File :-(, x, )
are unnatural races animal cruelty? Anonymous
What is your opinion about human created animal races that are way different from their natural look? Such as those hairless cats, really odd dogs etc. Is it sometimes ok, or animal cruelty?
>> Anonymous
Depends what they are used for and if they are treated well
>> Anonymous
>>44867
All domesticated animals are human creations. Most domesticated animals are drastically different from their wild anticedents. Most people who think "strange" breeds are immoral define "strange" as "looks different from the more common, but also invented, morphology of this domestic animal"
>> Anonymous
As manmade as they may be, unlike many wild species they have found a way to survive with humanity.
We breed them.
>> Anonymous
Firstly, the animals chose to breed with each other. Secondly, looking different from normal is on about the same level as snuggling as cruelty goes.
>> Anonymous
As long as they taste good. It's all good.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
"like OMG you guys, leafcutter ants make their own unnatural race of fungi! Is this fungi cruelty?!!"

>>44873is right.
Organisms mutate, produce weird offspring, and manipulate other organisms all the time. So whether or not an animal appears different from their "natural look" is not a problem in itself, as long as the animal isn't suffering heavily as a direct result.
>> Anonymous
>>44880
what about artifical insemenation?
>> Anonymous
>>44880

Ummmm, no. Dog breeders make sure which dogs fuck each other. There have also been breeds created by forcing the puppies to grow up in extremely tiny cages to create smaller breeds.
>> Anonymous
>>44890
Looks like you believe in Lamarckian crap. No, you can't create a breed by sticking dogs in tiny cages or cutting their tails. Those traits won't carry over the next generation. On the other hand, the results can be visually pleasing.
>> Voleta
>>44890

You make my head asplode
>> Anonymous
>>44890
You can't create a breed of dog by sticking it in a small cage. You are only altering it physically, not genetically. The dog has the genes to be big; an outside force is forcing it to remain small, but it's not changing its genetic makeup. Therefore, you are only altering the individual.
>> Anonymous
Hairless cats were a natural mutation found in Canada in 1966.
>> Anonymous
>>44890
You can't MAKE two animals have sex, as we've seen with pandas. The only reason it's easy to breed dogs is because they love to fuck everything in sight. The fact remains that they're choosing to have sex with each other even if you did play matchmaker.
>> kato
>>44920
for certain domestic animals (cattle, horses e.g.), artificial insemination is the _norm_ these days in breeding. there's zero choice involved for the animals in question. with dogs, artificial insemination is commonly used with highly-priced individuals.
>> Anonymous
>>44924
That's a fair point. On the other hand, most of the breeds in question predate that practice, so even if we could agree that this sort of thing was bad in the case where artificial insemination was used it wouldn't say that it was bad in general, or that it was any worse than any other case in which artificial insemination was employed.
>> Anonymous
Breeding animals to look different just because you can and are board is cruelty. Some of these dog and cat breeds are sicking to me. If you are breeding something to make it better at it's job then that is okay.
>> Anonymous
Some breeds, those that have health and/or mobility problems, could be considered immoral to breed. Persian cats that meet the breed standard usually have breathing problems, for example. Or English lop rabbits, whose ears drag on the ground and are often cut by the rabbit stepping on them.
>> Anonymous
>>44867
There isn't such a thing as "unnatural". Everything is part of nature.
>> Anonymous
Not hard for me to figure out.
Is the animal activeley suffering?
No?
Not cruelty.

If, for example, the animal is suffereing as a result of a defect common in it's breed, like how munchkins and corgies are prone to back problems, then yes, the animal is suffering and it's cruel to do nothing about it, but that does not mean the breed itself should be eliminated because it's cruel to allow them to exist.
>> Anonymous
>>44958
So every domesticated animal ever, including every single cat and dog, is actively suffering due to the cruelty of humans?