Category: Dog

Thousands of dogs are being tortured and violently killed every year for food purposes. Traders keep inventing more sophisticated methods of searching for their «prey.» Who would like their beloved pet and best friend to be caught? Who would stay calm knowing that letting their dog out without a lash may lead to it being tormented to death? In my view, the dog meat trade is unacceptable in our society and should be ended because of its immorality, cruelty, and inhumanity.

You may have seen stray dogs being caught by an animal control service. Probably, you felt remorse for them losing their owner or being sent to shelters. As troubling as it may be, in Asian countries, these «officers» often appear to be actual hunters, catching dogs for meat. Apart from disguising as animal control, poachers might also pretend to be peaceful citizens, looking for a pet to adopt. In particular cases, they may even reach the audacity to steal dogs from their owners in parks or backyards blatantly. People either get misguided or left with the feeling of false hope, while these traders are only concerned about their chase. I find it unfair to all of the dog owners who care about their pets fate.

It is sometimes believed that «meat dogs» are different from «pet dogs»: they do not have feelings, souls, or consciousness. However, that is not true because dogs have been domesticated for centuries and brought up to be natural companions. When you think of a dog, you imagine a loyal friend and not a source of meat. This perception should not change, are there are no animals as smart and empathetical around humans as dogs. Additionally, canines often take up respectable jobs of chaperones, guards, and trackers. Would you eat your friend or employee? I think that all dogs deserve to be treated with humanity.

Can you imagine spending days in a confined place with no food or fresh air? That is how dog catchers keep their «meat» before slaughtering. Those poor animals who have not suffocated to death are usually electrocuted, hanged, burned, or boiled alive. Supposedly, it occurs because traders are not capable of maintaining proper conditions for enormous amounts of dogs. Some cooks believe that if a dog experiences violence or is inflicted with pain before death, it receives adrenaline and tastes better. Regardless of these excuses, such harsh methods of slaughter and consumption are totally inappropriate.

On the whole, the current state of the dog meat trade cannot be permitted. Animals are caught arbitrarily, treated dismissively, and are held in intolerable conditions. These points bring me to the conclusion that dog meat consumption should be stopped and considered illegal. The problem may seem distant, as it arises mainly in foreign regions; however, it is in our power to spread awareness around the world by signing petitions or donating to specific organizations. Together we can and should save these animals from cruel deaths.

Introduction

Many humans who have pets handle them like their children because of the love that exists between the two. While raising a dog as your pet, it is important to consider the same in the context that a pet requires as much attention and care as a human baby. However, there is a great difference between raising a human child and a dog since the developmental stages must differ at some point which calls for difference in attention.

Raising a human child is a more complex process which involves bringing up a person in such a manner that he/she can make correct judgment on various issues touching on life.

Parents therefore have to play a very great role in helping the child through the transition of infancy dependency to the independence that is associated with adulthood. Raising a dog is completely different from raising a human child in that the dog will always remain childlike and it will never be independent but will remain dependent forever like an infant (Reistein 4).

My wife and I have no children, but we do have a pet dog named, Mochi. She is a 2-year old Yorkshire Terrier. We love her and spend a great deal of time playing, nurturing, and taking care of Mochi. We expend a great deal of effort taking care of her. In addition to all that tender loving care, it is impossible to have a pet and fail to employ the art of patience, consistency, and affection. This is because raising a pet is closely related to raising a human child since just like an infant; a pet will forever depend on its keeper.

Mochi is just a dog, but for me and my wife she is our little child. She is like a baby. When we consider the behaviors of an infant, a parent must be very patient with them sine in many cases, they behave contrary to the expectation of the parent. Furthermore, the parent must consistently train the child on the required skills for the infant to finally adapt to the system.

In addition, the stage of infancy requires a lot of love and affection to be complete. The same case applies to a pet since it is childlike and in many cases may not behave as per the expectations but with patience, consistency in training and affection, the do will finally come to adapt to the system.

Patience

There is so much similarities between raising a human child and raising a dog. As we had said earlier, raising a pet is like raising a human child in that the pet does not train to be successful and independent but trains to forever depend on its keeper while giving him company. The same thing happens to a child since the child is not independent but fully depends on the parents.

To bring up a child, parents ought to be very patient with her since she does not learn things in a flash of a second. The same case applies to a dog. The keeper must be patient with the pet as he trains it to be what he likes of dogs since it may not learn in a day but it will eventually learn.

Every individual would wish to have and would be proud of a well trained pet. To have the best trained dog like any other pet, it would be good to train it by yourself. My wife and I have watched our two year old dog grow from puppy stage to its adult stage now and we have trained it to be what we like.

However, raising a dog from a puppy to a well trained mature dog may sound simple but it is not as easy. It requires a lot of commitment, dedication, time, energy and patience to bring out the best dog. Just as parents take their time to raise and train their kid in to the best character, the same should be applied when raising a dog.

Acts of patience starts when purchasing a young puppy. Just as a woman does not have any man to father her kids, purchasing a puppy should not be done impulsively since this may lead to an unhappy relationship between the puppy and the owner (Sucher 14). The biggest satisfaction in owning a dog comes through endurance. It is achieved when an individual obtains a tiny, fragile, and adorable young puppy and raises it to an obedient, loyal and loving companion.

Raising a human child from infancy is not always a bed of roses since it involves a lot of work. The same case applies to raising a dog from infancy to a mature age. House training a dog may be quite challenging especially if it is done correctly. Teething may also be problematic and if the companion is not patient with the dog, it may become a hard situation to handle.

A parent has to be patient and that means the capacity to spend time with a child and listen to what he or she is saying and trying to find out what the child wanted to express or needed (Raser 4). The same thing can be said of a pet. An owner who is not willing to spend a great deal of time with a pet cannot expect a healthy relationship to occur between man and animal. Creating this bond will also require patience before the dog gets used to the companion.

A great reward is accompanied with patience in bringing up of a dog. If the owner has older children, the responsibility of raising the dog brings the family together and trains the children on the responsibilities of raising a pet.

Again, raising a dog patiently brings about satisfaction from a job well done in that the family is able to mold the pet according to their families lifestyle. Having diligence and patience in raising a dog rewards the owner with a loyal and loving companion (Sucher15). It has taken us a great deal of patience, as well as daily walks and grooming to have our Mochi as good as she is today.

Consistency

When raising a human child, the parent ought to be very consistent in training the equipping the child with the necessities of the world failure to which the child may grow up physically but lack the basic knowledge of life. For instance, the parent must consistently train the infant on how to eat diligently, how to speak, how to walk, how to use the toilet as well as many other issues that are involved in this life.

If the infant was shown how to do something once and then left to do it on her own thereafter, and then it could be hard or even impossible to do it the right way. However, if the thing is done repeatedly with the child, then she will do it perfectly in the long run.

Raising a dog also requires a lot of consistency coupled with patience in order to have the dog molded in to the lifestyle of your choice. Training a dog consistently produces a very loving and loyal companion whereas laxity may end up producing a very unruly dog (Sucher 15).

When the end product of a dog is not very attractive, the relationship between the man and the dog may be ruined thus ruining the very purpose of obtaining the pet. It is therefore important to avoid laxity and ensure consistency in everything that concerns bringing up a dog in order to ensure that the core value of obtaining a pet is maintained.

It has cost us a lot of consistency while raising our beloved Mochi since we do not have children and it was our treasured source of companion. Mochi is our only child in theory and we know that lack of consistency in training her is likely to end up in a semi trained dog which may hinder her from fully developing in to our beloved pet lifestyle.

Every interaction a dog has with her companion teaches her a lot on where she is ranked by the master and whether or not she should treat him with respect. If an individual could set some reasonable guidelines on the behavior of his dog and then consistently, firmly and gently insists that she has to follow the guidelines, then the dog in the long run treats her master with a lot of respect, utter adoration and devotion while sticking to the guidelines given by the master (Bridwel 35).

Consistency is basically the major factor in raising a dog and is mainly evident when giving the dog verbal commands. The same case applies to human children whereby if they are taught with consistence, firmness and gentleness, then they learn to abide by what their parents requires of them.

