Natural History

Posted in dog behavior, dog breeds, Uncategorized | Tagged dog fighting | 54 Comments

54 Responses

1. on April 26, 2010 at 10:03 am shefaro

   They look to me like Anatolian Shepherds that have had their tails docked and ears cropped. Working livestock guard dogs can be very aggressive and it is sad for me to see them or any other dog used for fighting.

   
   
   • on April 26, 2010 at 10:29 am retrieverman

     I think they might be Central Asian Ovtcharkas:

     http://alabay.com/

     
     
2. on April 26, 2010 at 11:14 am Sengimage

   This is disgusting regardless of the culture driving it. So sad that these people allow all their pride and feelings of empowerment ride on or go down with the results of one dog in a fight that represents their town or village.

   The dogs don’t give a crap about the town or villagers, just their next meal and mate. And apparently killing another dog.

   However, one needs to imagine what kind of twist it would serve in a war, if several tribes of these people raised packs of these dogs to act with these killing instincts towards soldiers dressed in American fatigues.

   Scary. Very scary.

   
   
   • on April 26, 2010 at 4:01 pm Bridget K

     Sengimage,
     Those dogs are NOT war dogs.
     They have been used for ages for protecting goats and lambs from wolves. And still are.
     They are like the Pyrr of Spain or the Maremma dog of Italy.

     So, from that, the tradition of dogfights in these old cultures has a very function. Via that, people can rank the level of stamina and aggression of their dogs. It is a control of quality.
     And it’s entertaining. Do you think that the western virtual entertainment culture is harmless towards animals or humans? I think it is not.

     I think that each culture owns its dogs. You can’t go and blaime them.
     If they were clearly torturing them – or if they put up wolf fights, I would got angry.

     If we blaime them, would yiou allow these afghans come and blaime us for breeding sick dogs mostly to entertain us, and keeping them in unnatural conditions and all alone, in our living-rooms.

     I have the opinion the western entertainment culture is even more brutal than theirs, because it wants to take benefit from naive outsider and spread everywhere. It uses artificial energy, like nuclear energy – not dogs’ energy. It produces abnormal numbers of waste – not only dogs’ poo and a carcass or two now and then.

     And because its brutality is always hidden so are its victims. In that entertaining culture of ours, the responsibility is always lost.
     These dogs are the buisines of the village they live in. Not ours.

     Do you REALLY think we know the right entertaining ways for them? We take away their traditions and give back American movies, hamburgers, PCs and mobiles, and lots of new shopping centres, of course?

     
     
     • on April 26, 2010 at 4:16 pm Rinalia

       Tradition and culture have been used since time immemorial to excuse and rationalize all sorts of horrific things. It’s an easy slope to slip down.

       
       
       • on April 26, 2010 at 4:19 pm retrieverman

         I am not a big fan of this fighting, even if this is the most terrorized country on earth.

         Well, wait, it is.

         
         
         • on April 26, 2010 at 4:27 pm Bridget K

           I think it is a bit lousy to draw a line between the terror in that country and their dog culture.

           Animal fights are common in west too.

           PBull dog fights are held for instance in Spain, but in secret.
           And remember, pb fights are just pure “entertainment”. There is no long, native, historical and agro-economical line behind that.

           
           
           • on April 26, 2010 at 4:33 pm retrieverman

             In the US, dogfighters are working class people, who have also been terrorized– no steady jobs, in some cases racial discrimination.

             When people are beaten down, they will act out in this fashion.

             
             
             • on April 26, 2010 at 6:12 pm Bridget K

               Why we then make apes, rabbits, cats and dogs lab-animals?

               Why we then treat our pigs, cows, hens and jailed fur animals like they’d be just machines?
               We leave the dead pigs lying on the floor for days or even weeks. Happens in Finland, and in Sweden.

               I don’t believe that theory fully. Something just doesn’t work.

               Old animal fight traditions have rather more sosio-economical connections than psychological connections.

               BTW, there have always been justified torturing in the name of religion or science, all with very high social and economical status. And also pure sadism.

               
               
       • on April 26, 2010 at 4:58 pm Bridget K

         Rinalia,
         besserwissers have since time immemorial used they knowledge as a justification wars, torture and destroying other cultures, minorities and also animal species and even plants.

