a baby…the first time I found a dead mouse in my bathroom I thought my cat accidentally smothered it because he loved to lay on that bath mat. Then I started finding mutilated mice left on the bathroom floor like a grisly crime scene. Animals are fucking crazy but I trust my 60 lb dog more than my 15 lb cat lmao.
Yehhh terriers are adorable until they find something small to just viciously murder. My mate's have some kind of giant patterdale terrier mutt which is the size of a small lab with the temperament, prey drive and general energy of a terrier. It's insane haha.
Honestly think any justification for genociding an entire species of dogs is horrifying, Maybe make sure those who own pitbulls have training to handle them but maybe we should not mass murder animals.
They’re a domestic animal that exists because of human intervention. Using the word “genocide” in that context is extremely fucked.
On one hand, pitbulls and other dogs bred for combat are genuinely more dangerous than other breeds and most of the people who get them are criminally underprepared to train and manage them, resulting in a ton of completely unnecessary fatalities and injuries. On the other hand, people on r/banpitbulls are legitimately insane, talking about and treating pitbulls like they are fucking xenomorphs who exist to hunt 5 year olds. EDIT: At the end of the day I think the best way to handle this problem is a severe crackdown on back alley breeders. That shit needs to be highly regulated and heavily punished. If getting a pitbull required you to go through training and certification then rates of incidents would fall through the floor. Not to mention how many of those scummy piece of shit breeders treat pits like fashion statements for people who want to look hard, which are the absolute worst group to possibly own a pit.
> If getting a pitbull required you to go through training and certification then rates of incidents would fall through the floor. This does leave the problem of what to do with the glut of these dogs that would sit in shelters with nobody to adopt them.
IMO thats where breeders being regulated would come in. If they where limited on the number of litters they could produce a year then that would cut down on overstuffing.
Definitely need to crack down on backyard breeders, but shelters should also stop marketing these dogs as family dogs or downplay the level of training and work it takes. Bite histories should also not be hidden for the sake of making an adoption like they are all the time.
Absolutely agree, people need to understand what they are getting into
> Bite histories should also not be hidden for the sake of making an adoption like they are all the time. The problem is that shelters are owned and operated by people who fundamentally like dogs and want them to have long happy lives. If Kristi Noem type people ran shelters obviously we wouldn't have that problem, but Kristi Noem type people don't usually choose to work at an animal shelter. (edit: don't usually choose)
If they truly love an animal they will not lie about bite history, people not knowing about an aggressive history means they won't train with the dog and then the dog is put down because they bit someone
Love can unfortunately mean lying to yourself about what a person or animal is like.
True but I wish they had some foresight on how lying can directly kill them
Yeah I get where shelter staff people are coming from - I'm an animal lover myself and love dogs lol. But human safety has to come first and it's just so unfortunate when injuries or deaths occur because adopters weren't properly informed. There has to be some kind of regulation around behavioral euthanasia criteria and adoption history transparency that shelters are forced to follow imo. I'm not one of those people screaming eradicate the pitbulls, I've known plenty of sweet pits, but for all dogs with a documented history of dangerous behavior.. just doesn't make sense to adopt them out and cover up the history. Plus I can't imagine a life of being so anxious that you attack shit due to genetic wiring or trauma is fun for the dog either.
> On one hand, pitbulls and other dogs bred for combat are genuinely more dangerous than other breeds Is that actually true, that there’s something genetically distinct enough?
Its both a presence of specific behavioral traits and a far stronger bite force than say, a chihuahua. The "lock jaw" thing is a myth, but the grain of truth is that pitbulls behaviorally are far more likely to bite and hold onto a target than other dogs. Combined with their mass, instinct to do tearing motions, and strength, they are far more deadly in a bite than something like a Collie. When other dogs bite, most of the time its meant as a "fuck off" that goes too far. When attack breeds bite, its an instinct trained to kill.