It is important to be in control of your dog so that you do not have to yell or shout at her when giving commands. This can only be achieved through consistency in a firm conversational mode.

With time, your dog should know that your verbal conversations are not suggestions but commands which she should adhere to. The dog may not understand your conversation with her at once and may at times ignore some commands but constant training while maintaining a firm tone plays a great role in your conversation with your dog (Bridwell 37).

Affection

The basic necessity of children below the age of seven is love and affection which enables them to happily embrace the broad category of issues that the parents may be trying to introduce them to. Lack of love and affection at this developmental stage may lead to improper development thus hindering the child from acquiring the basic knowledge that may be required of her.

A dog like any other pet is more of a child to its master since even during its maturity stage, she will never stop depending with her master and thus needs affection in order to have a great relationship with her companion.

When I think about cute, my 2-year-old Yorkshire Terrier named, Mochi comes to mind. Mochi is me and my wifes only child in theory. Even though shes of a different breed, a canine puppy vs. a human child, nonetheless, we have been raising her as our baby daughter and she has been treated by us as such.

Mochis cuteness to me comes greatly from how she acts around us, her behavioral actions that simulates or imitates that of a human child through our daily reoccurrences with her. We love her and spend a great deal of time playing, nurturing, and taking care of Mochi. We expend a great deal of effort taking care of her, an affection which has really strengthened the relationship between the three of us.

When dealing with a new and mature dog, it always has trouble adapting in to a new home. It thus needs considerable attention and affection for it to adapt quickly to its new environment. If a dog suddenly changes its environment and does not get the attention it requires, its transition period becomes very difficult and it results to stress and an unhealthy relationship with its master (Parrett 17).

Treating your dog with affection is impossible without involving time, money and effort. My wife and I share a lot and frequent activities with our Mochi in order to sustain a lasting bond between the three of us. For instance, frequently take walks in our lobby farm, glooming and playing in the fenced yard, quite often, we sit down with our Mochi in the couch while reading newspaper or listening to news and we also allow our dog to come and sleep with us whenever she wants our warmth.

It is again important to commit money in order to affectionately treat your dog. For instance, feeding your dog with quality food requires committing some cost as well as proving her with constant veterinary checkups for better health and such things as leashes, collar, bowls and pets. Veterinary checkups should be done annually which includes vaccination and ensuring the dog remains healthy all year round (Parrett 17).

It does not require a genius to understand the level of attention to detail required being able to have a pet that is disease-free and able to enjoy a happy existence. The same thing is needed to raise a child. A young boy or a young girl is just like a pet dog because they too cannot articulate what they need (Rosenberg 2). It is up to the pet owner and the parent to anticipate the needs of their little darlings. One can imagine the level of dedication and effort required to have that kind of mindset.

A pet owner has to work and perform in order to have beautiful, healthy, and adorable pets. The same is true when it comes to having children. A parent is always on the move. A pet owner is always ready to spring into action because the life of a pet is important. A parent will have to be ready to give time, money and of course a great deal of effort (Gardner 4).

Conclusion

A dog like a human child should be raised with lots of care in order to achieve the aim of having the pet in a home. This includes a healthy relationship between the dog and her owner for them to be good and life time companions. Among the basic necessities in raising a dog are patience, consistency and affection. Just as a human child, a dog takes time to learn the basic rules of life and especially in accordance to the owners lifestyle thus he has to be patient with the dog.

She also needs to be trained repeatedly and consistently to ensure that there is mutual understanding between her and the owner. Just as little kids require a lot of affection, dogs will lead a stress free lifestyle when given the necessary attention and affection.

Works cited

Bridwell, Jennifer. The Everything Dog Obedience Book: From Bad Dog to Good Dog: a Step-by-Step. New York, NY: Prentice. Print.

Gardner, Debbie. Raising Kids who can Protect Themselves. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2004. Print.

Parrett, Glenn. A dog for life: the practical guide to canine care. Ontario, Dundurn Press Ltd, 1992. Print.

Raser, Jamie. Raising Children You can Live With. TX: Bayou Publishing, 1999. Print.

Reistein, David. Parenting a Human vs. Raising a Pet. Associate Content, 2011. Web.

Rosenberg, Marshal. Raising Children Compassionately. New York: Puddle Dancer Press, 2005. Print.

Sucher, Jamie. Cocker Spaniels. New York, Barons Educational Series, 2009. Print.

Introduction

The issues concerning animal welfare have seen rising awareness from the public, resulting in protests and the establishment of organizations that aim to protect the rights of animals. For instance, among the most vital issues are those that pertain to violence. For instance, canine meat is consumed as part of a South Korean tradition termed Bok-Nal, or the days that involve eating dog meat to boost endurance during the hottest months of the calendar year (Maxwell et al. 1). Some nations still allow the intake of dog meat by humans due to custom, ceremony, and purported health benefits. Approximately two to three million dogs are thought to be farmed, killed, and consumed in South Korea each year (Maxwell et al. 1). Yet dog breeding is unregulated because dogs are not considered to be cattle, raising questions about the welfare of the animals. Therefore, it is an essential problem that needs rigorous regulation due to the number of dogs who suffer and the present views of the modern community who resist cooperation with nations that condone such actions.

History and Traditions of Eating Dog Meat

The history of eating dog meat has existed for hundreds of years and has transformed into a tradition. For millennia, Koreans traditionally kept dogs both as pets and as cattle (Dugnoille 8). For example, Korean historians Mark Byington and Martin T. Bale claim that human-dog interaction and the use of canine meat may be dated back to the earliest Puyo dynasty or from the 2nd century BC to 494 AD (Dugnoille 8). It was explicitly mentioned that there are archaeological remains discovered at a location in Dahaimeng, central Jilin, wherein carcasses of dogs and chickens were found, together with signs suggesting the species had been eaten as sustenance (Dugnoille 8). These remains, which date to the 3rd century BC, indicate that eating dog meat has a long history in northeast Asia (Dugnoille 8). Therefore, such a tradition did not form recently and is ingrained into the Asian community.

However, it is noteworthy that dog meat consumption was accepted as fully legal only 70 years ago. Due to the 19501953 Korean Wars attendant food scarcity, it was only recently adopted as a food supply (Maxwell et al. 2). Dog meat consumption has indeed been condemned on a global scale, yet it is still common in places like South Korea, where it is believed that 2.5 million canines are killed for food every year due to custom and its alleged benefits to health and vitality ( 4). Dog meat is consumed by 27% of Koreans, mainly elderly males (Maxwell et al. 2). More than 800,000 dog meat farms serve the market in South Korea, although dogs are not considered to be livestock under the law (Maxwell et al. 2). Dog well-being is not guaranteed by the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act, and dog farming is mainly uncontrolled (Maxwell et al. 2). According to assessments, meat farm dogs are often kept in crowded quarters at high rates of the stocking with poor nutrition and medical attention (Maxwell et al. 2). Therefore, with such overwhelming figures, it poses a threat to the well-being of animals and raises concerns in society.

Present Views

Although the views on such kind of cuisine feature have been widely accepted in the previous century, it is highly debated nowadays. All farm animals have been recognized as sentient creatures as of 2008 (Rostami et al. 66). Article 8 of the Animal Protection Law, which is termed Dongmul boho beop in Korean, outlaws hanging animals and other inhumane techniques of slaughtering them, notably prohibits conventional forms of execution (Sevin et al. 240). In other terms, the law has been established to put a halt to violent murder methods right away. Dog meat consumers, on the other hand, are aggressive and insist on having their meat appropriately processed, that is, by having it lightly seared by putting steel pipes on the animals while they were being hung, alive, by the neck until they were tired. Therefore, even with a strong promotion of animal rights, it is quite complicated since the market of dog meat was established a long time ago.

Many might assume that such an attitude certainly implies that dog meat purchasers have little or no essential moral requirement for the policing of these regulations. This appears to suggest that increasing concerns for animal protection in Korea are predicated on impact instead of socially constructed ethics. Moreover, those issues, as well as possible adverse effects for the regard of an animal against food boundary, are outweighed by the significant symbolic importance of dog meat in connection to health philosophies in Korea.