         Indian cultures was destroyd, and who cares, because they were such war-maiking and dirty people.

         Personally I don’t see it is my thing to blaime afghans for their acts to their own citizens – which I include the dogs to.
         I’m sad for the ways they punish they women who want to enlarge their social behavior status.
         But in the end, it really is their business!

         But, when they come to my country to live, these questions have to be taken under an eye for the second time.

         I don’t think the Finnish Health Care should pay for their traditional initations.

         So I think we really have to concentrate the promblems here in the west. We have lots of serious problems.

         It is far too easy to point a finger outside.
         And it is also one of the most tragical mistakes to get so fractiled with others’ promblems, that you forget your own.

         
         
         • on April 26, 2010 at 4:59 pm retrieverman

           It may be their business, and I don’t think we can force our cultural mores on them.

           But it doesn’t mean that we have to agree with it.

           
           
           • on April 26, 2010 at 6:23 pm Bridget K

             I’m afraid they will destroy also these ancient tribe cultures in the edge of Europe-Asia.

             See that the pic that’s given about them in the most media is like the pic of the Amer-Indians: quarrelsome people who need peace – the peace of ours.

             
             
         • on April 26, 2010 at 5:05 pm retrieverman

           Bridget,

           Um. I don’t think Rinalia is a warmonger.

           After all, she is a vegan.

           And works for a farmed animal sanctuary.

           
           
           • on April 26, 2010 at 5:46 pm Bridget K

             Yeah, I’ve learned that. She is really great in that.

             And I have never said Rinalia is “warmonger”, it wouldn’t make any logical, or any sense.

             
             
         • on April 26, 2010 at 7:43 pm Rinalia

           I don’t buy the whole “mind your own business” attitude. It enables oppression. No thanks to that.

           I understand the point you make. My country, the US, has plenty of problems. And I do believe that real and meaningful change mostly comes from within.

           That does not mean I have to support blood sports or cultural misogyny.

           
           
     • on April 26, 2010 at 4:22 pm retrieverman

       I don’t do 100 percent cultural relativism.

       Any scoundrel can say something that he’s doing is part of his culture.

       Like honor killings.

       And we in the West should also be blamed for our bad behavior.

       Like I don’t think we can give a cultural relativistic excuse for racism in the United States.

       And yet that’s been done all the time. And it still is.

       At some point, we have to say something is wrong, regardless of the culture.

       
       
       • on April 26, 2010 at 4:39 pm Bridget K

         Yes u are right.
         Not always.

         But a good sense is needed to value a culture. I believe there are differneces in those values cultures re-present.
         And that it can be even measured to some amount with sosio-economical and eco-biological factors.

         If the culture can limit its waste production preserve its native traditions, animals and nature, it cannot be too bad, can it.

         I have not seen a disgusting Kabul dog fight. All the clips I’ve seen, the dogs look healthy. Not much blood, not long-lasting torturing fights.
         Afghan culture is not for sadism.

         But there are many pbs – videos, for instance, in the net, which look somehow bad. Dogs ripping and torturing each other for hours ans so lots of vain blood. It looks really stupid. And there’s nothing behind that, no natural working dog idea.

         
         
         • on April 26, 2010 at 4:47 pm retrieverman

           I think we should respect cultures– but not every single time and in every instance.

           I respect Islam– it is a great Western faith– and I am interested in what Afghan tribal culture can teach us.

           However, the treatment of women in Afghan tribal cultures and the treatment of dogs are not something I appreciate.

           
           
           • on April 26, 2010 at 5:14 pm Bridget K

             You don’t have to respect it.

             But do you think you have means enough to understand and emansipate their culture via these virtual clips?

             Or, is it a justfying reason to argue and to go and make a war?

             I think in the world we should learn to accept small minorities.
             And learn to wait, because the best and solid changes always happen from inside out.

             The polymorphic may well benefit also us here in the one-norm-west (which bases its culture on the imaginary, unlimited material depending developement and virtual (or fractured) style of living life).

             
             
             • on April 26, 2010 at 5:16 pm retrieverman

               Bridget,

               You don’t know me very well.

