tetris11

joined 2 years ago
[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Bloodmage would be more accurate

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago

Political at the human-level, yes - but at the dog level - they just see themselves as different, not ranked. They don't themselves subscribe to the idealogy of archetypes.

A well-bred dalmation from a long stock of desirable characteristics (from a human perspective), would still probably breed with a "lesser breed" (again, from a human perspective) because the dogs don't actually care; their owners do.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ah yeah the Göttingen school of history, and the invention of various racial identities. It was popular all over Europe at the time, especially among the higher classes. I didn't know about Brücher and Haeckel.

I guess there's nothing wrong with selective breeding, as long as there's no singular ideal "perfect race" to use as a caste system. In domesticated animals, the only caste that exists there is the ones we human impose based on market value, but not ones that the domesticated animals themselves would adhere to.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

hmm! So we accept it in dogs, because dogs don't have an idealogy of the "perfect breed" so to speak, and so we still selectively breed them for characteritics that we desire, but there's not one ideal that can rank one dog over another.

I think you just cleared up a lot of it for me: there's no dog politics in dog breeding, they're just diverse.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (12 children)

Oh good distinction, didn't think of that. Is genetics then simply not the phenotype of applied eugenics (not exclusively, of course)?

So we're okay with the idea of dog breeding, because we see dogs not as individuals in control of their lives. I guess, this confuses me too sometimes since I've never owned a pet, but I've definitely heard of pet owners refer to their pets as quasi-children. I've even heard in the same sentence about how they love their dogs, and then to go on about the positive characteristic of their dog's breed. It's a little bit strange, no? But they're not bad people, and they mean it genuinely in a loving way.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago

Sext her sister's BIL

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

My mum was raised without eating pork (they just didn't have it growing up), and my dad saw and heard the abattoir near daily and associates the smell of pork with screaming children.

On the odd weekend when they were both away, us kids would sprint to the store, grab reams of bacon and cook it fast on the sly for a real fry-up. We'd have to air out the house as well afterwards to get rid of the smell, but they'd always know and complain about it when they got back

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago

Aww yeah, gonna get the iron warmed up for an all nighter

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

She'll know. The smell. Also the breadcrumbs.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (14 children)

and tech workers have mixed feelings about it, because it's made their job 10x easier whilst making them 10x more expendable

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago

Can you get it to draw bewbs? Asking for a friend

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago

That actually is a timeless career. Kudos to you for tracing the footsteps of our founders

view more: ‹ prev next ›