Additionally, the concept of dogs as living beings that require safety or possessing them as companion animals is a relatively recent trend in South Korea. This happened as a result of the countrys political and economic turmoil, which forced the government to prioritize human survival and progress along with conservative values of animals as products (Alberro 670). However, as the nations political and financial climate changed in the middle to late 20th century, attitudes about pet ownership and the animal welfare movement also changed (Alberro 670). According to the South Korean Farm Ministry, there were 4.57 million pet owners in the nation in 2015, or almost 22% of total households (Alberro 670). One in five South Koreans, according to a 2017 national survey, own animals (Alberro 670). Thus, an intensifying tradition of dog meat consumption and the lack of pets in households led to the common perception of dogs as livestock.

Dog Meat Opposition

Nevertheless, it is not only modern Asian society that opposes the widely accepted dog meat consumption. Among the parties that support dog welfare are the Western countries and activists, along with governments. For instance, the Animal Protection Acts content has undergone multiple revisions since its introduction in 1991, most noticeably in the 1990s, early 2000s, and 2010s, with the most recent version being in 2015 (Alberro 679). Although the size and scope of the adjustments varied from year to year, they were all typically made to increase the potential penalties and sanctions for infractions, prevent more defined behaviors, and define terminology and phrases. For instance, the Ministry for Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs explained why specific revisions were made to the Act in 2008, saying they would make it easier to determine when a breach had occurred (Alberro 679). The 2014 Animal Protection Act amendment aimed to define the terms animal and animal cruelty in a precise manner (Alberro 679). Therefore, it can be seen as increasing support of dog welfare due to better definitions with narrow scopes to protect the animals from violence and maltreatment.

Moreover, countless concerns have been raised during international events. During the preparation for the Olympiad in 1988 and the FIFA in 2002, which were held in South Koreas capital, there was much pressure on the Korean authorities (Kang 205). Prior to the World Cup, the representative of the organization wrote an open letter urging a prohibition on the sale of dog meat during the tournament (Kang 205). The letter was sent not only to the football organization in South Korea but the parliament. Nevertheless, advocates of the dog meat industry retaliated after South Korea was pressured internationally to outlaw the trade because of the championship (Hahm et al.). In advance of the tournament, the National Dog Meat Restaurants Association started a campaign to persuade spectators at the events in Korea about the essential nutrients of dog meat (Hahm et al.). Samples of the canine meat were distributed to promote the purchases and gain more support (Hahm et al.). As a result, every opposition was met with a group of people who supported the market.

Numerous rallies against the eating of dog meat have been held by Korean and foreign parties to bring awareness to the inhumane practices of the business. 2011 saw a demonstration at the South Korean embassy in San Francisco organized by the American group In Defense of Animals and the Korea Animal Rights Advocates (Joo and Chun 388). The statement they gave to the embassy had more than 15,000 signatures and urged the South Korean government to speed up efforts to halt the market (Joo and Chun 388). However, this was not the only demonstration, with Koreans taking the initiative. In order to protest the consumption of dog meat, activists in South Korea barricaded themselves in enclosures on the roads in the capital city in 2012 (Sinclair and Phillips 442). Finally, the Animal Welfare Institute held a demonstration in the U.S. as part of global demonstrations against the ingestion of dog meat in South Korea (Sinclair and Phillips 442). Thus, all parties made major efforts in order to show Korean and global opposition to dog meat commerce.

In this case, it is vital to note that in order to promote an effective national dialogue, Korean and international organizations seeking to end the market of dog meat must act carefully. Although raising awareness of the suffering involved in the dog meat industry is a crucial first step in putting a stop to the eating of dog meat, the argument should stay that only South Korea can resolve to owe to its own development. Therefore, while it requires a collective effort, there must be a unity of opinions in South Korea.

Conclusion

Hence, given the number of dogs who suffer and the current attitudes of the modern community, which oppose collaboration with countries that support such actions, it is an important issue that requires strict regulation. Koreans have kept dogs as both pets and livestock for millennia. It was only recently used as a food supply because of the 19501953 Korean Wars associated food shortage. Although there was broad acceptance of this element of food in the previous century, it is currently the subject of intense controversy. Since 2008, all farm animals have been acknowledged as sentient beings. Governments, campaigners, and Western nations are a few groups that support dog welfare. Additionally, other issues have come up during international competitions. However, even though it calls for a collective effort, South Korea must have a consensus on all matters.

Works Cited

Alberro, Andrew. The State of Modern South Korean Animal Cruelty Law: An Overview with Comparison to Relevant United States and Swiss Law and the Future. Washington University in St. Louis School of Law Review, vol. 18, no. 3, 2019, pp.665-690. Web.

Dugnoille, Julien. To Eat or not to Eat Companion Dogs: Symbolic Value of Dog Meat and HumanDog Companionship in Contemporary South Korea. Food, Culture & Society, vol. 21, no. 2, 2018, pp.214-232. Web.

Hahm, Jeeyeon Jeannie, Asli DA Tasci, and Deborah Breiter Terry. The Olympic Games Impact on South Koreas Image. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, vol. 14, 2019, 100373. Web.

Joo, S., and M. S. Chun. A Discourse Analysis on Eating Dog Meat in South Korea for 20 Years. In Transforming Food Systems: Ethics, Innovation and Responsibility. Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2022, pp. 387-391.

I heard a dog cry: More-than-human interrelatedness, ethnicity and zootherapy in South Korean civil society discourse about dog meat consumption. Ethnography, vol. 20, no. 1, 2019, pp.68-87. Web.

Kang, Hyunmee. Same World Cup, Different News Frames. The Athens Journal of Sports, vol. 9, no. 4, 2022, pp. 195-214. Web.

Maxwell, Natalie, Callum Buchanan, and Neil Evans. Hair Cortisol Concentrations, as a Measure of Chronic Activity Within the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal Axis, is Elevated in Dogs Farmed for Meat, Relative to Pet Dogs, in South Korea. Animal Welfare, vol. 28, no. 4, 2019, pp.389-395. Web.

Rostami, Ali, et al. Meat Sources of Infection for Outbreaks of Human Trichinellosis. Food Microbiology, vol. 64, 2017, pp. 65-71. Web.

Sevin, Efe, Kadir Jun Ayhan, and Diana Ingenhoff. Capturing Country Images: A Methodological Approach. The Journal of International Communication, vol. 27, no. 2, 2021, 237-257. Web.

Sinclair, Michelle, and Clive JC Phillips. The Cross-Cultural Importance of Animal Protection and Other World Social Issues. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, vol. 30, no. 3, 2017, pp.439-455. Web.

Introduction

The cause of aggression in dogs has been an ongoing debate, with some factions arguing that it stems from the breed of the dog and is hence inherent. Other groups contend that the hostility is due to environmental conditions. Aggression in dogs is characterized by loud backing, excessive hostility towards people, and the ability to attack relatives along with strangers. This essay is an analysis of factors that contribute to aggression in dogs and tries to debunk the myth that dogs are responsible for their behavior. The paper holds that people influence the behavior of domesticated dogs and should bear the burden of their pets behavior. The essay initially provides evidence that human beings are responsible for the behavior of their dogs before providing an overview of the arguments presented by the alternative view.

Nurture in Aggression

The most aggressive breeds of dogs, according to stereotypes, are German shepherd, mixed-breed dog, Pit Bull types, Rottweiler, Terrier, Spaniel, and Saint Bernard. These breeds are considered aggressive from the onset, even before their purchase. The owners of these dogs are also treated with fear, as other people imagine the dogs might attack them. The general demeanor and attitude towards the dogs are responsible for their generalized hostility in some areas (Oxley et al.). The dogs are accustomed to minimal affection from the human beings around them and adapt to this state. They do not engage in playful activities with people like the smaller breeds associated with warmth and closeness do. People new to an area may deem these dogs as aggressive by virtue of the treatment they are accorded and the adaptations that occur thereafter.