               
               
               • on April 26, 2010 at 5:26 pm Bridget K

                 I know.
                 You just want to create big debates on your blog!

                 
                 
                 • on April 26, 2010 at 5:27 pm retrieverman

                   Maybe, but I try not to do much political stuff on here.

                   
                   
                   • on April 26, 2010 at 5:38 pm Bridget K

                     To what and how we put our dogs to work is political.
                     Do we make them lab-animals or Kabul dogs.
                     Not a biggest issue in the land, but a political one of course.

                     
                     
             • on April 26, 2010 at 5:24 pm Bridget K

               I vote for the polymorphic world.

               You don’t have to appreciate all its cultures – of course not.
               But you can learn to respect.
               For instance, most people don’t appreciate rats or mosquitos. But they have a
               meaning there in the eco-system.

               If u knew the habits, values and functions behind their dog fights, do you think it’d be easier to respect it?

               One should go and live in a culture few months to learn something about it.
               It is ridiculous to judge anything via these 3-minute clips in the Tube.

               
               
               • on April 26, 2010 at 5:25 pm retrieverman

                 I certainly agree with you.

                 But it doesn’t mean I should defend dog fighting because a culture does it.

                 
                 
                 • on April 26, 2010 at 5:33 pm Bridget K

                   Well I hope people would act for the concrete problems, not virtual ones.

                   Mean the jailed Moon Bears of China would need our attention more than these well-being, brisk dogs of Kabul.
                   Or the lab-animals, or..

                   
                   
     • on April 27, 2010 at 9:22 am Sengimage

       My point was…. they would make excellent war dogs.

       If they hated people. But, it appears they are trained to hate other dogs.

       Ironic in how that goes. Since in our culture our children mainly learn to hate from the parents that raised them. Likewise these dogs learn to fight their own kind from the owners who raise them.

       The potential to create a Dog that directs all that whoop ass towards an invading army. Imagine that?????

       Are we supposed to be humane about it? Do we then equip our soldiers with tranquilizer guns? Or de we train them to kill any 4 legged canine they encounter?

       This culture you’re defending does not seem so dependent on their fighting dogs to protect their herd of 3 or 4 goats. It appears the dog introduced as “my champion” was chained to a post, perhaps because he wasn’t really a good protector but possibly a very good killer? There is much you can assume from what you want to glamorize about any culture…. the truth is usually far different from what you believe and may only contain small bits of what you know as the truth.

       The actions of this culture is driven my the male side of it…and its totally a pissing contest. Its more about what dog represents the tribes with the strongest reputations not about the best breeding stock of dogs….otherwise that priority would have been mentioned by the men gathering to strategize how best to get their dog to maul the other dog. We can only defend them by saying it has a better purpose, But for what… these guys aren’t defending huge herds of livestock. That’s clear at least from this video and if you frequent LINK TV you would see first hand there isn’t a huge domestic herd of anything anywhere in that country. And there are obviously more people than dogs, and what appears to be more people than livestock.

       Their culture puts a higher value on milk than it does on meat from the producers of that milk. And on the occasion they do slaughter an animal….its most likely to celebrate a major event for the tribe, like their champion dog retaining that title.

       This is a third world ritual of man bonding we’re witness to here. NOT a contest to determine the best dogs to breed from. That may be a second thought after a win, but its more an exhibition of an extension of their penis we’re witness to. ;-)

       
       
       • on April 28, 2010 at 2:29 pm Bridget

         Sengimage,

         You say things giving the image you look down to their culture.
         ForEx., “They don’t need dogs to protect their 3-4 goats”. Hope you check below. Their production is no means to compare with the megalomanic farming industry in the U.S., BUT it is the lifeblood to the people in the rural and the nomads:
         http://www.news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=7916
         And for these people, the good dogs are still important.
         And, the good dog for them is no retriever, it is a LSG Koochee.

         Here’s a NYT article about the dog fights after Taliban:
         http://from-the-doghouse.com/Scoop_and_Howl-ARCHIVE-Dgh.html
         The man in it says “It is not for the money (the dog fight). But he also admits “Afghans like to fight”.
         Any American sure know the same description (“fighters”) were used about many indian tribes – against them. Indians were “brave and wormogers”, they were “primitives” who “needed badly our means”.

