This is why you stupid cunts







Docking is important in certain breeds and is more inhumane to not dock their tails.

5/2/2006 1:16:00 PM

oh pooooooooor spaniel at the bottom

we docked my spaniel molly's tail...it was the cutest little nub i'd ever seen! i loved the way it wagged hehehe

5/2/2006 1:29:09 PM

what? you present 3 different scenarios of how dogs got injured, and this is enough to justify something I find distasteful and unnecessary?

Yes, dogs with tails are going to get injured. Same with their legs, faces, and other body parts.

Docking of horses was banned in 1948 or thereabouts in Great Britain, based on the main reason that it was done more for owners' fancy to their horses' appearance (it made the animals look jaunty and sports-like) rather than for any beneficial purpose to the animal. I would think the same case could be made for a dog: cutting off most of an animal's tail does not save it from unlikely circumstances of injury, and instead can affect the animal's balance and coordination.

5/2/2006 1:40:06 PM

Unless it's a working dog (and I mean functionally, not group) it's pretty stupid to mutilate a perfectly good animal.

[Edited on May 2, 2006 at 1:44 PM. Reason : BTW, whats that boxer doing?]

5/2/2006 1:43:24 PM

WTF happened to the dog in the third picture??

5/2/2006 1:57:53 PM

matters not whether someone wants to or not.

It's the same as circumcision with humans.

5/2/2006 2:07:04 PM

upon further investigation, i think that third dog (spaniel) isn't injured...i think he's just gotten back from a bird hunt!

5/2/2006 2:10:35 PM

Wait, so you believe in tail docking but not neutering? You say they could injure the tail and eventually have to have it removed anyways but think the same scenario is absurd when it comes to testicles (where its not just injury but disease and behavior that is a concern)? Go figure.

I think most breeds look better with un-cropped ears and un-docked tails anyways. THere are very few circumstances that a pet dog has a legitimate reason to be docked.

Quote :

"It's the same as circumcision with humans."

It is not the same as circumcision. There are actually positive medical benefits to circumcision but there aren't any to docking. Circumcision is also pretty much a 1 on the pain scale while recent studies in docking and pain management suggest that docking actually does cause severe pain.

On a side note... did I actually hear recently that a study suggested that circumcision is just as effective as condoms at reducing the risk of HIV transmission? I swear it came up on radio or in a news blurb but have seen nothing on it... was a study in Africa I believe. Just sounded absurd.

[Edited on May 2, 2006 at 2:15 PM. Reason : .]

5/2/2006 2:11:42 PM

I use to have a brit. spaniel like the dog in the third pic
just a diff. color and we nub'd him up

5/2/2006 2:12:24 PM

nope!

[Edited on May 2, 2006 at 2:17 PM. Reason : heyyy adam]

5/2/2006 2:16:56 PM

ell'o LK

5/2/2006 2:18:26 PM

I suppose that tail docking and neutering both technically remove body parts of an animal. However, neutering is generally accepted in the pet community because of the severity of the pet overpopulation problem ( in light of all the rescued animals that show up on TWW). It benefits the animal population as a whole, so that hopefully only wanted animals with good health will be bred by knowledgeable people (not saying purebreds are always better, because they're sometimes not, I have found mutts to have much better health than most purebreds).

Tail docking, in contrast, doesn't benefit a population of animals or a large scale problem, but instead corrects the inherent flaws in certain breed standards or hygiene issues in dogs. These could better be attended to with more stringent hygiene practices like clipping or washing, or ultimately incorporating into breed standards outlines for tails with good natural conformation.

5/2/2006 2:46:22 PM

Quote :

"On a side note... did I actually hear recently that a study suggested that circumcision is just as effective as condoms at reducing the risk of HIV transmission? I swear it came up on radio or in a news blurb but have seen nothing on it... was a study in Africa I believe. Just sounded absurd."

The theory that the presence of a foreskin may cause an increased risk of sexually transmitted diseases was disproved by a new study [22]. The question of HIV warrants further study [20], [7]. Although there is an apparent geographical correlation between male non-circumcision and HIV infection on the African continent, this is not true globally, and the pattern seen in Africa could easily be due to other factors.

[Edited on May 2, 2006 at 3:23 PM. Reason : rh]

5/2/2006 3:19:31 PM

Quote :

"what? you present 3 different scenarios of how dogs got injured, and this is enough to justify something I find distasteful and unnecessary? Yes, dogs with tails are going to get injured. Same with their legs, faces, and other body parts."

For certain dogs, Weimaraners, Vizlas, German Shorthaired Pointers, not docking the tail is dangerous to the overall health of the animal.

