Does anyone know why did dog fighting get banned all around the western world during the 19th century even though...

Cucks whining about it

They were the SJW of the era

>western world

The idea of dogs as pets came out of the west, and even then only in urban areas and historically as a symbol of wealth. In rural areas they're more often seen as work animals to protect livestock, so it's not hard to see why dog fighting is associated with rural communities. I have in-laws that are ranchers who refer to dogs as "redneck door bells" and balk at the idea of them being "indoor pets." They happily use them as garbage disposals for bones while I have friends who get upset if their lap dog doesn't have enough fiber in it's turds.

In the Middle East they have a lot of customs that revolve around anything touching the ground being filthy. Throwing shoes, showing the bottom of your feet, putting your feet on things is all the epitome of rudeness, and that certainly extends to dogs. I would get pissed when I saw people kick dogs in the UAE, it's just that much of a cultural disconnect, but outside of the first world something like 80% of dogs are feral, filthy, and carriers of disease.

Cats are an entirely different animal from dogs.

You could look it up, baiting, dogfighting and cockfighting were the go to event for all the plebs and technically they still are in places where the ban isn't enforced, like Cuba and Afghanistan.

>lose interest
Losing interest doesn't explain banning. The ban wouldn't be introduced if people weren't doing it in the first place.

you didn't specify dogs, faggot. you just said 'animals as pets'

also, ancient Egyptians kept cats as pets

I can relate, my grandma living in a rural idea found the idea of someone keeping a dog indoors downright absurd. On par with having cows and pigs sleeping next to your bed.

Cats were used to kill rodents around the house though, they weren't kept solely because they're cute and cuddly

not really, cats were bred for pest control and so were terriers

Dogfighting has historically been a cornerstone of masculine culture, so it's still prevalent today in societies like the Middle East and the larger Islamic world, rural Russia, South America, and other societies that place a lot of emphasis on machismo and manliness.

In the modern West, masculinity has been more or less cucked out of existence so you won't really see stuff like dogfighting anymore.

Cats weren't *bred* for anything the same way dogs were.

or maybe men in developed countries have found more interesting forms of competitive entertainment like football and boxing and no longer need to spend time training pets to kill each other

Pretty much

Even "manly" men today would have been mocked as effeminate 100 years ago

Modern concept of masculinity is the result of bored upper middle class people in the late 19th century out of touch with reality

Couldn't explain it better.

they weren't bred as selectively as dogs for certain tasks, but the only reason humans domesticated and kept them around in the first place is because rats are terrible

Sports betting is legal and popular pretty much everywhere aside from puritanical shitholes like America, though.

Yeah no 99% of the men in the modern developed West don't actually partake in activities like boxing or full tackle football. They just sit on their fatasses on their couch (maybe with their friends) and watch it on TV.

With dogfighting you're physically close to two dangerous animals who've been bred and trained to maul and kill and can severely injure or even kill you if you don't know how to handle them or know what you're doing. You're involved in a sport.

The Egyptians kept cats to kill any rats that would get near their granary stores, which was important in a time before refrigeration and salting. They were well regarded and respected for that role, but they didn't just instinctively adore them and keep them around for no reason like most people do now.

No it's the result of getting women into the workplace because all the men are off dying in some Belgian trench

/thread

Its illegal and taboo everywhere besides Afghanistan and other shitholes.

People dislike dogfighting because they love their dogs, and watching two of the same animals tortured and forced to tear each other apart for the bloodthirsty entertainment of the crowds is inhumane. Even in the past people cared for their pets as workers and friends, upper class aristocrats even had portraits done of their four legged friends. Dogfighting was a function of trashy lower classes.

Turns out masculinity doesn't have to be defined by brutally watching two animals maul each other to death. Who knew?

The way I imunderstnad in the US, betting between a couple of friends isn't illegal in practice, but bookmarking and running a buisness around that is.

Very rich people kept exotic pets like monkeys and parrots but only because they were exotic, not to seek companionship or whatever the fuck.

lmao of course you faggots would get off on this neo-machoism bullshit

Exactly, plenty of rich kings and nobles had personal zoos where they kept animals just to show off how fucking loaded they were to their fellow rich cunts. That's not to say they didn't develop attachments to some of them, but it was a much rarer thing than it is today.

Why do I sense a woman behind this post

>anyone who isn't a bloodlusted sociopath is a woman

wew lad

I'm fine with bullfighting though as long as the fight is fair. The matador being gored by the bull might make for fun entertainment

Would you want to watch this good boy tear apart another good boy for no reason at all?

I wouldn't. :3

Because you're a stupid cuck who thinks the only way to be a man is to be violent.

if you hurt children or dogs or those who cannot defend themselves in scandinavia you could be accused of being a niding and thus marked as a free for all kill. Dogfighting is disgusting and i will stomp your face in if i see yo hurting dogs you filth

Bitch people breed bitch dogs, gotra say.

youtu.be/F8WBtDc85_4

>abhors violence
>calls anyone a cuck
wew

Those are bred to defend flocks of sheep against wolves and bears, they weren't bred to gore each other to death because a bunch of drunks wanted to place a bet.