         I see that the western nations (or people) fight much more than them. And something like Peggy R. describes in her own.

         It is mainly the western nations that have helped them to gain such a brave nature, or rather image of themselves.
         Afghanistan was under the British, then USSR and now US and EU command and wars. If they didn’t possess that “proud nature”, ALL they traditions, among them the ancient dogs, would have been swept away. The Afghan ladys would then go out with their pugs – is that really an image you are waiting for, cannot believe.

         Why? Beacause it clearly seems to me no culture is better than another.
         Every nation has its time. Some last little longer, some stress more the other nations OR the nature.
         My point of view is more biological and so very relativistic.
         And biologists always vote for the diverse world. It is also the most interesting, and exciting. How would we communicate here, if there were only the western dogs?

         I know personally Central Asian regugees (kind of economical, with mid-class / trader back grounds). I tease them being muslims and fond of dogs. They don’t see the contradiction.

         Of course the dog-fighting is gonna be used as one example about the degeneration and unmorality of the Afghan nation. It’s a thing among the many others – to justify any act done by the west. And all the pity-feeling doggy-lovers will support it! But, NOTE – without taking any responsibility of what will re-place the old culture, if its traditions are being killed.
         I just say it’s so easy to but a nose into other cook’s sope – but the other cook is the only one who can be responsible of it.
         I’m surely not glamorizing the Afghan culture – tho’ must admit I feel for any rural / organic type of life. And was telling you it’s so much older than yours. Don’t you feel a bit funny to go and blaime its traditions?

         We’ll see what your Obama and the bosses in the Europe Union gonna do about them all there.
         It may be nothing new but a history repeating itself. Until now, it is easy to see our generation have made the same mistakes as the former.
         That’s what can be called the core of the human nature!

         
         
       • on April 28, 2010 at 2:57 pm Bridget

         The dogs inherit their territorial behavior and its level. Male to male – aggression (or b-b) is natural for all “anime vertebrates”. It don’t need training.
         You just take your young male full of testoterones to another crazy male.

         In many staffie-breeding lines there have been certain aggressive studs who were much favoured. And that still shows in those lines.
         I met a bitch 9-weeks-old and she snached angrily my retriever male in the face with his tiny teeth! Know her sire is very aggressive dog.

         So, who is still saying the dog-fighting culture has nothing to do with the working abilities of the dogs?
         The optimum hard life of those Afghan dogs maintain their working abilities.
         As we know in our western breeds, if a dog do has an easy life, it is about to loose its working abilities.

         Our pet-dogs would act that way, if we only let them.
         But we somehow cannot stand our little doggie fighting. Even tho’ they sometimes wanted to confront.
         No, doggies must stay nice and pretty and cross their clean paws over the our bible.

         I won’t let my retriever to go to a bull-terrier, and he wouldn’t yet go, for he knows it’s not the thing.
         But he has had some quarrels with a males of the same type as he.

         
         
3. on April 26, 2010 at 3:09 pm leashedForLife

   they look like Kangals to me –
   he semi-ring tail carried high is a give-away, IF the dogs still has a tail, that is. :—(

   i agree, the dogs do not give a hang who they *represent* –
   it all comes down to M:M aggro thats been stoked by the owner(s) and handler(s).

   these breeds are territorial – nonchalantly dropping-in over the wall of a house-compound with a couple of LGDs of any type, in the walled-yard, is masochism if not suicidal.

   but getting them to ATTACK a specific type of person, en-masse?
   extremely unlikely; these dogs are not intended to pack-up, they are (as seen here) often intolerant of strange-dogs, so they;d be more-likely to waste a lot of time + bloodshed ripping at each other, not the intended targets,
   >>> ppl-over-there in uniforms.

   ONE dog could be a pretty serious threat, especially after dark; dogs see better than humans do.
   — terry

   terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF

   
   
   • on April 26, 2010 at 3:19 pm retrieverman

     I think the only LSG dogs from Afghanistan are what the Russians (and we) call Central Asian Ovtcharkas. Close crops and docked tails are almost givens in these dogs.