Quote :

"Wait, so you believe in tail docking but not neutering? You say they could injure the tail and eventually have to have it removed anyways but think the same scenario is absurd when it comes to testicles (where its not just injury but disease and behavior that is a concern)? Go figure. "

apples and oranges. also, I am not against all castrations. I am against people telling other people they have to castrate their dog. You are the fucking worst at it.

Quote :

"It is not the same as circumcision. There are actually positive medical benefits to circumcision but there aren't any to docking. Circumcision is also pretty much a 1 on the pain scale while recent studies in docking and pain management suggest that docking actually does cause severe pain. On a side note... did I actually hear recently that a study suggested that circumcision is just as effective as condoms at reducing the risk of HIV transmission? I swear it came up on radio or in a news blurb but have seen nothing on it... was a study in Africa I believe. Just sounded absurd. "

there is no medical benefit to circumcision. there are to docking. As I said earlier, docking the tail of short haired dogs like Weimaraners, Vizlas and German Shorthaired Pointers actually prevents debilitating injuries.

Quote :

"Tail docking, in contrast, doesn't benefit a population of animals or a large scale problem, but instead corrects the inherent flaws in certain breed standards or hygiene issues in dogs. These could better be attended to with more stringent hygiene practices like clipping or washing, or ultimately incorporating into breed standards outlines for tails with good natural conformation"

Tail docking most certainly benefits a population of animals. Docking of the tail is not a flaw in the breed standards. Weimaraners, Vizlas, and German Shortharied all have short tails for a reason. They may appear thick at the base, but when you get to the end they do not have much girth which causes splitting, breaking, and massive bleeding.

Quote :

"During the autumn of 1990, when the dogs were between 12 and eighteen months old, we received replies to our interview investigation regarding 44 litters. The investigation included 299 individual dogs (142 dogs and 157 bitches). It then became apparent that tail injuries had occurred in 23 of these litters. 81 individual dogs had suffered from tail injuries. This compared to approximately 27% of the whole investigated group. Dogs were somewhat more affected than bitches. In the autumn of 1991, the same dogs were now 24 to 30 months old. This time we received replies from 26 litters. To make it more true, we picked out these 26 litters from the 1990 investigation, and collated the material separately. We were then able to compare the changes within the same group between 1990 and 1991. In 1990, the group of 26 litters consisted of 191 individuals. In 1991, 179 of these were still alive. Of the 26 litters, 16 had received tail injuries in 1990 and 23 litters in 1991. In 1990, we found 72 individuals with tail injuries, corresponding to 38% of the group. In 1991 the number of tail injured individuals had increased to 92, corresponding to 51% of the group. The number of tail injured dogs had increased by more than 30%. It could now be established that the male dog had received somewhat more injuries. If one were to transfer the above increase of 30% of tail injuries into the larger investigation group, the 44 litters from the 1990 investigation, we would end up with an increase in frequency of tail injuries from 27% in 1990 to 35% in 1991. This large group can be seen to be representative of the population of German Shorthaired Pointers born during 1989. In other words, every third German Pointer with a long tail, has suffered from more or less serious tail injuries. "

http://www.cdb.org/sweden.htm

Quote :

"The kind of tail injuries which occurred during 1990 and 1991 respectively were on the whole the same. Bleeding and damaged tail tips, the last 10cms of the tail. Light, medium and severe injuries. On occasion it has been very difficult for the injuries to heal. Infected and inflamed tails. Lameness injuries and so called water tails. Broken tails. "

Next thing I know, I'll be told removing dew claws is bad.

Quote :

"upon further investigation, i think that third dog (spaniel) isn't injured...i think he's just gotten back from a bird hunt! "

The spaniel in the picture actually have severe lacerations on its tail as a result of running through Heather.

[Edited on May 2, 2006 at 4:04 PM. Reason : .]

5/2/2006 4:03:55 PM

poooooor spaniel

5/2/2006 4:13:02 PM

Quote :

"apples and oranges. also, I am not against all castrations. I am against people telling other people they have to castrate their dog. You are the fucking worst at it."

Simply claiming "apples to oranges" does not cover your ass. You are defending one practice with the very same premise that you bash in the other (when the other actually has far more dire consequences in the negative). Why don't you go back to the thread and actually comment on the documented info rather than avoiding and deflecting.

Quote :

"As I said earlier, docking the tail of short haired dogs like Weimaraners, Vizlas and German Shorthaired Pointers actually prevents debilitating injuries."

The benefits to docking on mass scale are miniscule compared to the benefits of neutering on mass scale. Docking itself can result in debilitating injuries. Much like you had a problem with neutering, there are problems with dockings performed improperly or that get infected (much like the injuries you are trying to prevent).