These breeds are the highest purchased and popular within the regions where aggression is reported. Studies indicate that the dogs considered aggressive are the highest purchased breeds in certain neighborhoods. The residents of these regions report the dogs as aggressive strains within these areas, yet they make the largest share of dogs assessed. This is a misconception, given that no other result is expected from these surveys. German shepherd dogs are popular in classy neighborhoods and are considered an aggressive breed (Oxley et al.). Surveys within these areas have these hounds making more than 60% of the dogs. When the analysis of the most aggressive dogs is conducted, this breed features the most. This is an error in the research process as the participants are not diverse, rendering the results of such projects ungeneralizable. Better results can be obtained by conducting projects where almost all breeds of dogs are featured, and this is not possible given the widespread preference for the aforementioned breeds.

The purchase of the dogs and their rearing is primarily for defense. This may influence their aggression and the associated features such as loud barking and attacks on strangers. The owners of these dogs orient them towards ensuring the safety of their premises. They encourage aggression by leaving the dogs outside at night to defend their property. This encourages instincts such as the identification of strangers within the allocated areas by the dogs. They respond by barking to alert their owner of the situation and attack the stranger in fulfillment of their owners requirements (Mai et al.). If owners purchased the brands considered as aggressive and trained them to be playful and friendly as some people have done, the dogs would be less combative. The existence of friendly dogs within the aggressive breeds category indicates that the tag is miscounted. This shows that altering the purpose and encouraging friendly traits within the dog is responsible for ensuring they exhibit diminished aggression.

Dogs with owners younger than 25 are more aggressive, while those owned by owners older than 40 are less aggressive. This shows that dogs emulate the energy and behavior of their owners in the course of their growth. Younger people below 25 years are energetic and indulge in chases with their dogs. They throw things at them so that they can chase them. They also encourage the dogs to bark loudly by emulating the barking sound (Kogan et al.). This generally leads to a learning experience for the dogs that are exhibited aggression. Dogs owned by older people are mainly involved in walks with their owners. This ensures that they generally remain friendly towards people and strangers, hence limited confrontation. The existence of this feature for dogs from all breeds shows that the breed of the dog contributes very little to the aggression feature. It also shows that all dogs can be fashioned to suit any purpose as desired by the owner and based on the efforts made towards achieving this purpose.

Dogs that attended puppy training classes as less aggressive towards strangers due to excessive exposure to people. Dogs with this kind of training mainly undergo positive reinforcement within the teaching centers (Mai et al.). They are rewarded for their friendliness towards people, and these dogs shun aggressive characteristics. They present as generally timid and scared dogs, exhibiting playfulness and compassion. The impact of these puppy training centers when these dogs are still young is likened to the teaching of children to enable learn specific behaviors. Puppy training techniques are the same and apply to all breeds of dogs; even the ones deemed aggressive. This uniformity further indicates that dogs cannot be blamed for their nurture. It indicates that aggression of friendliness within dogs is a matter of nurture instead of nature.

Dogs from rescue centers are more aggressive than those bought from a breeder. This is because rescue centers collect stray dogs and shelter them, preventing illness and demise. They thereafter try and rehabilitate them through teaching various behaviors. People eventually take these dogs from the rescue centers and adopt them as pets. These dogs are usually more aggressive than those from puppy training centers. The formative stages of dogs from rescue centers were characterized by the need to survive, and these dogs adopted behaviors that enhanced this prerequisite (Kogan et al.). Puppies from training centers, on the other side, are accustomed to the provision of all their needs. The stray dogs learn how to hunt, and this causes the adoption of barking and aggression techniques. These are vital adaptations against humans who would seem to harm them or prey that may predate on them. This shows that these behaviors are mere stereotypes of some breeds and instead emanate from environmental demands and the need to live.

Dogs trained using punishment and negative reinforcement is more aggressive towards strangers and are likely to lunge at family members. This is because negative reinforcement promotes fear and hatred towards people who deprive them of vital requirements such as food (Mai et al.). Negative reinforcement is a feature of Pavlovs hypothesis that encourages deprivation as a means of rehabilitating behavior and installing new traits in animals. These dogs generally detest human contact, and this may explain their aggression towards family members and strangers. According to these dogs, human beings are associated with lack and suffering hence the need to evade human contact.

Nature in Aggression

The alternative faction contends that aggression in dogs stems from breed characteristics associated with genetics with these traits. They argue that breeds such as German shepherd and Rottweiler are inherent. These people submit that there are genes within these dogs that are responsible for their inherent aggression. This school of thought also turns to the evolution theory as an argument to support their stand (Essig et al.). They argue that during the evolution of these breeds of dogs, there was a need to attain aggression as a means of surviving the wild habitat. The wild habitat before the domestication of various animals by man was plagued with danger and extensive hunting. Dogs had to develop aggressive features to scare potential hunters and predators that may have sought to harm them. This assertion is also based on observation of other animals and the various features they have acquired over the years.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the notion that dogs are responsible for their aggression and the stereotyping of some breeds based on this assumption is misguided. This belief may point to the classical human escapism feature, diverting attention to other factors and absolving themselves of any error. The evidence of human involvement in the development and existence of aggression in dogs is overwhelming. The assumption that some breeds of domesticated dogs are inherently so is also inaccurate, and there is a need for additional research in this field. Further analysis into the role of human beings in this phenomenon is bound to eliminate misinformation and spur the discovery of mechanisms that encourage certain behaviors in domesticated dogs.

Works Cited

Essig, Garth F., et al. Dog bite injuries to the face: Is There Risk with Breed Ownership? A systematic review with meta-analysis. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, vol. 117, 2019, pp. 182188.

Kogan, Lori, et al. Small animal veterinarians perceptions, experiences, and views of common dog breeds, dog aggression, and breed-specific laws in the United States. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 16, no. 21, 2019, p. 4081.

Mai, Dac L., et al. Beyond puppy selectionconsidering the role of puppy raisers in bringing out the best in assistance dog puppies. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2021, pp. 110.

Oxley, James Andrew, et al. Contexts and consequences of dog bite incidents. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2018, pp. 3339.

Introduction

Since the beginning of time, mankind has always domesticated wild animals. Some of these animals have been well domesticated while some have not. A dog has formed a very close association with mankind. Dogs have often been described as a mans companion. Initially, domesticated dogs were used for hunting and are still used for that purpose even at present but to a lesser extent. It has been shown that dogs are quite intelligent and can be easily trained.

The ease with which a dog can be trained has made it to be very close to humans. The friendship between dogs and human beings has seen both parties benefit. Man has taken several steps to take care of this unique friend, for example, police dogs usually have some kind of body gears to protect their from bodies from being hurt, especially when on outdoor missions. Dogs that are kept as pets are often shown much compassion as they are viewed, as part of the owner.

One of how pet dogs are treated well is by being clothed. Although this is a controversial practice, as will be seen in this paper, it can be argued, that dog fashion is an extension of a personal style. Dogs have been integrated into the life of human beings and have strong bonds making them be treated as part of a family. Out of the love that dog owners have for their dogs, they have gone to the extent of buying them clothes. This literature review will prove that dog fashion is just an extension of a personal style.

Methodology

To undertake this research internet sources were used. Five current sources were picked up for the literature review. The article ranged from a newspaper article, web pages to a scholarly article. The articles tackled the topic from a variety of perspectives. The summaries of the articles are highlighted below.

Article 1

RSPCA, RSPCA says people, who dress up their dogs, could be prosecuted. The Telegraph, 2009. Web.

Summary

This article strongly presented the opinion of RSPCA regarding dogs being dressed by their owners. It is claimed that forcing animals to wear clothes is cruel and harmful to their health. The article shows that dog clothes are taken seriously as top designers have engaged in the business, while others have organized dog show fashions: Top fashion designers, including Vivienne Westwood and Ben de Lisi, have also created dog designs, while the London store Harrods has an annual fashion show called Pet-a-Porter (RSPCA 1).

