Pit Bulls Were Never "Nanny Dogs". Never. It's A Myth

[KittyWampus]

If you want to argue for the breed's compatibility with children and families… do it without using a myth.

The following link has an article that does a darned good job of covering available primary sources to seek out where the "nanny dog" term started. It also goes into the history of the breed's development & it's link to dog fighting.

It's an interesting read.

http://thetruthaboutpitbulls.blogspot.com/2010/08/nanny-dog-myth-revealed.html

snip
Archive searches of British, American and Canadian newspapers going as far back as the 18th century turn up not one single mention of "Nanny Dog" with regards to ANY breed until 1904 when the first stage production of Peter Pan opened featuring a nursemaid dog named Nana. Though J.M. Barrie patterned Nana after his Landseer Newfoundland, Nana has been portrayed by a St. Bernard, and an Old English Sheep Dog in subsequent stage and screen productions. No mention of Nana ever being a Staffie Bull. Not even in Never Never Land.

So, where is the oldest known reference to the Staffie Bull as a nanny dog? In a New York Times article. In 1971, Walter R. Fletcher wrote an article entitled, "A Breed That Came Up the Hard Way" in which he interviewed William R. Daniels and Mrs. Lilian Rant, President and magazine editor for the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Club of America on the eve of the Staffie Bull's being granted permission to be shown in the American Kennel Club's miscellaneous class. It's the first step to AKC recognition and the club wanted to polish their dog's image.

Daniels brings up Dickens' villainous Bull's-Eye again and Mrs. Rant acknowledges that the Stafford "had an unsavory reputation for fighting and violence and his name became associated with ruffians, who cared little for him as a dog but only for his ability in the pit. The Stafford we know today quickly becomes a member of the family circle. He loves children and is often referred to as a 'nursemaid dog.'"

Well, there it is. Mrs. Rant, lover and promoter of the Stafford, is clearly speaking in the present tense about the dog of today (1971) currently being referred to as a 'nursemaid dog' in the United States. She is using a variation of the argument that Mr. Lee used 77 years before about the Bull Terrier, suggesting that the Staffordshire Bull Terrier's unsavory reputation as a fighting dog has been left in the far distant past. She harkens back to Dickens again, before the Staffordshire Bull Terrier even existed as a distinct breed. Her contention that Staffordshire Bull Terriers are OFTEN referred to as nursmaid dogs is a little bit of a stretch, too. In 1971, there were 99 registered Staffordshire Bull Terriers in the United States. As editor of the club's magazine, she must have been at the center of all conversation about the breed. It is likely that she either coined the nickname or promulgated it through the magazine, and the term may have gained popularity among those few Stafford enthusiasts who subscribed to her magazine.

A timeline search does not turn up a mention of the "nanny dog" until 1987 in an archived Toronto Star article entitled, Move to Outlaw Pit Bulls Under Study in Several Cities.


snip
Go ahead and prove me wrong, not with a single primary source, but with a preponderance of evidence that demonstrates the incredible existence of the baby loving fighting dog that was so beloved and so popular in times gone by that it was commonly called the nanny dog.

[Scootaloo]

1. Okay. And? n/t

[KittyWampus]

2. And what? I've seen this myth posted twice now on DU.

[Scootaloo]

3. Well, I presumed maybe you had a point to make.

Also, "thetruthaboutpitbills.blogspot.com" might have an agenda of some sort.

[ErikJ]

4. And the pitbull lobby doesnt?

[Scootaloo]

7. 'Course we do.

(I am assuming that as someone who happens to like the breed, that I am part of this 'lobby')

A question I asked someone a while back, never got an answer to...

Okay, so you feel all pit bulls need to be destroyed. Now, define 'pit bull'. The American Pit Bull Terrier is a specific breed, after all, and any animal without a verifiable pedigree is not an APBT. There are about a dozen breeds that are physically similar to the APBT, more if you're a little nearsighted, to say nothing of all the mutts and mongrels that could share these characteristics from some source or another. Where's the cutoff point, for "needs to die" and "can keep living"? Is there one?

[DrDan]

77. always wondered, was this argument adopted

from the NRA's "what's an assault weapon?" meme,

or did the NRA clone it from pit-bull enthusiasts?

anyway, it has certainly served these similar groups well.