My uncle is a pig farmer and he treats his dog like a pet. I don't even think the dog does any farm work. It's a stout little labrador mix, but he lets it run around his property and come inside when it wants. It almost died fighting a beaver once I guess.

Dog A: intelligent, friendly, well trained and helpful in practical functions in all walks of violence
Dog B: brutal, violent, aggressive, dangerous to have around humans, useless as service or police dogs, can only be used in blood sports

Hmm...

The breed in that video is actually an excellent guard dog and an extremely intelligent and useful animal. But the dickhead who owns it treated it like shit.

Violence is fine. War, MMA, etc. A bunch of hicks forcing animals to kill each other for amusement is cruelty.

pointless violence is not masculine or virtuous
dogfighting is degenerate entertainment for poor people and blacks

They actually were bred for both protection and for pit fighting. They are still pretty popular fighters in northern Caucasus.

Pretty much this

If you had a dog, you used it to hunt, guard your house, or help herd sheep

If you had a cat, it's sole function was to kill pests that could get in your food storage

The idea of the goldfish bowl originated in China as an environment to raise fish in the you could later kill easily without spending hours to catch them

Even birds were often used as messangers, such as with carrier pigeons, or as pest control much the same as cats were

>men being forced to fight and kill each other is fine
>dogs being forced to fight and kill each other is not fine

I was agreeing with most of your post but then you went full retard.

Forgot to add birds being used for hunting like dogs were.

Caucasian ovcharkas aren't intelligent at all, they're some of the stupidest dogs around that are extremely tough to teach abd naturally aggressive. I always gotta laugh at idiots with no experience trying to train them like they're Gernan shepherds or some shit or god forbid even keep them as a pet for their children.

This is entirely true, yet I don't see why its a bad thing.

Modern day pet ownership has been proven in countless academic studies to be healthy on a number of levels. From companionship to practical functions. Everything from service dogs to therapy dogs to regular small breeds that give people comfort in their daily lives. These animals do serve a function on an intimate level.

There are still working dogs. There are still herding dogs, guard dogs, police and military dogs, etc.

And I don't think there is anything un-manly about people who hate sadistic inner city trash who set their animals against each other for amusement.

In a perfect world, war wouldn't exist. But we don't live in a perfect world, we live in this one. Dogs fight in wars as well. Humans volunteer for war knowing full well what they're getting involved in. The human equivalent of dogfighting would be holding two people at gunpoint and forcing them to tear each other apart for under threat of death.

Why will we never see an era of masculinity like the enlightenment to 1800s again? Or the greeks who worked out all the time and pondered the nature of the universe.

A guy that can quote literature, speak of all sorts of topics, woo your sister, but still endure hardship in war or beat the shit out of someone?

Now it's just fucking tapout and povertygorillas: the culture

inb4 le gentleman or whatever fedora bullshit even though I didn't even talk about that time period

It isn't stupid, it thinks differently. It doesn't retrieve or heel naturally, its instincts are around protection and guarding. With the right trainer (ie. not some cuck who bought it as a meme) it can become an outstanding dog.

>Humans volunteer for war knowing full well what they're getting involved in.

All those drafted peasants and civilians throughout history would like to have a word with you. Just look at the eastern front in ww2, a lot of soldiers on both the German and Soviet side were drafted to kill each other. A very large majority would not have chosen to go, but if they refused they would have been imprisoned or killed.

It is stupid, considering it wasn't even bred for intelligence or companionship, it was bred to be a ferocious nigger that eats wolves for breakfast. A dog's intelligence is measured in his ability to learn and obey and Caucasians are pretty damn bad in that department, on par with mastiffs really.

It's not a good or bad thing, it's just how they were. Animals were seen as tools, not really as companions. Abusing animals to vent your frustration was far more acceptable because concern for their welfare only went as far as their usefulness did. That isn't to say that people didn't care for them, but having a 'love of animals' was generally viewed as odd in pre-enlightenment Europe at least. Respect sure, but no one would ever think of a dog as deserving of the same rights or protections that humans received.

You're looking at history through rose-tinted glasses. Masculinity has always existed in pockets amongst men, as has femininity. Every civilization that lived in any measure of comfort throughout history has developed a more effeminate masculine culture. Masculinity is cultivated through necessity. Your idea of the philosopher bodybuilder comes through intelligent men being called to service for warfare or hard labor jobs needed to keep society afloat. As society continued to specialize with the industrial revolution the idea of the renaissance man gave way to the specialist. Career academics, career artists, career soldiers, etc.

I was referring to the modern world and first world armed forces. War throughout the past has always been a nasty affair fought with conscripts and rivers of blood and trauma.

I'm trying to make the most of a bad breed here. They CAN be trained, but overall they aren't suited to the modern world. Other dogs can do its jobs with more efficiency. Bullmastiffs are good dogs through my experience though. My cousin owns two and they're great dogs.