It was argued that though there were some instances where clothes were necessary for dogs, clothes are generally not good for dogs. It was argued that during winter, dogs needed clothes, especially small dogs, which stay indoors most of the time. Views aired have criticized dog dressing and termed the practice as going overboard:

To see a little dog dressed up in boots, I think, is a little over the top. You can buy anything fashion-wise for your dog. I have an extreme love of the dog, but I dont like to see them dressed up like little human beings. I dont think they like it either. Its unnatural. (RSPCA 1)

It was argued that pet owners ought to ensure that they take care of their pets and ensure that they have normal behavior. It was argued that overdressing dogs may hamper their normal behavior, thus becoming a violation of the law. It was sadly expressed that people have taken to dogs simply because they are viewed to be fashionable. The trend of taking up dogs because they are fashionable was said to be triggered by the rise in celebrities with handbag dogs (RSPCA 1). It is strongly argued in the article that it has become a common trend for people to take up dogs as pets basically because dogs have become fashionable and as such these dogs have been subjected to what human beings think is best for them (the dogs) and not what is best the dogs.

Evaluation

I found this article to be very basic in supporting the thesis statement for this paper. The argument is clear; people are taking up dogs not actually as pets but rather because it has become a fashion. Celebrities have enhanced this habit of making dogs fashionable. Dressing dogs is not done for the comfort of the dogs but rather for the comfort of the owner. Simply, put the owners admire their dogs dressed. This article shows, basically why people tend to dress their dogs; it is their personality that they extend.

Article 2

Gregorich, Jenny. Why Do People Buy Clothes for Their Canines? Ezine Mark, 2010. Web.

Summary

Gregorich presented an argument in favor of dog clothes and generally argued that it is for the benefit of the dog and not for the owner, as the first article above has argued. The first argument that the author presented was that the small breed of dogs needs to be protected against the harsh environment for example during the winter: Dogs with small coats often shiver during the winters, and without adequate clothing to keep them warm they are likely to fall sick (Gregorich 1). The author further argued that this is not a new habit as clothes have been used by the military to keep the dogs safe when in a bad environment.

The second reason forwarded is that clothes are a way of showing love to the best friends of man. The author believed that buying clothes for dogs would make them feel special. Dog owners are cautioned to buy their dogs dresses that feel comfortable on them. The author furthermore argued that dog owners should buy clothes that their dogs will be proud to wear. The author argued that a dog wearing the right clothes will feel proud.

The author believed that clothes make dogs confident Wearing clothes for dogs certainly helps them garner attention from curious onlookers (Gregorich 1). Wearing of clothes by dogs was also associated with being friendly Wearing dog clothes makes them appear friendly and approachable, especially to children (Gregorich 1). The clothes were finally associated with shaping the character of a dog.

Evaluation

This was an article from a web page and I do not agree with many of the opinions expressed in the article. I picked this article to express plainly to what extent efforts have been made to justify that dog clothes are for the right of the dogs and not the owner. Most of the arguments that the author made do not sound realistic, and I felt that they were just meant to justify the habit of dog fashion.

The author argued that clothes could make dogs confident and friendly. I believe that clothes have nothing to do with the confidence and friendliness of a dog; these are characters acquired upon training a dog. I do believe, that the issue of dogs feeling proud does not arise.

Dogs are naturally meant to be without any clothes. How can one prove that dogs feel ashamed when they do not have clothes? I believe this article shows the true stand of the owner who dresses their dogs. Dressing dogs are not actually for the benefit of the dogs but for the joy of the owners. The owners feel that their dogs look cool with clothes on. The dog owners identify more with the dogs when they have their clothes on. Therefore it is just right to say that dog fashion is just an extension of personal style.

Article 3

Dog Clothes. Dog Clothes. I love India, n.d. Web.

Summary

This article expresses similar opinions as those expressed by Gregorich in the immediate above article. Some reasonable arguments are made in this article. It suggested that humans like the world of fantasy and that dogs of late are taking to that trend. The article gave suggestions indicating that dogs are at peace wearing beautiful clothes. The article gives several cautions that owners should take when clothing their dogs.

It is advisable that very attractive clothing should be avoided to discourage the dog from chewing the cloth. Clothes should be comfortable on the dog, for instance, the distance between the cuts for the paws should be comfortable for your dog (Dog Clothes 1). The article goes too lengthy to describe the kind of clothes which should be worn by dogs when on outdoor activities, for instance, hunting. Strong arguments are made favoring dog clothes as a way of protecting them, especially when they are out in the woods Clothes for active dogs are designed especially to keep them from getting scratches and cuts in the woods by the sharp bushes and splintering brambles (Do Clothes 1).

In the article, it is expressed that a dogs coats, vests, boots, and hats should not be very tight but should remain securely in place while the dog is on the hunt or a hike with you (Dog Clothes 1). In general, the article expresses in a clear way that clothes should be used to protect the dog from cold and a harsh environment.

Evaluation

This article sheds light on how and when dogs should be dressed. The arguments made in the article are mostly reasonable except the first remark made, which claimed that dogs have a keen interest in fashion: even dogs take on some of the spirits of their owners and like to wear clean beautiful outfits sometimes (Dog Clothes 1). Otherwise, the article presented concise arguments that still favored our topic statement.

Examining properly the reasons that are given for dressing a dog, it becomes clear that people do not dress dogs for those reasons. The article exclusively associates dog dressing with bad weather and environmental conditions. In a real sense most dog owners do not go out in the woods to hunt nor do they expose themselves to chilly weather conditions. As a matter, the dogs are taken out when it is most appropriate to walk them around.

When dogs have walked around, in most cases, they are taken around safe environments, safe for both the owner and the dog. The description given by the article above applies to police and military dogs, which are often exposed to challenging environmental conditions. Dogs that are kept as pets are dressed because the owners want to.

Article 4

Foderaro, Lisa. In More Office Cubicles, the Dog Has Its Day, 2009. The New York Times. Web.

It is an article that appeared in the New Times. In this article, the author brings to reality the close bond that has been formed between human beings and dogs which are kept as pets. Foderaro describes how dogs are part of the life of their owners. The relation is so close that at times dogs have been described as a partner who cannot be left behind:

Employees say they bring their dogs to work simply because they hate to leave them home alone, and they are more than willing to sacrifice coffee breaks for trips to the fire hydrant. Once at the office, they say, dogs help relieve stress (it is difficult to feel tense when something is licking your knee) and provide a measure of security for people who keep late hours. (Foderaro 1)

The author presented various views about what employees at various capacities thought of coming to the workplace with their dogs. Most of them were excited and believed that it was a great thing to do. The employees argued that leaving dogs at only makes them (the owners) feel bad Employees say they bring their dogs to work simply, because they hate to leave them home alone, and they are more than willing to sacrifice coffee breaks for trips to the fire hydrant (Foderaro 1).

It is evident that people close associations with dogs that at times they act as therapy When youre crazy, and you want to kill somebody, and she comes over and puts her paw up, whatever you were aggravated about completely disappears (Foderaro 1). The author recorded the story of a dog that even came to the office when the owner was sick.

Evaluation

I picked up this article because it is shown, how people treat dogs. Apart from the fact that office dogs might infringe on the rights of other employees at the work place, there is nothing wrong with dogs being in offices as long as they maintain office etiquette.

Dog owners who take their dogs to the office have various personal reasons for that. It is clear from the above article that it is not the dogs that need to be at the office but rather the owners who want to see them at their offices.

On the surface, this article does not relate directly to the topic statement but examined closely one gets to understand that dog owners, in most instances, treat dogs for their interests. It is worth noting that as much as a dog might enjoy being in an office if the owner changes his/her mind and believes that he/she does not feel good seeing the pet around, then the pet will not have a say but stay where the owner will see it fit. The argument is simple, dog dressing just like dogs accompanying their owners to the offices, is mainly in the interest of the owners.

Article 5

Planck, Max. Human-like social skills in dogs? The trend in Cognitive Science, 2005. Web.

The author explained the origin of the close relationship between dogs and human beings. He claimed that dogs are skilled at reading human social and communicative behavior (Planck 1). The author claimed that this behavior of easily adapting to human behavior makes dogs be easily trained to carry out some tasks. It has made it possible for dogs to coexist with human beings everywhere. The author quoted researches carried out to show that dogs over time have evolved skills that have to enable them to read human behavior. The researches quoted have shown that dogs intuitively know what human being communicate to then even if they do not use words.