     They are probably related to Kangals via transhumance.

     
     
4. on April 26, 2010 at 3:20 pm Bridget K

   Many are kind of half bred.

   In their culture which has restored many of their original features, it is OK.
   We have our western virtual pop-life to entertain ourselves.

   And there is also a clear function behind that dog fighting culture. To keep the dogs’ aggressiveness in a good level. These dogs are kept to protect the stock from wolves.

   I really hope we could adopt and adjust ourselves to these kind of dogs to maintain the few wolves still left in Northern Europe. In Southern Europe, these dogs have been the main instruments and still are, to care about the wolf-politics. In countries like Spain, France, Italy and Afghanistan and Turkey.

   The wolves of Southern Europe are little smaller that northern Gray wolves. The difference between two distict male can be 35 kg (a norm Spanish male) and 40 kg (a norm Finnish male).

   Wolves are even coming back to Germany – there have been no wolves there for centuries.

   But can anyone clarify why the wolves JUST in Scandinvia are that hated that many hunters and also their Union want to kill more of them – tho’ their population is very small?

   And they haven’t kill a human since the 1880s.
   and the traffic kills much more reindeers than the wolves.

   Any idea?

   There are ab. 160 animals in Finland, in Sweden ab. 250, in Norway now ab. 40.

   
   
   • on April 26, 2010 at 3:22 pm retrieverman

     Why?

     Because the farmer’s unions in those countries.

     In the US, wolves are still hated in the West. They are hated even in the Great Lakes states because they kill white-tailed deer.

     
     
   • on April 26, 2010 at 5:58 pm leashedForLife

     they have an abundance of their own LGDs in Europe,
     bridget –
     they do not need to import another breed to defend their flocks. ;-)

     i also do not think that sending 2 dogs into a ring to fight does anything to test or shape their dogs / breeds ability or willingness to defend their sheep, goats, etc, against wolves, foxes, wild-cats, or other predators.

     fighting-dogs to GAMBLE has a long, long global cultural history –
     it has IMO diddly to do with protecting ones herds + flocks.
     it has to do with MONEY, social-status + human competitive spirit –
     notice the bullcr*p about WE DECIDE ON A PLAN TO WIN THE FIGHT?
     ** say what? **
     i don;t see the dog there, taking notes on signals + plays; this is not bloody football, its just a dog to dog assault – theres no PLAN.
     getting to brag, *my dog is a champion…* is IMO the primary motivation – not *my dog is a great flock-guardian…*
     ::roll-eyes:: as if! LOL.
     they want to WIN – pure + simple; and the dog is the proxy in the fight.
     winning MONEY is good; having a *champion* to brag-about + BREED for more MONEY is good.
     if it were not dogs, it might be knives; or wrestling; or foot-races… or… any of a hundred other contests.

     i see no reason to glorify this as a *test* for protecting sheep; its gambling, entertainment, excitement – and PAIN for the dogs.
     IMO + IME – Ur mileage may vary,
     — terry

     
     
     • on April 26, 2010 at 6:38 pm Bridget K

       The dog who wins (most of) his fighting partners is valued. Owner can even sell him and get much money.

       But many of the best dogs are not sold at all. the owner wants to keep his dog cause he gives him a special status no money can buy!

       And, maybe the most important thing in the long run, many of the best fighters are the most wanted studs.
       Bitch owners want to part of their honour to make pups by them.

       THAT is why this tradition is also a breeding programme.
       Just like in the west it used to be, what comes to certain breeds here.

       
       
       • on April 26, 2010 at 7:02 pm Bridget K

         Terry,

         the only difference is that western fight-dogs had (have) working class owners / handlers;
         while these Kabul dogs have farmer owners.
         In their agro-culture they need the dogs.
         And that kind of culture is good for the wolves and other beast also in that country.

         In Finland we haven’t had own mastiff breed (tho’ some specimen may have lived in Karelia).

