Hacker News Reader

Comment by ethagknight | Hacker News Reader

Whats the solution here?

Maybe: we stop using terms like 'purebreed' and 'mongrel'. Or reclaim 'mongrel'

I like the term 'natural dog'. "I'd like a medium sized natural dog with a long coat because it's cold here."

"Natural dog" is a silly term. Dogs are a domesticated animal and breeds have been around for almost as long as writing. [1]

I call mine a "mutt" - it's inoffensive and gets the point across.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_breed#History

Mutt is intended to be an insult. While I'm fairly confident I've never heard it used as such first hand, it's still the 2nd definition on whatever Google uses for defining things:

    a person regarded as stupid or incompetent.
    "“Do not give me orders, mutt.”"

'Dog' is also an insult, and for that matter so is 'bitch' (n.b. for non-English-speakers: 'bitch' is the English word for a female dog).

I don't think that there's anything wrong with calling things by their proper names.

If you wish to be pedantic, "mix" and "mixed breed" are fairly neutral terms.

A natural dog's parents picked each other because their butts smelled good.

An unnatural dog's parents were chosen by someone looking to make an animal with a squashed snout.

Start calling purebreds "GMO dogs" instead.

Did you know purebreds contain chemicals?!

how about the term 'landrace'?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Dog_landraces

Eliminate purebreds. Can you imagine we did the same with humans? Selecting for only one characteristic is a recipe for genetic disaster.

I think you're throwing out the baby with the bathwater in that approach.

Purebreds carry common genetic weaknesses. They also carry common genetic strengths. How confident are we that we can preserve the strengths as we mitigate the weaknesses?

Again, imagine we bred humans that need to have their back shaped in a certain form, nose of a certain length and so on. It won't work in the long run. Even worse, they breed for genetic defects like the hips on German shepherds. You can select maybe for certain personalities or physical attributes but you need to allow for other variations. The guidelines for purebreds are just stupid.

> Can you imagine we did the same with humans?

I can! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haemophilia_in_European_royalt...

Oh, there's a pretty good chance people will try doing the same for humans when genetic engineering becomes a tad more common/extensive. There's a reason talk of 'designer babies' and the likes is a hot topic, especially in regards of selecting for certain characteristics here too.

Mutts mostly, maybe a few different kinds of pure breeds. Might offend someone's aesthetic sensibilities (though I can't see why), but that seems like a worthwhile trade.

Not breed to optimize for certain traits. But that's what dogs (and the current 'breeds') are all about anyway, both pugs and what most people consider 'anatomically correct' dogs.

Or at least don't optimize for traits that are disconnected from the health and wellbeing of the dog, like pure looks? Optimizing on more practical or athletic aspects probably makes it more difficult to end up with a sick dog.

Dogsled racing is a working area that has seen trend away from pure huskies. There are still plenty of huskies in the sport, but mixed teams are very common in the Iditarod now. In 2000 there were only three all-husky teams in the whole race. The racers are crossing with other breeds and bringing in new dogs that are more optimized for the race. There's a danger that in the long run they could end up with something extreme, like what greyhounds are for racing, but right now it's full of healthy, diverse dogs.

Don't buy a pure bred, especially not at a premium.

Have them mate with other breeds

Ban breeding. There are plenty of dogs available for adoption. Once we run out of those we can reconsider the ban. Pretty simple stuff.

>Ban X

the username checks out

Realise that the incarceration (physically and/or psychologically) of animals for a purely comforting or entertainment purpose is an affront to proper morals.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com