Dogs have been noted to accurately read simple symbols and act on them decisively. The author explained that dogs unlike other animals can cope well with other animals. The convergence of human behavior and that of dogs was associated with the enculturation of the human culture to that of dogs. The authors argued that the ability to read human social behavior should develop over a dogs lifetime and should vary depending on the amount of exposure a dog has had to humans (Planck 1). Furthermore, the author indicated that: Taken together, these comparative findings suggest that the unusual social skills of dogs arose as a result of domestication and represent a case of convergent evolution with humans (Planck 1).

Evaluation

I picked this article specifically because of the scientific explanation that it offers. According to the article, dogs can cope well with human beings because of the skills that these dogs possess. The skills possessed by the dogs make it easier for them to be trained to behave in a way that humans admire.

Training an animal to behave in a way that a person admires is simply domesticating an animal. This ability to be easily domesticated has made the dog a favorite animal as it becomes so easy to walk around with it, take it to your workplace, and even cloth it the way you feel is good. This article simply shows that dogs are easily domesticated and trainable, and thus because of this they have been used as a way of expressing personal styles for those who own them. It should be noted that because of the flexibility of the dogs, they may not object to dog dressing but rather may adapt to wearing clothes due to their flexibility in adapting to new ways.

Conclusion

The five articles reviewed above have shown that dogs are highly flexible. They can adapt due to the skills and traits that they possess. Some of the reasons, which have been forwarded in some of the articles for dogs, being dressed do not make much sense and they can be just be viewed as a way that humans use to justify this practice. It is worth noting that in most cases dressing of dogs is not done for protection as most of the dogs are owned as pets and spend most of their time in safe environments. Thus when dogs adapt to wearing dresses, it is not because they are proud but rather because they have adapted and learned that it is the way of its master.

Works Cited

Dog Clothes. Dog Clothes. I love India, n.d.

Foderaro, Lisa. In More Office Cubicles, the Dog Has Its Day, 2009. The New York Times.

Gregorich, Jenny. Why Do People Buy Clothes for Their Canines? Ezine Mark, 2010. Web.

Planck, Max. Human-like social skills in dogs? Trend in Cognitive Science, 2005. Web.

RSPCA. RSPCA says people who dress up their dogs could be prosecuted. The Telegraph, 2009.

As I look back on my childhood, I cannot think of a time when we did not have at least one dog in the house. Growing up I always overheard my parents talking to other parents about the benefits of us growing up with dogs in the house. Recently I completed additional research to understand the benefits of children growing up with dogs in the house for a friend. There were so many things listed, and I quickly became overwhelmed. After completing my research, I found that having a dog in the house is very beneficial for children of all ages.

The first benefits of children growing up with a dog in the house are health related. There are many health benefits for children. Studies have shown that dogs help lower children’s blood pressure, reduce stress, and anxiety. Children are also less likely to develop allergies and asthma, as dogs’ provide exposure to a mild amount of germs. The exposure to the germs increases the child’s immune system to help prevent sickness as they grow up. Owning a dog also helps the child become more active, as the child can become responsible for daily walks. There are so many health benefits for children who live in a house with at least one dog.

Children also obtain a large amount of psychological benefits from owning a dog. From experience, I can say that dogs teach children empathy and unconditional love. Being able to care for a dog that is dependent on you for everything teaches you empathy. The child learns how to read the dogs needs, teaching them empathy. Due to a dog’s ability to love unconditionally, they can comfort, provide support, and listen to their problems without judgment. By doing so, the child is also learning how to love others unconditionally without judgement. Owning a dog can also aid in increasing children’s verbal skills and socialization. In the past I have observed how a dog’s presence has provided a verbal stimulus to help a child practice talking and socializing with others at an early age. Dogs can provide social, emotional, and cognitive language skill support for children. As children grow older, dogs can teach them impulse control, generosity, patience towards others, and improve their self-esteem. Growing up with a dog in the house has many psychological benefits for children of all ages.

As a child, I can remember my parents always reminding how owning a dog required a lot of responsibility.

My pet is a dog named Yogi, and in this essay, I will talk about him.

Yogi is an adorable brown dog that has a few black spots spread across his body and tail. He is a kelpie crossed with a border collie, and he has fluffy velvety ears. Even though Yogi has a very strong body frame, he has a very gentle face and is always a friendly dog to those whom he knows. If a stranger approaches our house, however, Yogi can get very aggressive. He always barks loudly to attract our attention to an approaching stranger.

Yogi loves many things. Among these is to nuzzle his wet nose in my hands and in the hands of my parents and siblings. He craves attention most of the time because he is scared of being abandoned or ignored. I actually came across Yogi while he was still a puppy. It appears that his owner had abandoned him on the road. I found him wandering in our neighborhood. I informed my parents about the puppy. I wanted to keep him. They communicated with the local authorities so the authorities could allow us to adopt the pet.

Yogi loves food, especially bones. Once we have fed him his regular food, we always give him a few bones on which to chew. Yogi can actually spend whole afternoons chewing bones because he loves them so much. Whenever Yogi is worried, he looks at us with desperate eyes that appear like he is sad. He does so while wagging his tail from one side to the other. Whenever we see him exhibiting these signs, we immediately prepare him a quick meal and some bones for him to eat.

Yogi has also made it a habit to play with our cat, Faith. Sometimes, Yogi plays with and pours out the cat’s water, something that always leaves the cat giving him a vicious glare. Sometimes, the cat even meows, as if to let Yogi know that he is not very impressed with Yogi for pouring out his water. Whenever my dog plays with the cat’s water, I see him lifting his head as some of the cat’s water pours out from his tongue, like the way water drops from a waterfall.

Yogi also likes the chipping sound made by the birds that reside on the trees in our compound. Whenever Yogi hears these sounds, he raises his ears and points them toward the direction where the chirping sound is originating. One can always observe the way his eyes light up with excitement whenever the birds begin making their soothing noises.

I love Yogi very much. He is the best pet you could ever dream of. I am grateful to fate that he appeared in my life.

Dogs have been living alongside humans for more than 15,000 years, and with good reason. The companionship of a trusted dog is one that few other animals can provide. From their unconditional love to their unwavering loyalty, dogs are the perfect companion for anyone looking for a friend that will always be there for them.

Owning a dog can be one of life’s greatest joys, but it also comes with responsibilities that can’t be ignored. Before deciding to adopt a four-legged friend, it is important to consider all the advantages that come with owning a dog. So, I would like to explore some of the benefits of having a dog in my essay.

Physical Benefits of Having a Dog

Having a dog may be one of the best things you can do for your health. In fact, more than 20 studies have shown that owning a dog can lead to lower blood pressure and cholesterol levels, as well as a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease.

Besides, having a dog means you will have regular opportunities for physical activity. Walks and playtime with your pup can help you stay active and improve your overall health. Whether you’re going on long walks, runs, hikes, or just playing fetch in the park, having a canine friend helps ensure that you stay active throughout the year no matter the weather outside.

Not only will you get more exercise from playing with your pup, but the bond between the two of you will grow stronger as well! Besides, exercising releases endorphins, which help elevate your mood. It has been proven that people who own dogs tend to live healthier lives than non-dog owners.

Mental Benefits of Having A Dog

Dogs don’t judge, they just love unconditionally. They provide unconditional love and loyalty like no other creature on Earth. They don’t care what you look like or how much money you make; they will love you just the same. This kind of love is something that many people need in their lives, especially those who may not have a large social network or family nearby. With a loyal pup by your side, you will never feel lonely again! Additionally, dogs are fiercely loyal to their owners and will do anything to protect them. This makes them great watchdogs and guard dogs as well.

Having a dog can also lead to improved mental health due to increased levels of serotonin and dopamine (the “happy hormones”) in the brain.

Furthermore, having a pup to care for gives you something else to focus on rather than dwelling on negative thoughts or feelings about yourself or others.

Studies have shown that spending time with your pup can reduce depression and anxiety while improving self-esteem. Dogs also provide comfort during hard times; their presence is comforting in its own unique way. On top of all that, they make us laugh—and laughter is truly the best medicine!

Societal Benefits of Having A Dog

A dog is a great companion. They can offer companionship and support to people living alone. Dogs also provide a sense of safety and security for people who are afraid of being alone, or who have elderly or disabled family members living with them.