         
         
         • on April 27, 2010 at 1:58 pm leashedForLife

           bridget said:
           >> western fight-dogs had/have working-class owners / handlers; while these Kabul dogs have farmer owners. <<

           clear up into the 1930s and 40s in the USA, *dogfighting* as a gambling entertainment was NOT a working-class activity alone;

           the deans, faculty + students and parents of Harvard University students, were often at dog-fights, wearing suits + ties or boaters and shirtsleeves in the 1890s.

           after the Civil War, dogfighting was quite respectable – it became BAD only when humane legislation was passed to stop it, and other blood-SPORTS like cockfights.

           wealthy and well-educated ppl *still* get into breeding, fighting or just gambling on fighting dogs – it is just more covert.

           ALL classes of USA citizens can be seen at dogfights, or Profit From dogfights, directly or indirectly; selling videos, selling dogs, betting, etc.

           this is not defined as *blue collar fun*.
           bloodying dogs in fights to make $$ is a democratic activity – which is also abhorrent, no matter where it is practiced, or by whom. ;-)

           JMO + IME,
           cheers,
           — terry

           
           
5. on April 26, 2010 at 5:47 pm Bill

   We are by no means perfect, but we are better. It’s ok to say that.

   If you enjoy European/Western/white guilt, that’s cool do your thing. It’s not hurting anyone.

   I get nuance and history, but sometimes things are more black & white than not.

   
   
   • on April 26, 2010 at 6:28 pm Bridget K

     Well i’m a concrete activist and not a sinner.

     
     
6. on April 26, 2010 at 6:32 pm Bill

   Also, is it unseemly to wonder aloud what would happen if that cutain was pulled back to reveal, say, a tosa inu, or a red nosed nosed pit?

   
   
7. on April 26, 2010 at 7:40 pm Jess

   I am going to have to start getting up early to hit your blog, because by the time I’ve finished the dog food and feeding their first meal, my connection is too crappy to watch videos.

   Same game, different country:

   http://tinyurl.com/28ah7mu

   Taigan being tested on wolves in Kyrgyzstan (scroll down):

   http://tinyurl.com/b3ca5p

   
   
   • on April 26, 2010 at 7:51 pm retrieverman

     I call them Ovtcharkas because that’s the Russian word for them. Those areas were either in the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union or very close to those former countries, where Russian was the official language.

     I’ve seen the taigan on the wolves before. That wolf’s head isn’t much larger than the those of the dogs. Perhaps this is a good example of a wolf could be a dog ancestor.

     The big North American wolves don’t remind me much of dogs.

     
     
     • on April 27, 2010 at 9:15 am Bridget

       Some eskimo dogs like malamuts resemble the wolf.
       The British dr. Grenfell, while working in Labrador in the 1800s and 1900s had a favorite husky wolf dog – a very big and of the wolfish-type.

       When the urban world anlargens, and the culture changes, the space and the work for these big primitive dogs is getting harder and harder to find.

       
       
       • on April 27, 2010 at 11:00 am retrieverman

         Yeah, but I’ve already written about this, and I can send you Russian paper that talks about this (in English).

         The Mongolians cross livestock guardian mastiffs with wolves and then use the hybrids to hunt wolves.

         
         
8. on April 27, 2010 at 9:19 am Bridget

   In Turkey they have Kangal Dog festivals and fights. It is sort of national breed of Turkish. Kangal is used there a lot as a LGD.
   I think the same dogs can be found in Afganistan too.

   
   
   • on April 27, 2010 at 10:58 am retrieverman

     Kangals are the Kurdish livestock guardian.

     Kurds don’t live in Afghanistan.

     
     
9. on April 27, 2010 at 9:31 am Bridget

   You call these dogs Ovtcharkas:
   http://www.centralasianshepherd.us/native_alabai.html
   ?

   
   
   • on April 27, 2010 at 10:53 am retrieverman

     Yes.

     Alabai or Alabay is an Ovtcharka.

     I’m using the Russian name because these dogs come from areas that were part of the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire or places near the those former countries.

     
     
10. on April 27, 2010 at 9:59 am Peggy Richter

    War dogs from the mastiff type are shown in Assyrian bas-reliefs. It’s not “new”. A dog like those shown in the video would actually not be that effective — they are slower and bigger targets than a Malinois or German Shepherd. Which is, by the way, one of the reasons why the smaller dogs are more universally used as military dogs. (another is that larger dogs eat more).