Yeah, my dad used to be a vettech and said that it's less the fact that they're more aggressive but more that when they are the ability to do severe harm is higher (Though several less hated breeds have similar aggression and ability yet don't get the same hate but whatever)
> a ton of completely unnecessary fatalities This is not even close to being true. According to the CDC, there are 33 fatal dog attacks per year, which is a very rare occurrence that is responsible for less deaths than lightning strikes or even deer caused vehicular deaths for that matter. Now, that being said, for every fatality, there’s an estimated 16,000 dog bite related emergency room visits. But when we’re talking about dog attacks, you just can’t lump in fatalities. Dog attack deaths are basically vanishingly rare, even if pit bulls are responsible for 60% of them.
There's also the issue that people are terrible at identifying dog breeds. The average person will look at a Rottweiler or Boxer and claim it's a pit. The only "pitbull" attack to make the news in my area was an obvious Rottweiler, but the cops can't tell the difference and so it turned into a whole anti-pitbull discussion with demands to ban a breed that wasn't even involved. (There are [tons of "guess the pitbull" websites](https://www.k9rl.com/can-identify-pitbull/). Most people will fail to identify them correctly.) Meanwhile I've had all kinds of dogs and now pretty much stick with pits because they're easy to train (if you get them young), good with cats and kids, and the shelters are full of them.
I live in a city that LOVES pitbulls, there are a number of rescue organizations that bring dogs in from other states to adopt out, I see them out and about everywhere. Where I’m going with this is, I know of one (1) attack that has happened in the twenty years I’ve been here. I just kinda feel like with the number of pits and pit mixes here, there would be a lot more attacks if they were inherently dangerous as people claim.
Bunch of Michael Vick bot accounts
I love pitbull drama it always devolves into the one drop rule for dogs
I don't really like either side of the debate, at least the diehards. Some of the pro-pitbull arguments feel really disingenuous when it comes to the reality of large/fighting dogs. I love big dogs like Huskies, but I also know that poorly trained and socialized ones can be dangerous. My own childhood husky was a big friendly dumbass who did end up ripping the ass out of someone's pants when they tried hopping our back fence. My uncle/coworker both had rescue pit mixes that were ~~vicious murderous bastards~~ overprotective, but I've also other family/friends who have pitts that are friendly little dumbasses. If you train/socialize them well, they can be fine dogs, the problem is a lot of dog owners in general are actually kinda shit at that even if they're not abusive or training their dog to be hostile.
Yeah like I get wanting to put a stop to the horrific levels of inbreeding. But sometimes you'll just come across a normal looking picture of a dog online with people saying it should be destroyed because it isn't a poodle or golden retriever. Basically anything vaguely mastiff gets clocked as a pit bull.
"it's a combat dog" lol
It devolves into people saying “it’s simple genetics” for genetics that aren’t that simple at all.
Any descendant from Killer Kimbo should be put down https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/killer-kimbo-xl-bully-half-of-uk-pets-descended-one-us-dog/
> “A lot of the time, the Bully breeders are trying to hide how inbred the dogs are,” Meanwhile you've got [Doughboy across the pond, who is 2x Pimpy 3x Bape and almost 100% inbred.](https://x.com/Kholdseid/status/1783352376243421640) Pimpy son opp. Trying to hide how weird and fucked up their dogs are is a new thing in the world of pimpy son opp breeding. Especially bully breeders.
THIS is where that fucking meme came from! I knew that the Tiktok gibberish genre always pull from some real source
So the whole thing where those dogs have really wide front legs. Do people specifically breed for that or is that just a natural trait?
I love pitbull drama it always devolves into the one drop rule for dogs
> while another in South London has Frank Sinatra as both its maternal and paternal grandfather. Putting some of these dogs down would be a mercy, they're practically all horrifically inbred to the point of painful deformity at best and constant suffering in the worst cases. [Look at this family tree.](https://x.com/Kholdseid/status/1783352376243421640)
Why's it always "put down the dogs" and not "stricter breeding regulations to prevent animal suffering."
Why not both?
What's the one drop rule?
It's a racist concept from back in ye olde days of the 1900s-1960s where if your family ancestry had a single black ancestor at any point in the family tree, you were black, and therefore "subhuman" to racists at the time. It was even used in law as part of rulings against interracial marriage. In this instance, it's people arguing that any dog with a single pit bull ancestor is forever a pit bull and should be treated as such, which oftentimes leads into those people saying it should be put down.
Thank you for your explanation!