Quote :

"Tail docking most certainly benefits a population of animals. Docking of the tail is not a flaw in the breed standards. Weimaraners, Vizlas, and German Shortharied all have short tails for a reason. They may appear thick at the base, but when you get to the end they do not have much girth which causes splitting, breaking, and massive bleeding."

First off, I don't think anyone has made blanket tail-docking statements. Most everyone has commented on it for cosmetic purposes... working dogs and therapeutic examples are understandable exemptions. Docking the tail of a dog simply to fit an accepted image is not acceptable. Yes, some breeds have weaker tips but that doesn't mean they are going to suffer an injury, especially when not actually used as a working dog.

Here is a copy of an article from the 1996 Australian Veterinary Journal
http://www.scottvet.co.uk/tailwag/docking1.txt
It's conclusion:

Quote :

"Cosmetic tail docking cannot be justified on scientific or medical grounds. Unless pecuniary or traditional reasons are to take priority over the welfare of the animal, then the criteria to justify removal of a dogs tail are not satisfied. The tail is not merely an inconsequential appendage. It is an anatomically and physiologically sign significant structure which has many biological functions that should not he underestimated. Tail docking can predispose the dog to detrimental consequences including intense, initial pain and continuing pain related, neurological problems. Tail amputation should only be performed on those dogs whose tail or associated structures have been injured or where there is occult pathology of this appendage. If tail amputation is indicated as a therapeutic measure, appropriate anaesthetic and surgical techniques should be employed. The neonate is anatomically and physiologically able to and in fact does feel pain. Therefore veterinarians who wish to be seen as caring professionals and as the guardians of animal welfare must stop cosmetic tail docking and actively oppose anyone else continuing the painful practice."

From the American Veterinary Medical Association official stance:

Quote :

"Ear Cropping and Tail Docking (Current as of June 2005) Ear cropping and tail docking in dogs for cosmetic reasons are not medically indicated nor of benefit to the patient. These procedures cause pain and distress, and, as with all surgical procedures, are accompanied by inherent risks of anesthesia, blood loss, and infection. Therefore, veterinarians should counsel dog owners about these matters before agreeing to perform these surgeries."

Oh and you aren't the only one that can post "scare tactic" pictures on this issue...

5/2/2006 4:57:48 PM

For hunting dogs, it's a pretty good idea because a lot I know of (like labs) who aren't docked inevitably get them caught in something and they have to be docked later anyway. As for dobermans and rotties who don't hunt, it's stupid and a waste of money. It's illegal in Europe anyway.

5/2/2006 6:09:40 PM

^^ that last pic makes me

maybe its for the good of the animal, but it just looks so sad

5/2/2006 6:14:19 PM

I've watched my step father dock the tails of his pointer puppies. While I'm sure it isn't painless it is quick and they go back to nursing almost immediately and only yelp at the cut, some don't even yelp then. Their tails are docked for field trial purposes, because if they are too long they curve and don't point correctly. It is done when the puppies are super young and their eyes are still closed. I think he counts how many vertebrae or whatever are in their and cuts the extra....I'm really not positive.

5/2/2006 6:16:30 PM

5/2/2006 6:17:03 PM

Do you remember being circumsized?


No, you dont.


The dogs wont remember having a tail docked either.

5/2/2006 6:37:27 PM

^everytime i think about it i shudder though haha

5/2/2006 7:25:06 PM

I thought this thread was about sex.

5/2/2006 8:16:14 PM

Quote :

"Most everyone has commented on it for cosmetic purposes... working dogs and therapeutic examples are understandable exemptions. Docking the tail of a dog simply to fit an accepted image is not acceptable. Yes, some breeds have weaker tips but that doesn't mean they are going to suffer an injury, especially when not actually used as a working dog."

have you ever been around weimaraners, gsps, or vizlas? I don't understand docking spaniels, since I had one and we didn't dock his tail. I don't agree with docking pits, but certain breeds of dogs have weak tips and the lack of hair causes massive problems. Banning the docking of tails in GSPs, Weims and Vizlas is detrimental to the health of the animal.

I also don't agree with docking the tails for hegeine purposes. As most of those cases are easily preventable. But the wholesale ban on docking tails is horrible and detrimental. In fact a lot of the countries with docking bans are starting to reconsider based upon the high rate of injuries to previously docked breeds.