[Scootaloo]

87. Difference is, a dog is a living thing

As such it has a variance of temperment, training, and genetics. An AR-15 is always exactly like every other AR-15 ever produced, but two dogs from the same litter can wind up being completely different animals.

So the question remains. How many animals need to be destroyed, and what are the limiting factors in determining which ones?

[DrDan]

88. btw, I have never advocated destroying any . . .

and the argument was relative to assault weapons - not specifically AR-15s

and I am sure there are gun owners who would argue that individual weapons can differ in their specific operating characteristics

[Scootaloo]

89. Well, you're trying to draw a false equivalence between animals and tools

[DrDan]

91. I am suggesting an equivalence between two arguments

[onenote]

95. And doing a very bad job of it.

You were asked a pretty straightforward question which you have been evading. Why not put your "equivalence" response aside and just answer the question? How would you draw the line between which dogs should be deemed ipso facto so dangerous as to warrant being put to death and those allowed to live?

[DrDan]

98. why don't you take a look at to whom that question was addressed

I never advocated destroying any of them . . . I was just addressing the equivalence of the arguments

[kewlbeanspx]

111. Death sentence BSL

Last edited Mon Jul 1, 2013, 12:19 AM - Edit history (1)

Why do you jump to death as the only resolution BSL advocates support? America would do well to follow the lead that spain has taken. They have BSL, but it takes the form of taxes, training for owners, higher insurance rates in accordance to risk for certain breeds, background checks, mental health evaluations for the prospective owners of dangerous breeds, as well as enforcing muzzle and leash laws for those same breeds.

If we legislate these breeds to kingdom come, it would weed out 90% of the problem.

[jazzimov]

53. WTF is the "pitbull lobby"?

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. There's no doubt the blogger has an agenda

Now that that's been established, a clear refutation of the historical case will be in order. Since the blogger has an obvious agenda, it should be easy enough to show specific facts, like pit bulls being referred to as "nanny dogs" in late 19th century texts. Even one will do, apparently, to refute this biased blogger.

[Spider Jerusalem]

9. The pit bull as such didn't exist in the 19th century

a search of Google books shows almost all references are to the English Staffordshire bull terrier (which is not the same breed as the American pit bull terrier) or to the Old English Sheepdog, no references whatever to the American pit bull. (And in fact a Google search for "nanny dog" brings up a prominently displayed link to the Wikipedia entry for the Staffordshire bull terrier.)

[alcibiades_mystery]

13. Oh, OK

So, there was no old-timey "pit bull" as Nanny dog, so when people distribute Victorian imagery suggesting that pit bulls were once considered Nanny Dogs, they'd be wrong. Indeed, there is no evidence that pit bulls were considered "Nanny Dogs" at any time pre-1971, as the blogger asserts? Is that correct? And there is no evidence apart from the "prominent displayed link" that the Staffordshire Bull Terrier was ever considered a Nanny Dog either?

OK.

So people who say that pit bulls were "once considered nanny dogs" are incorrect, yes?

[Spider Jerusalem]

18. ...

The Staffordshire bull terrier is commonly referred to as such here in the UK, however the earliest reference traceable is from 1988. The American Pit Bull Terrier is not referred to as such in ANY source searchable via Google Books (however "Pit Bulls for Dummies" has the sentence "the pit bull's close relative the Staffordshire bull terrier is called the 'nanny dog' in England&quot .

So yes, people who say "pit bulls were considered nanny dogs" are incorrect, and in the present context of the usage of the term are conflating the American pit bull with a similar but different breed of dog.

[alcibiades_mystery]

21. Cool...I should say I have no dog in this fight, so to speak

I don't give a hoot about Staffordshire Bull Terriers, American Pit bulls, or anything related to banning or not banning either. To paraphrase Seinfeld, I'm not offended as a pit bull person (pro or con); I'm offended as a historian. I've heard this Nanny Dog claim a lot, usually with Victorian era images, and references to some Golden Age when "pit bulls" were considered Nanny Dogs. This blogger, as partial as his account may be, is the only person I've ever seen try to substantiate the claim, and he couldn't. I basically just ask anyone disagreeing with him or making the Nanny Dog claim to substantiate it, and they generally cannot. They do get hopping mad, though.