TL;DR: Racism. More specifically, it was a legal segregationist principle in the US that if you have even a single black ancestor - aka "one drop of black blood" - you are legally considered black. It was only outlawed in 1967, thanks to *Loving v. Virginia*. It wasn't actually a law until the early 20th century (Wikipedia says Tennessee adopted it first in 1910); before that states had (for lack of a better phrase) "less strict" definitions of how ancestry affects race. The fact that this happened after the end of the Reconstruction Era and onset of Jim Crow laws is not a coincidence.
Damn, I didn't know it went into that level of depth/hatred. Thank you for the explanation, I appreciate it
My dog is an 9% pit bull, all 27 pounds of him. I guess it’s time for him to go. Who knows when that 9% will overtake his Velcro personality!
My dog also has pitbull in his genetics, and the greatest danger he poses to people is his lethal farts. He's 30lbs of pure, North American Couch Potato.
Lol exactly how mine is. Much less farty than my Boston Terrier was those, that is for sure.
Mine has to take probiotics, so I imagine that has a lot to do with it
Since a lot of people are bringing this up, there's several reasons people have argued that anti-pitbull users and their arguments are often racist. The first is that there is [high overlap ](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/s/zWL9HRg0Qq) between the anti-pitbull subreddit and other racist or prejudicial subs on Reddit. The second is that breed specific legislation (which often target Pitbulls) has been shown to have a disproportionate [impact on POC ](https://issuu.com/lowcountrydog/docs/lowcountry_dog_magazine-_june_2021/s/12555948) specifically because of insurance and housing. The third reason is because many academics have pointed out the historical basis behind Pitbull bans was rooted in racism and how [it carries over today](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271671737_The_Dangerous_Individual's_Dog_Race_Criminality_and_the_'Pit_Bull') The paper *The Black Man's Dog: The Social Context of Breed Specific Legislation* by Ann Linder, touches on the aforementioned impact of BSL and also goes into evidence that racial bias is a driving force behind it. >Regardless of whether minorities are more likely to own these animals in practice, the perception that they are may still be a driving force behind the laws, coloring the decisions of legislators. [Race, Racism and the Law ](https://racism.org/articles/basic-needs/propertyland/2334-the-black-man-s-dog-the-social-context-of-breed-specific-legislation) [The Black Man's Dog ](https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/32171-25-1-third-articlepdf) Exploration of the [history of the breed ](https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/26109029) and their reputation shows that race and class were major drivers behind their stigma. >Brilliant… A powerful and disturbing book that shows how the rise of the killer-pit bull narrative reflects many broader American anxieties and pathologies surrounding race, class, and poverty… [Pitbull: The Battle over an American Icon](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_Bull:_The_Battle_over_an_American_Icon) Of course this doesn't mean everyone who advocates against Pitbulls is racist or that any opposition to the breed is inherently racist. But there is a definitive overlap, one that has been noticed and *studied* A lot of the people who show up and "innocently" remark "gee golly, isn't it racist to equate anti-pitbull stances with racism" are *often* part of the anti-pitbull brigade and are attempting to bias the discussion and strawman the actual argument presented. (not all people, some are genuinely curious). It's important to note that many POC (certainly not all) have raised and began these discussions on their own about the impact of BSL, the association of their race with owning Pitbulls even when it's not substantiated by statistics and the historical context of maligning the breed. No one is saying that discrimination against Pitbulls is "dog racism" or some equally ridiculous claim. And acknowledging (through research on racial bias) that some malcontents associate Pitbulls with PoC is not the same thing as advocating for that association.
People who are caught up in bullshit moral panics like that tend to have very socially conservative views. There's not strong scientific evidence that breed predicts behavior and basically no veterinary organizations support breed bans. It's basically a way of concern trolling and feeling superior without having to do much research.
Can we make a rule that white people cant point to black people when we talk about pitbulls? That seems more than fair.
Fantastic write up. Thank you.