Having a pup is not only beneficial for yourself, but also for society as whole. Dogs are natural social lubricants; when people contact each other through their puppies, conversations become more effortless and friendlier!

Furthermore, having a companion animal gives us more reasons to go out into our neighborhoods, which helps support local businesses and strengthens community ties among neighbors.

Last but not least, having a dog as a pet can bring many benefits, including reducing crime in urban areas. Studies have found that having a canine companion can decrease crime rates in some cities by as much as 50%. This is because dogs act as deterrents for criminals who could target vehicles and homes, because they know there will be someone waiting inside if they try to break in. Furthermore, criminals are deterred from entering areas filled with canines due to the potential danger of being confronted by them.

Conclusion

As you can see, there are many benefits to having a four-legged friend in your life!

From providing physical activity opportunities to promoting emotional wellness, dogs really do make our lives richer in so many ways.

To my mind, if you’re thinking about getting yourself or someone else an animal companion this year, consider all the wonderful things having a pup has to offer — you won’t regret it.

Pit bulls, often the subject of controversy and misunderstanding, deserve a fair and informed perspective. These dogs, known for their strength and loyalty, have been unjustly stigmatized due to misconceptions perpetuated by media sensationalism and biased portrayals. It’s time to set the record straight and advocate for a more balanced understanding of pit bulls, focusing on responsible ownership and promoting positive interactions with these animals.

Challenging Stereotypes

Pit bulls have gained an undeserved reputation as aggressive and dangerous dogs. However, it’s important to note that no breed is inherently dangerous; it’s the environment and treatment that shape their behavior. Pit bulls, like any other breed, can be loving, loyal, and well-behaved companions when raised in a caring and responsible home.

Media Sensationalism

Media plays a significant role in shaping public perception of pit bulls. Sensationalized stories of pit bull attacks dominate headlines, perpetuating the negative stereotype. Yet, these instances are often outliers, overshadowing countless positive interactions between pit bulls and humans. By focusing on responsible ownership and responsible media coverage, we can begin to shift this narrative.

Loyalty and Affection

Pit bulls are renowned for their loyalty and affection toward their owners. Countless stories highlight their protective nature, making them excellent family pets. Advocates of pit bulls often share tales of their dogs’ unwavering loyalty, demonstrating that these dogs can be gentle and loving companions.

Community Impact

Promoting responsible pit bull ownership can have a positive impact on communities. Encouraging proper training, socialization, and responsible behavior on the part of owners can help mitigate any potential risks associated with dog ownership. Well-trained pit bulls can become therapy dogs, service animals, and even participate in community outreach programs, breaking down the negative stereotype.

Education and Training

Education is key to dispelling the myths surrounding pit bulls. Proper training and socialization are essential for any dog breed, and pit bulls are no exception. With the right training, they can thrive in various environments and interact safely with people and other animals. By providing resources and support to pit bull owners, we can foster a community of responsible guardians.

Human-Canine Bond

The bond between humans and dogs is profound and well-documented. Pit bulls have the potential to form deep connections with their owners, offering companionship, protection, and emotional support. By recognizing the positive aspects of this relationship, we can encourage responsible pet ownership and the development of strong, loving bonds.

Rescue and Rehabilitation

Many pit bulls find themselves in shelters due to overbreeding, abandonment, or misguided fears. However, with the right care, training, and rehabilitation, these dogs can become wonderful pets. Rescue organizations are working tirelessly to give pit bulls a second chance, highlighting the potential for positive change when we treat these dogs with compassion and patience.

Promoting Positive Interactions

Creating positive interactions between pit bulls and the community is essential to overcoming prejudice. Public events, training classes, and educational programs can help familiarize people with the true nature of these dogs. Encouraging individuals to meet well-trained and socialized pit bulls can help dispel fears and shift perceptions.

Legislation and Advocacy

Laws and regulations targeting specific breeds, commonly known as breed-specific legislation (BSL), can perpetuate the negative stereotypes around pit bulls. Advocacy efforts should focus on encouraging responsible dog ownership across all breeds rather than targeting one specific type. By working together to promote responsible ownership and education, we can address the root causes of any negative behavior.

Conclusion

It’s time to challenge the misconceptions and stigmas associated with pit bulls. These dogs have the potential to be loving, loyal, and positive additions to families and communities. By focusing on responsible ownership, education, and promoting positive interactions, we can reshape public perception and advocate for fair treatment of pit bulls. It’s up to us to change the narrative and give pit bulls the chance they deserve to show their true colors as wonderful, affectionate companions.

In Alistair MacLeod’s short stories As Birds Bring Forth the Sun (Birds) and Winter Dog, MacLeod emphasizes the power of past memories to influence the present. In each story, both of which take place in Cape Breton, Macleod describes how fates and fortunes intertwine with the life and devotion of dogs with their male owners. In Winter Dog, the dog is a symbol of the narrator’s youth, while the canine in Birds symbolizes family myth or a deathly curse. The cultural depictions of dogs in both short stories symbolize guidance, protection, strength and faithfulness. They are also symbols of protective powers, loyalty and often appear in the myth and folklore of Celtic lands. Is having a dog in one of Macleod’s short stories a blessing, curse or both? This essay will look at both stories in detail.

“Brothers and sister I bid you beware/Of giving your heart to a dog to tear”. This quote taken from the poem The Power of the Dog by Kipling, illustrates the torment the owner of a dog faces should they embark on owning one. Dogs can be a source of such joy in your life but this is also matched or even surpassed by the pain and sorrow they can also bring as anyone who has owned a dog or several in their lifetime can well attest. The agony of owning a dog can come from many sources: the dog can die too soon of an illness or an accident or worse, the dog can live fifteen years and then tear your heart out because you loved it for so long. For the narrators in both stories, owning a dog comes with an understanding that it will be a blessing or curse and that the truth will surface eventually about which one it is.

The dogs in these short stories arrived as pups (in a box or crate) from elsewhere. One dog saves a life (the golden one), while another dog (the grey one), mistakenly takes a life. The female dog in Birds (the title signifies a folk belief) “had been left, when a pup, at the family’s gate in a small handmade box and no one knew where she had come from or that she would eventually grow to such a size.” (MacLeod 118). The unnamed protagonist in the story Winter Dog, after seeing his children playing with a neighbour’s dog in their yard, recalls the time his family purchased a male dog when he “was twelve and he came as a pup of about two months in a crate to the railroad station which was about eight miles from where we lived.” (MacLeod 36).

The strength of both dogs is remarked upon early in each story. In the opening paragraph of Birds, the dog is given the heroic Gaelic name, cù mòr glas (the big grey one). The Irish word for hound is cù, which is also “the first syllable in the name of the great heroes Cùchulainn and Cù Roi.” (Monaghan 132). It is fascinating that MacLeod chose the colour grey for the dog in Birds because in Celtic mythology and folklore, it is the black dog that warns of war, death or death-warning (Monaghan 132). The green dog in Celtic mythology, Cù Síth, barked loudly but could only bark three times, however on the third bark, “it sprang forward and devoured anyone nearby.” (Monaghan 132). The name of cù mor glas is altered later in the story.

Cù mor glas is described by her owner as “large and grey, a sort of staghound from another time. And if she jumped up to lick his face, which she loved to do, she would be on the verge of knocking him down and he would be forced to take two or three backward steps before he could regain his balance.” (MacLeod 118). This habit of the grateful dog jumping up to lick the man’s face illustrates her loyalty to her owner (also an ominous warning of a future event). She is so strong that, while still a puppy, cù mòr glas survives being run over by the “steel wheel of a horse-drawn cart” suffering from crushed ribs and broken bones (MacLeod 118).

The dog is grateful to her owner for nursing her back to health from her carriage injury despite his family urging that “her neck be broken by his strong hands or that he grasp her by the hind legs and swing her head against a rock, thus putting an end to her misery.” (MacLeod 119). The dog must have known she was a lost cause so she was appreciative of her owner’s unwavering care for her as by all rights she should have died from that accident and her later injuries. In her book, Shameless: The Canine and the Feminine in Ancient Greece, Cristiana Franco states that “when the master raises and cares for the dog, the ethical model that regulates their relationship tends to appear, through the language of duty and debt for care received, quite parallel to that of parent-child relationships.” (Franco 123).