[Myrina]

78. Seriously, right?

[99Forever]

5. Be prepared for ...

... the onslaught of urban myths and regurgitated nonsense headed your way. Pit Bull apologists are very similar to Delicate Flowers in their view of reality.

[WilliamPitt]

8. . . . . .

[Cali_Democrat]

10. Pit bulls are nanny dogs only if they're breast feeding at the Olive Garden

while listening to Beyonce.

[progressoid]

12. Doh!

You type faster than me!

[Cali_Democrat]

15. ...

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

44. YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!!! (n/m)

[Aerows]

85. And eating fried chicken

coated with corn flakes.

[progressoid]

11. I don't know about Nanny, but I saw one nursing a small child at the Olive Garden.

[Rex]

14. Amazing the lengths DUers will go to

sometimes...

[whatchamacallit]

19. To what

set the record straight?

[RebelOne]

16. I have owned 2 pit bulls and 2 Rottweilers and they were all sweethearts.

Unfortunately, they are all in doggie heaven now. But I now have a Chihuahua and she is more vicious than any pit bull or Rottweiler. She hates everyone but me.

[whatchamacallit]

20. And more dangerous too

right?

[jazzimov]

57. Right! So dangerous that the poster can't respond

because their dogs have eaten them.

[one_voice]

24. I've had Rotties...

my daughter has pitts, both rescues. Sweet dogs, all of them. I have Boxers right now, big clowns.

My mom has Chihuahuas, she's had three, one was a mean little shit, the other two were sweeties.

I love the bully breeds, always have, always will.


edited to add: love me a mutt too.

second edit: spelling

[bike man]

42. The only dog that has ever bitten me in anger was a Rottweiler. He came off

his porch into the road and took me off my bicycle.

Puncture wounds in my hindquarters from teeth, skin missing from elbows/knees from road surface.

[sibelian]

43. they have to be properly socialised.

If you treat them like nice dogs they become nice, friendly dogs. If you treat them like scary beasts...

[ThomThom]

73. the little brainless ones can be very snappish, they get confused

raise a dog to be mean and they will be
raise a dog to love and they will

[BainsBane]

17. Staffordshire terriers were bred to hunt vermin

just like every other terrier, including Scotties and Westies. They were bred as small animals who would keep down populations of rats, mice, and whatever else infested farms owned by people of modest means.

[Spider Jerusalem]

23. No they weren't?

That's a Staffordshire bull terrier. It is not a "terrier" as such. It was not bred for ratting. It was the result of cross-breeding the old English bulldog (from the days of the bull-baiting ring) with various terrier breeds; the characteristics selected for in breeding were the gameness of the terrier and the strength and tenacity of the bulldog. (The English bull terrier is another product of such breeding.) They were bred as fighting dogs after Parliament passed a law banning bull- and bear-baiting in 1835.

[BainsBane]

25. source?

[Spider Jerusalem]

29. ...

The Staffordshire Bull Terrier had its beginnings in England many centuries ago when the Bulldog and Mastiff were closely linked. Bullbaiting and bearbaiting in the Elizabethan era produced large dogs for these sports and later on the 100-120 pound animal gave way to a small, more agile breed of up to 90 pounds.

Early in the 19th century the sport of dogfighting gained popularity and a smaller, faster dog was developed. It was called by names such as "Bulldog Terrier" and "Bull and Terrier." The Bulldog bred then was a larger dog than we know today and weighed about 60 pounds. This dog was crossed with a small native terrier which appears in the history of the present-day Manchester Terrier. The dog which this produced, averaging between 30 and 45 pounds, became the Staffordshire Bull Terrier.

James Hinks, in about 1860, crossed the Old Pit Bull Terrier, now known as the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and produced the all-white English Bull Terrier. The Bull Terrier obtained recognition by The Kennel Club in England in the last quarter of the 19th century, but the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, due to its reputation as a fighting dog, did not receive this blessing.

In 1935 the Staffordshire Bull Terrier was recognized by the Kennel Club in England and enthusiasts were able to conduct conformation matches. The sport of dogfighting had long been made illegal and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier had evolved into a dog of such temperament as to make him a fine pet and companion and a worthy show dog.

http://www.akc.org/breeds/staffordshire_bull_terrier/history.cfm

[BainsBane]

65. ok, thanks.