>having a 'love of animals' was generally viewed as odd in pre-enlightenment Europe

This is why I'm so found of Schopenhauer. Among other reasons.

>watching dogs maul each other is inhumane
>but watching humans concuss each other in the ring is fine

You're the sociopath here if you have more feelings for some dumb animal that doesn't even have sapience than to your species. Really the symptomatic attribute of this faggot era.

No shit they can be trained, but you really know very little about the dog if you think they are "extremely intelligent".

Stop being such a bitch. Grown men have the right to participate in nonlethal combat sports if they want to do so. What, would you ban martial arts? There is no death in MMA. Its a man on man fight in the spirit of sportsmanship.

The animals are tortured to encourage aggression and forced to tear each other to pieces.

How are these things even slightly related? I would abhor a system that forced prison inmates to kill each other for sport as well.

>equating a dog to a human

The fact that it isn't a human and didn't have a choice to consent toward its situation is what makes it wrong in most people's eyes.

>muh consent
And we've finally come full circle.

Don't really get the appeal of watching animals kill each other.

>The human equivalent of dogfighting would be holding two people at gunpoint and forcing them to tear each other apart for under threat of death.
You know deserters got shot in WWs 1 and 2.

>he doesn't think consent is extremely important in all walks of life

Enjoy prison.

t. Literal rapist

More like why the fuck should anyone give a damn whether animals have consent or not.

>let's spare the innocent fly that just flew into my house because it has no agency xD

Nah nigger fuck off. Genesis 1:26

>it's the current year guys
>wars are good now
>dogs should get the vote too

There's a reason the FBI keeps a database of people convicted of animal cruelty: its the best indicator of antisocial and other violent behaviors in development. If you're going to cite religion, at least realize that stewardship over the land and all the animals in it implies that we should take care of them, not destroy them and torture them.

Wars were never good faggot, but sometimes groups like ISIS rise up and you can't be a pacifist cuck when they do.
If you can't figure out why torturing animals is bad then you're a lost cause.

>Swatting an animal which is a known vector for disease is the same as forcing an animal that trusts you to fight to the death with another one for your enjoyment

Samuel 17:43

>swatting a small pest that enters your house quickly
>brutalizing an animal for its entire life then forcing it to kill another one for your amusement

These are certainly the same thing and this is not at all a braindead analogy.

A more apt comparison would be pulling the wings and legs off of the fly and laughing as it flopped around. And even then flies don't have a fraction of the cognitive processes of a domesticated animal like dogs.

Its a figure of speech from a religious text. It doesn't justify animal cruelty, it refers to a method of punishing a disobedient working dog with a whack from a stick. But please, by all means, keep googling "bible verses that justify sadistic treatment of animals" and keep acting like the answers matter. I'm Greek Orthodox and its irritating to me to see the Word used to justify this filth.

Morality advances just like other knowledge.

The principle is the same, stop weaseling about.

It isn't.

At all.

Nobody sees it that way.

That's why there are laws against it in basically every country on earth now.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_fighting#Status_by_region

You're probably a fedora trying to be edgy by misquoting the bible in favor of animal cruelty.

>The principle is the same
Not really, swatting a fly is beneficial as it prevents it from laying eggs and potentially getting sick.

Whats the benefit of torturing a dog and forcing it to fight?

Getting you sick*

In dogfighting you're not hurting the dog though, a dog is hurting a dog.

Also, cockfighting was commonplace among ancient Israelites.

Training dogs to fight and be aggressive involves beating them idiot.

Not necessarily.

Alt Right is a mental illness

>everyone I don't like is alt right

lel that's funny, the English bred the golden retriever and owned half the world, while the caucas has been the armpit of the world forever

Britain is one of the most cucked and bitchified countries in Europe if not the planet

...

>this is what dogfighters actually believe

What do you guys make of cockfighting?

They're basically brain stems.

>we'll take less Euro immigrants but more Pakis
Sure showed them Abdul

It's more widespread to this day. In Cuba for example.

*France

because cockfighting is more interesting and cheaper

>nobody
Kant had a problem with animal abuse.

Evidence points to cats domesticating themselves.

Nobody gave a damn about Kant either.

Kant, Schopenhauer, and presumably Pythagoras considering he was an ancient vegetarian and possibly vegan by today's standards since there wasn't an actual differentiation between the two until very recently in history.
Difficult to know, but I find it strangely comforting knowing that there existed long before I did, people who weren't savage shits for its own sake, and in times when it was likely more common and therefore seen as acceptable. It almost always speaks to the genuineness of one's beliefs when others' views are opposed to it by default due to the era, and/or area in which they were.
That's not to say that anybody whomsoever has a radical idea comparatively to those around them is correct, but it sometimes shows that they're not some bandwagoning tagalong. On the other hand, it may insinuate that they're trying a tad too much to be different from others.
Anyways, this is an impressive thread. I actually read all if it before posting this. This board seems to have some much more thoughtful posters than many others.

doggos should be friends

Is this FOXE?

wew lad you seriously sound like a pseudointellectualveganfaggotwatnumalecuck desu

Rich Australians still do it today