>A lot of the people who show up and "innocently" remark "gee golly, isn't it racist to equate anti-pitbull stances with racism" are *often* part of the anti-pitbull brigade and are attempting to bias the discussion and strawman the actual argument presented. (not all people, some are genuinely curious). It's the typical 4chin tactic of _"I'm not racist you're the real racist for thinking I'm racist."_ and JAQing. Anti-pitbull people are typically racist, because they use the same "logic" and terminology when talking about pitbulls that's used to try to justify racism against black people. Those redditstats about the subs they're most likely to participate in further prove this. There's a reason their sub has a big overlap with reactionary rightwing subs. From what I've seen when I did some reseach on them, if you look at their profile, there's a good chance they also participate in subs that are typically heavily racist like 4chan, publicfreakout, greentext, stupidpol, noahgettheboat, averageredditor, politicalcompassmemes, etc. They're most likely in this very thread with either their alt or main accounts. Edit: Typo
On one hand, I get why pitbulls are so controversial. They were bred to be fighter dogs, and as such are dangerous if not in the hands of a responsible owner, especially when children are involved. But on the other hand, r/banpitbulls is some serious reactionary chronically online shit. It wouldn’t be too bad of a sub if it were just a general advocacy/news sub relating to just how dangerous pitbulls can really be, but the people on that sub will see a picture of a pitbull and then go on angry tirades about how all of them deserved to be euthanized and will bigrade any posts that so much as mention pitbulls. It sounds like a pretty miserable sub to be a part of tbh
Most of the comments are from the same username.
Disclaimer: I know next to nothing about dog breeds, my username is not Caninomancy. But isn't there an incident recently where a couple of pitbulls mauled a whole bunch of pregnant ewes? Some might say "there are no bad dogs, only bad owners" and I'm inclined to agree, but is it really entirely the owner's fault when it's a complete massacre of livestock?
I mean if you don't train your dog and put it near prey livestock there's a chance it'll start killing them. See poor ol Cricket who got a bullet because the loon who owned him couldn't be bothered to train him. The only thing that changes with the breed is the size of the livestock killed. Edit : https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/apr/26/trump-kristi-noem-shot-dog-and-goat-book More blatant reminder that a story about murdering dogs for killing livestock was in the papers not too long ago.
> The only thing that changes with the breed is the size of the livestock killed I disagree, I don't think all breeds have the same level of fierceness. iirc certain breeds are genetically more prone to aggression, e.g., Akita vs. St. Bernard.
The problem with this is that there's different types of "aggression" and one is not predictive of the other. You have prey-drive, which is the desire to chase (and/or kill) small mammals. This was selectively bred in some breeds (like terriers) and is less present in others (like Retrievers). This can sometimes be extrapolated to cats, because cats are small mammals and dogs don't always understand the subjective distinctions we draw between small mammal species. This means if you own a cat, some dog breeds come more recommended than others. But even some dogs with high prey-drive learn to co-exist with cats. Then you have animal reactivity/aggression. Reactivity is often a bluster (common in timid or low confident dogs who will put on a big show to deter other animals coming near them but won't actually bite or attack). Reactivity can also be situational, like leash reactivity where a dog will bark at other dogs on leash but play fine off-leash. Barrier aggression is another form of it (becoming frustrated when there is a "barrier" like a fence between them but will be fine when the barrier is removed). True animal aggression is when a dog will actually bite/attack/maul other animals that are not prey. Bull-baiting dogs (like pirbull breeds) are theorized to potentially have a genetic predisposition towards animal aggression. This is reinforced in their use in dog fighting rings and back-yard breeders. Human aggression is aggression towards human beings. Generally this isn't considered to be a result of selective breeding. It can be something that stems from certain conditions like rage syndrome. It's something you might also see in packs of feral dogs. It's widely considered true that pitbulls are a high prey-drive breed (as are all terriers). It's theorized that they may be prone to animal aggression (for instance they may not be the ideal farm dog). It's not believed that they have a predisposition towards human aggression.
While some breeds have higher aggression, 'Pit Bull' isn't a real breed. It's a set of breeds and their intermixed mutts. Most pit bulls are so divorced from a functional breeding program their effectively just a big dog. Which ironically makes them slightly more dangerous than most large dog breeds because they haven't had anti human aggression bred out as strongly.
Did that pit bull hate sub just brigade the damn post or something? Yeesh. They’re powerful dogs that shouldn’t be underestimated, but they act as if they’re the spawn of satan 🙄
The anti-pitbull group have a separate Discord server where they organize and they brigade any post that mentions the breed.