The narrator in Winter Dog describes his golden canine as “tremendously strong and in the winter months I would hitch him to a sleigh which he pulled easily and willingly on almost any kind of surface. When he was harnessed I used to put a collar around his neck and attach a light line to it so that I might have some minimum control over him, but it was hardly ever needed. He would pull home the Christmas tree or bag of flour or the deer which was shot far back in the woods; and when we visited our winter snares he would pull home the gunnysacks which contained the partridges and rabbits we gathered.” (MacLeod 38). Here the dog proves his loyalty because he was purchased to be a cattle collie dog and, ultimately, as a working dog, “turned out to be no good at all and no one knew why.” (MacLeod 37). Dogs proving their loyalty to their masters dates back to ancient times. In fact, when the last king of the Persians died, Darius III, everyone abandoned him except his loyal dog. His dog remained at his side despite knowing he would no longer be nurtured by Darius (Franco 47).

Perhaps the dog sensed that specific duties were expected of him and when he brought “panic instead of order and to make things worse instead of better” (MacLeod 37), his owner stuck by him and the dog rewarded him with unwavering loyalty and strength. Or, as Franco states in her book, that “even when it performs tasks on a human being’s behalf, the dog acts with autonomy: it’s up to the dog to decide whether it will respect the command or not.” (Franco 170). The dog was also described unfavourably as “worse than nothing” (38). Yet still, the family stuck by him despite the dog being unremarkable in almost every way and he “continued to grow grey and golden and was, as everyone agreed, a beautiful-looking dog.” (MacLeod 38). Unlike the dog in Birds who warranted being named, the dog in Winter Dog was never given a name. Perhaps this was due to the unworthiness of the mutt (he was suspected of having German Shepherd blood), or the narrator simply thought this detail unimportant.

The dog in Birds eventually healed from her injuries and the family gradually became accustomed to her. One day, during a spring thaw, the dog bolted for some unbeknownst reason, never to return. The family, in addition to the father who raised her and nursed her back to health, had become attached to her and were morose at the dog’s sudden departure. A full year passed from the time the dog vanished to the day when the father and two of his teenaged sons were fishing by a small islet and he spotted his beloved dog on top of the island’s highest hill. He shouted out “M’eudal cù mòr glas”, which meant “dear or darling” in Gaelic (MacLeod 121). The dog saw his former owner and darted down the hill at once. Cù mòr glas jumped up and put her large paws on his shoulders as she used to do when she was younger. The father was on unstable ground, however, and he fell under the weight of the enormous dog. On the same hill cù mòr glas had come sprinting down, six more dogs suddenly appeared over the top of the hill. They had never seen this stranger, who was still struggling under their mother and mistook her actions as one of self-defence. Or perhaps these pups attacked because they had not been raised by humans and had grown up in the wilds of Cape Breton. Their animal instincts quickly took over:

They fell upon him in a fury, slashing his face and tearing aside his lower jaw and ripping out his throat, crazed with blood-lust or duty or perhaps starvation. The cù mòr glas turned on them in her own savagery, slashing and snarling and, it seemed, crazed by their mistake; driving them bloodied and yelping before her, back over the brow of the hill where they vanished from sight but could still be heard screaming in the distance. It all took perhaps little more than a minute (MacLeod 121-122)

The father died from his wounds and the dog and her pups were never seen again, or “never seen again in the same way.” (MacLeod 123). Over the years, there were sporadic sightings of cù mòr glas and she grew into a legend like “the Loch Ness Monster or the Sasquatch on a smaller scale.” (MacLeod 123). The younger son on the boat that fateful day began having nightmares of his father being torn to shreds. He started to call the dog the cù mòr glas á bhàis, the big grey dog of death. His night terrors became so frequent that he imagined he saw the dog everywhere and he wound up taking his own life with a fishing knife to the throat and then plunging into the ocean. Another brother lived until the age of forty but was killed outside a pub in Glasgow one night by a “large, grey-haired man” and supposedly, “six other large, grey-haired men who beat him to death on the cobblestones” (124). The colour grey and the number six figured prominently in the death of this particular brother. The family blamed this on the curse of the cù mòr glas á bhàis, and would continue to do so for generations. Near the end of the story, the narrator is in the hospital with his five “grey-haired” brothers, keeping vigil by their dying father. The oldest brother drove down from Montreal and took great pains to avoid “Greyhound” bus stations just to not tempt fate. The family is well aware that their beliefs of the big grey dog of death are seen as strange by most and shared by no one but them, but there are also “men who believe the earth is flat and that the birds bring forth the sun.” (MacLeod 127).

As we can see, the dog in Birds started off as a blessing but resulted in a curse for the owner and future generations of his family.

The short story Winter Dog does not dwell in the world of mythology like Birds, and in contrast, it turns a curse into a blessing. The latter part of the story in Winter Dog focuses on the narrator as a boy, going with his dog to check their snares one snowy winter Sunday. The dog and his owner spotted a dead seal on the ice and decided to inspect it. The narrator decided to take the seal home and strapped a harness to his dog and attached him to a sleigh. The dog suddenly became uneasy and started to whine but the owner did not pay attention to the dog’s clairvoyant behaviour. After about two hundred yards, the dog and sleigh crashed through the thin ice and plunged into the icy depths. When the dog popped out of the ice, the owner frantically tried to grab him by the collar. He managed to free the dog from the water and took off the harness. The dog then began to walk around him in circles whining once more as perhaps a warning, and then bolted for the trees. The boy continued along, only to fall through the ice himself. He cried out and his loyal dog returned immediately, though the dog was himself freezing and afraid. As the dog moved closer to his owner in the ice, the boy grabbed the dog’s harness. The resilient dog then backed up pulling the boy out of the freezing water. Now both were in fear of hypothermia, but the dog lead his owner back safely through the snowstorm and to home.

The boy was so afraid of being found foolish or disobedient that he snuck back into the house with the dog, changed his clothes and then went downstairs to the party going on in his house. Some guests wondered why the dog was soaking wet but the boy never “told any one of the afternoon’s experience or that he had saved my life.” (MacLeod 47). Two years after saving his master’s life, the dog was shot in a neighbour’s yard. Despite being shot and losing a lot of blood, the mighty dog still managed to drag himself three-quarters of a mile towards home. The boy later learns that his own father had asked the neighbour to shoot the dog: that same dog who had saved his son’s life two years earlier: that same dog that began as a curse to the family who had spent good money to get him only to end up as a blessing as a lifesaver. The dog was killed for many reasons:

The dog had become increasingly powerful and protective, to the extent that people were afraid to come in the yard. And he had also bitten two of the neighbour’s children and caused them to be frightened of passing our house on their journeys to and from school. And perhaps there was also the feeling in the community that he was getting more than his share of the breeding: that he travelled farther than other dogs on his nightly forays and that he fought off and injured the other smaller dogs who might compete with him for female favours. Perhaps there was fear that his dominance and undesirable characteristics did not bode well for future generations. (MacLeod 48-49)

The narrator, now a father, recalls the memory of his dog as he sees his own children playing with a dog. He now knows he is only alive to father his children solely based on the unselfish actions of his faithful dog who placed himself in harm’s way to save his owner’s life and then was killed for his loyalty. The recollection of his dog “persists in [his] memory and in [his] life and he persists physically as well. There, in the golden-grey dogs with their black-tipped ears and tails, sleeping in the stables or in the lees of woodpiles or under the porches or curled beside the houses which face towards the sea.” (MacLeod 49).

As we can see, the dogs in both stories remained etched in the memories of those they had touched long after they were gone. Both dogs initially blessed their owners with unwavering loyalty and support but then were paradoxically damned for simply being what they were, dogs. For the owners in the stories, having a dog acted as both a blessing and a curse. The family of Birds did not try to uncover their blessing but rather succumbed to their generational affliction. As the narrator in Winter Dog acknowledges, a curse should immediately follow on the heels of a blessing-that being, without the sacrifice of his golden dog, he would not be alive today.