[Drahthaardogs]

26. Nonsense. They were bloodsport dogs, not ratters.

The English forebearer known as the "Bull and Terrier". To say that they are not "similar" to the modern version is true, but to obfuscate their history of blood by calling them ratters is less than honest. However, a basset hound from 1920's that was still used to hunt hare is a very different looking dog than the basset hound of today.

Let's get real. The modern pit as a breed is a mess full of unstable, unhealthy, and unregulated individuals. There are some individual specimens that are not bad dogs. HOwever, as a breed registry, they have NO standardized breeding regulations or objectives, and quite frankly...it shows.

If I wanted a bull type dog, I would get an Old Southern White bulldog. As with any bulldog, expect a certain level of aggressiveness, but they are still bred to type for working people on farms and unstable dogs just will not do.

[BainsBane]

28. the mess

is the fucked up people that get their kicks from making dogs fight, not the animals.
I meet fantastic pit bulls all the time. Every time I go for a walk or to the dog park, in fact. Michael Vick's dogs have been rehabilitated and one is even a therapy dog.

[Drahthaardogs]

33. No.

Some dogs have aggression, it is how they are bred, and not necessarily a bad thing. Malinois are true man-stoppers. They are bred for serious dog people by serious dog people who do dog sports. You do not see them in people's backyard as a general rule.

The idea that you can change a pits internal temperament is foolish. You cannot "rehabilitate" their genetics.

To be quite honest, there are three groups of people who are screwing up the breed and

1) the group who thinks every dog is really just a gold retriever inside and enough love and goo goo eyes will make it so.

2) the thugs who want tough aggressive dogs without breeding for the mental stability to switch it on and off when needed; i.le. those who breed for looks and attitude and ignore all the other aspects that comes with breeding responsible dogs

3) The owners who think they have what it takes to own a dog with high fight drive and physical abilities to do real harm when in fact, they should own NOTHING more than a golden retriever

[BainsBane]

35. dogs are rehabilitated all the time

You are simply factually incorrect.

[Drahthaardogs]

38. I am factually correct.

The dogs that had real aggression were not "rehabilitated", they were put down. The ones that went on to be "re-habbed" likely did not have the temperament required to do bite work, catch hogs, etc. in the first place.

I see it all the time in other breeds. They are called "washouts" and typically end up as family dogs. Nothing wrong with it except when people think they can make a dog with real drives into something else. As a dog man for over 35 years, I can assure you, you can work genetics, you can work around them a little bit, what you cannot do is work against them.

[jazzimov]

62. Factually, no you're not.

You are just perpetuated myths and pretending that you are an "expert".

You are factually incorrect.

You claim that you are a "dog expert", but I doubt that. Because you obviously know nothing about dogs. You perpetuate myths, only.

You claim to understand "genetics", but you clearly do not.

Please, stop it. I implore you. Stop perpetuating myths.

[Drahthaardogs]

69. You need to stop

I have trained dogs for 35 years. Won multiple breeder's awards. Competed in tests, trails, etc. How many dogs did you train last year and to what level? How many schutzhund titles have you won? How many field trials? Have you ever bred a litter? If so, did you track the pups? What does your breeding program look like?

[Aerows]

92. I'll take a dog trainer's opinion

and as a person that has taken a few dogs through obedience training, over yours. My obedience trainer had retrievers that would go get her purse out of the car, complete with operating the remote lock. She wouldn't allow Pit Bulls in her classes. I'd say she has a bit of dog sense, too.

She helped me teach my Doberman to be a glorious, if occasionally mischievous, member of society.

[BainsBane]

64. that is not true

Michael Vick's dogs were rehabilitated and one is a therapy dog. http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2012/11/seven-survivors-of-michael-vicks-dog-fighting-ring-reunite-five-years-later/ Cesar Milan rehabilitates aggressive dogs all the time. You're just making stuff up. You have no evidence. You're operating on fear and stereotype alone. That more dogs aren't rehabilitated is because of a lack of resources, not innate aggression. That is likely true for some dogs, but certainly not even close to all dogs. They are just dogs for God's sake. I don't understand why you're so terrified of them.

[Drahthaardogs]

70. Lies, lies, and more lies.

Of the 48 dogs 2 were euthanized for aggression, and 24 were sent to a "sanctuary" for aggressive dogs due to their severe aggression towards other animals.