5/3/2006 1:31:16 AM

Quote :

"It is not the same as circumcision. There are actually positive medical benefits to circumcision but there aren't any to docking. Circumcision is also pretty much a 1 on the pain scale while recent studies in docking and pain management suggest that docking actually does cause severe pain. On a side note... did I actually hear recently that a study suggested that circumcision is just as effective as condoms at reducing the risk of HIV transmission? I swear it came up on radio or in a news blurb but have seen nothing on it... was a study in Africa I believe. Just sounded absurd. "

That made me lol

5/4/2006 12:23:55 AM

Quote :

"On a side note... did I actually hear recently that a study suggested that circumcision is just as effective as condoms at reducing the risk of HIV transmission? I swear it came up on radio or in a news blurb but have seen nothing on it... was a study in Africa I believe. "

hahhhahah what a retarded thing to say. What the fuck is the meaning of "reducing the risk of HIV transmission"? You mean, like if you're circumsized (your dick) then you can fuck those HIV infested chicks without any issues?

On a side note, circumcision is unnecessary and reduces your dick's pleasure nerves.

5/4/2006 12:27:57 AM

It does make you less likely to transmit/receive aids, but it isn't a much higher difference.

Its like jumping off a cliff into a ravine with or without a pillow strapped to your ass. One is safer, neither is safe.

But...it may be unnecessary, but it looks better and it gets your more coug than a floppy skinned weirdo-weiner.

5/4/2006 12:39:45 AM

I think people catch more STDs with foreskin because the foreskin is easy to perforate.

Lots of extra skin = more tears.

Something like that. Yes this is documented. No I'm not finding you the fucking link.

5/4/2006 12:52:15 AM

Quote :

"it looks better and it gets your more coug than a floppy skinned weirdo-weiner."

From personal experience, no girl is gonna go all the way and unzip your pants only to say no to an uncircumcized penis...I am just saying.

Quote :

"Lots of extra skin = more tears. Something like that. Yes this is documented. No I'm not finding you the fucking link. "

wrong.

5/4/2006 12:54:35 AM

Quote :

"From personal experience, no girl is gonna go all the way and unzip your pants only to say no to an uncircumcized penis...I am just saying."

Lots of personal experience, eh??

And, yes, I think some women will say NO if they think it looks weird.

5/4/2006 12:56:26 AM

Quote :

" From personal experience, no girl is gonna go all the way and unzip your pants only to say no to an uncircumcized penis...I am just saying."

When the fuck have you ever gotten that far??

And giving you the benefit of the doubt that you have...I'm sure the girl was just soo excited that some guy was actually giving her play and not feeding her, that she wouldn't care if the penis was covered in warts.




BTW...no one has answered my question about what is wrong with the dog in the third picture in the first post. I'm not familiar with this topic.

[Edited on May 4, 2006 at 1:00 AM. Reason : .]

5/4/2006 12:59:27 AM

I am not gonna post anecdotes here so feel free to digest my comments with a grain of salt.

Nor do I have warts unless you had anal sex with some other guy who was pretending to be me.

5/4/2006 1:06:04 AM

I haven't read the thread so this may have already been mentioned

if the dog is a house pet, you won't be taking it out hunting. So there is no good reason to cut off its tail

5/4/2006 1:15:07 AM

Quote :

"jbrick83: BTW...no one has answered my question about what is wrong with the dog in the third picture in the first post. I'm not familiar with this topic. "

jbrick83, your question has already been answered in this thread:

Quote :

"elkaybie: upon further investigation, i think that third dog (spaniel) isn't injured...i think he's just gotten back from a bird hunt!"

Quote :

"nutsmackr: The spaniel in the picture actually have severe lacerations on its tail as a result of running through Heather."

[Edited on May 4, 2006 at 1:52 AM. Reason : sss]

5/4/2006 1:47:48 AM

Quote :

"if the dog is a house pet, you won't be taking it out hunting. So there is no good reason to cut off its tail"

dependent on the breed and where you live.


Also, America is the only country that still circumcizes for cosmetic reasons. That trend is changing however as more and more boys are being left uncircumcized and the health issue is bogus. If you can't clean your penis then you don't deserve to live. I, while circumcized will not have my sons circumcized.

[Edited on May 4, 2006 at 1:55 AM. Reason : .]

5/4/2006 1:53:26 AM

^^Thanks.

5/4/2006 1:55:10 AM

Guys who are circumsized are 5 times more likely to receive oral sex from women than those that are not. That is enough for me to say that I will have my sons cut, I'm not trying to start them out behind the 8-ball.

And in my opinion, if the breed of dog was meant to be without a tail, they would have lost their tail over evolutionary time.

5/4/2006 2:39:46 AM

^

I'd love to see how scientifically sound that study is.

5/4/2006 5:19:34 AM