That is absolutely psychotic.
They brigade anything about pitbulls. I actually an shocked that sub hasn't been banned yet for brigading alone.
Anti-pitbull people brigade with lethal efficiency and really will not let go. It's crazy. Just a post of someone's pit that has never done anything, is well-adjusted and well trained? Insert hope you don't have a toddler screeching. You're right, they are powerful and need extra care and thought that *some* breeds don't necessarily (but some others *do*), but there are a crazy number of pitbulls out there. The vast, vast majority of them never go on to maul a single person. Edit: Like clockwork.
>Cute puppy. It's kinda like seeing pictures of baby hitler though https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/s/ot4AwBjtpr
Yoink
Nice grab.
They brigade like crazy yeah. Dunno if this is an instance of it but they're known to be heavy brigaders.
They apparently have a discord server where they share posts for people to brigade
Damn, imagine caring that much about hating a singular dog breed.
No idea if this is true, but I heard a claim there’s a 4chan group that does it as an anti-Black dogwhistling thing
It wouldn't surprise me. Anyone who's weird about pittbulls is inevitably weird about a host of other things. That train is always on time.
It helps if you have a misplaced sense of justice and a history of concussions
I'm so flabbergasted by the comment that anti-pitbull sentiment is a dog whistle for racism. Pitbulls, in my experience, are pretty much exclusively White People Shit.
This is one of the weird parts of pitbull drama, some people say some crazy racist shit when pits are brought up but also some people only think of pitbull owners as the whitest white women of all time with a 80 lb pit named Cuddlebug
[this comment ](https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/s/UHg8g7WNQN) explains it fairly well
Pitbulls are generally associated with black people in the US, and the discussion around pitbull bans is heavily tinged with racism. [This article](https://medium.com/etc-magazine/the-inherent-racism-behind-breed-specific-legislation-7e3d6d1981fb) is a pretty good intro to the topic. And then on the other hand, there are outright racist trolls using anti-pitbull groups as cover to post memes about how pitbulls are responsible for 80% of bites while only making up 13% of the dog population or some bullshit.
I took a glance in the ban pit bulls sub and people say a lot of things that are basically along the pattern “although they are X percentage of the population they commit Y much larger percentage of violent dog attacks,” which is a little too close to a dogwhistle for my liking.
Yeah, I took a look at Ban Pitbulls and honestly I'm not seeing the 'pitbulls are a stand-in for minorities' claim. There are definitely a lot more overtly racist subs on Reddit.
in SRD in these pitbull threads theres always people (always white) claiming any pitbull criticism is racist. Even though I am a brown person living among other brown people who own pitbulls in my own neighborhood. I guess I cant have opinions on these dogs.
Yeah, but the dude linked a 24 page pdf I'm not going to read, so it must be true.
I can’t believe someone say anti pitbull is a dog whistle for racism and can’t see the racism in this belief.
I’ve definitely seen a bunch of racist anti pitbull memes it’s so weird. Randomly one month on tiktok I got a bunch of “golden retriever replacement” memes it was bizarre.
You can find racist people on both side of this debate, but in of itself it has nothing to do with racism.
There's literally books written on this by POC civil rights authors. This is peak the real racism is people who talk about racism.
Imo that claim goes a bit far but what’s racist about believing that??
I've seen it before from them. They use it as a stand in for black and Hispanic people a lot
German shepherds are more dangerous anyway
Whenever I see these threads I always bring up the time my mother was nearly killed by two German Shepherds and a husky. They were very obviously not pit bulls but I bet you'll never guess what animal control classified them as. Pit bulls.
When I was a kid, Rottweilers were the boogeydog
Snapshots: 1. *This Post* - [archive.org](https://web.archive.org/web/20240517085552/https://old.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1ctmmwv/pitbull_puppy_adventures/l4dn9oj/?context=3) [archive.today\*](https://archive.today/?run=1&url=https://old.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1ctmmwv/pitbull_puppy_adventures/l4dn9oj/?context=3 "URL failed to archive; click to resubmit it!") *I am just a simple bot, __not__ a moderator of this subreddit* | *[bot subreddit](/r/SnapshillBot)* | *[contact the maintainers](/message/compose?to=/r/SnapshillBot)*