    Dog fighting, cock fighting, horse fighting (look it up) and bull fighting are all symptoms of something that I believe is “human nature”. We are a fairly violent and aggressive species. So, by the way are chimpanzees. Fights for social status are common in MOST if not all mammals, including dolphins (Dolphins killing other dolphins and raping females have been documented on film). We are perhaps more aggressive than some, but we aren’t vastly different than hyenas or chimps or lions.

    We use culture to change the FORM of that violence and aggression. In it’s most primitive form, it is between peoples. When we indulge in it on a massive scale we call it war or genocide. In a stylized form, you find soccer, football, boxing, etc. Because we have “empathy”, it’s possible for us to transfer that aggression to surrogates — which is where pitched fights between animals come in. There really isn’t much difference between dog fights and bull/bear baiting. It’s just cheaper and easier for poor folk to keep dogs, roosters and smaller animals. It is safer for the people than fighting themselves, and because we are a gambling species, it is more profitable as a rule. Getting another rooster is much easier than getting another son, brother or husband.

    Where human life is cheap, why would these people value their animals’ lives higher? When we have riots after soccer finals in Europe, and “ganglands” in most major cities, I think we are a bit hypocritical to complain about people using animals as surrogates for violence between themselves.

    VR, Peggy Richter

    
    
    • on April 27, 2010 at 10:54 am retrieverman

      Human nature is a nebulous term.

      One that is used to justify bad behavior as much as culture is.

      
      
11. on April 27, 2010 at 9:53 pm Peggy Richter

    agreed that human nature is a nebulous term. Perhaps I should have said it seems to be hard-wired genetically? Certainly there’s plenty of evidence of a more or less universal tendency of H. Sapiens to be territorial and to use physical conflicts to establish status. That can vary from a Maasai youth going out to prove “manhood” by killing a lion with a spear to the “proof of manhood” by killing another person in more than one tribe (New Guinea and Amazon). It includes violent sports like football, soccer and boxing. This type of behavior isn’t unique to H. Sapiens. Most mammals and a number of other animals (from “insects” up) will use physical struggle for status (and access to breeding). The spear point in the Neanderthal and the apparent death by violence of the Iceman both show how long-established this is. Chimps conduct “wars”, murder and physical violence to establish their status. Because we are “big brained”, our means by which we do this takes various cultural forms, but at it’s base, it’s the same cause. And we also use animal surrogates — thus the fights staged between animals. Add gambling (which adds excitement and gain to the activity) and it’s no surprise that violence between people (individually and in groups) or people staging violence with animals as surrogates is both ancient and persistent. The difference between us and them is more cultural / technological than moral. We have a technology that makes it more possible to “stage manage” such events – ‘Survivor reality TV”, wide world of wrestling, video games, soccer/football, even most wars are more managed because of our technology and culture, but the basis of these is pretty much the same as their dog fights.
    Peggy Richter

    
    
    • on April 28, 2010 at 3:13 pm Bridget

      Yes they are old breed. And I think the Russian O – dog have been developed from these Koochee – types.

      What comes to the aggression in humans – it is the representative abilities in the human mind that makes us so instrumental, that we can even survive in a virtual world.

      That ability to use instruments, tools, means we can use a TV-film or an animal-fight to touch and strenghten our certain emotions – that all are very primitive.

      
      
12. on April 28, 2010 at 1:31 pm Lane Batot

    Yeah, it wouldn’t take much to reopen the gladiator/animal fights in the Coloseum even with the modern supposedly civilized Western society–humans can be quite sadistic critters! Has anyone else seen the old Omar Shariff/Jack Palance movie filmed in Afghanistan–“The Horsemen”? Them thar Afghans were fighting every critter imaginable in that movie–camels, dogs, sheep(rams), even little chicks! So it is obviously a deeply entrenched pastime. I, too, lament the “corruption” of other cultures with Western values/pastimes, but dang, if I don’t wish these folks would get ahold of a T. V. or two fer entertainment……

    
    
    • on April 28, 2010 at 3:24 pm Bridget

      Own a TV-company or – factory?

      
      

Comments are closed.