I am not making shit up. I just happen to know a little bit more than you, and I work with dogs that have some aggression. Hell, they are BRED for that aggression.


Please stop. You are the one perpetuating lies.

[BainsBane]

76. Pay attention to what you just said

That makes nearly half who were rehabilitated. You said it was impossible to rehabilitated aggressive dogs.

[Aerows]

93. You are discussing this with a dog breeder

and trainer of specialized hunting dogs.

Not some nobody on the internet that has as much knowledge as a couch potato dog owner. That's all I want to say. He trains dogs for a living, and with a specific purpose, and naturally, as a pet owner, you might have other ideas about what makes for a good dog.

Don't discount what he says, though.

[BainsBane]

97. That he's a dog breeder doesn't make him right

His own post shows that he is wrong that dangerous dogs cannot be rehabilitated. Do his math.

I don't know what kind of operation that guy runs. I don't know if he even likes dogs. I know of no dog lover that advocates extermination of entire breeds. Anyone in the AKC would tell you that is complete nonsense.

Someone made a post showing that more people are killed by Golden Retrievers than pit bulls. Do you advocate their mass extermination as well? That question was rhetorical. I'm done with conversations about killing animals based on nothing but what they look like.

[Aerows]

99. He breeds and trains hunting dogs

'Nuff said.

In case you are wondering, hunting dogs are the closest to the human. They learn quickly and adapt to life with their human counterpart.

I've never had a hunting dog, I've had a Doberman. They are sporting and working dogs for protection, but can pull you down the street on a bike or rollerblades like nothing else. They have an even temperment that is sometimes TOO needy and gentle towards the family.

Dobermans have a good nose, though, and can distinguish between friend and foe. That's where Pit bulls fail. They have bad noses and can't pick out a friend from a foe, and they end up attacking a friend because that is what they are around mostly. Throw in pain-resistance and you have a bad combination.

[janlyn]

104. Hunting Dogs

Lets also keep in mind he raises and trains HUNTING dogs!!! Just because he trains a specific breed or breeds DOES not make him an expert on ALL breeds!!! My parents bred,raised and trained German Shepherds and I can guarantee they would never put forth an opinion on any other breed than their own!!!

[Aerows]

86. The worst thing my Doberman ever did

Was seize the shower curtain when I was giving him a shower bath, and streak through the house with it, spraying water everywhere.

I think the water was too cold. Your friends, the Pit Bull, are so unpredictable, they are liable to cry, whine or rip your arm off. I know that is unpopular, but it is the truth. I knew a couple with one, and the husband got up in the middle of the night to get a drink of milk and the dog attacked him. In his own words, "The second that dog turned on me and I got stitches is the same time that dog isn't in my house anymore."

Opening the refrigerator door isn't a threatening activity, but a lot of pit bull attacks happen in the kitchen. Go figure.

I DARE you to repeat similar incidents with German Shepherds and Doberman Pinschers. They don't happen. My great-grandmother at 97 had a German Shepherd dog that would lay at her feet, carry a grocery bag in her mouth, and watched over her like a nursemaid.

ETA: German Shepherds were bred to attend to the flock, be gentle with it, but implacable with enemies to it. That's what good dogs are BRED for, and they are safe to be around elders. This sweet girl practically waited for my great-grandmother to ask her to do something for her. She lived for it.

[Demo_Chris]

48. Very nicely said!

[jazzimov]

60. You really aren't serious,

are you?

[jazzimov]

56. This post so so full of idiotcy

I honestly don't know where to begin!

Let's begin with your first statement; "some dogs have aggression".

What is "aggression"? How is that different from "protectionism"? I have never met an "aggressive" dog. I have met dogs that were "protective". Your perception of "aggressive" would be what, exactly? I have seen so-called "aggressive" dogs roll over and present their submissive selves when outside their property and without their owners present.

I'll stop there, because I think that is enough to destroy the rest of your testimony.

[Drahthaardogs]

71. Since you asked,

Generally speaking there are several types of aggression many are bad, some are good. Territorial aggression and predatory aggression are two traits that lots of breeders try hard to instill in their dogs. However, when you breed without some guidelines and the ability to keep inferior animals from breeding, you get junk.

Many breeders do this themselves. Labradors are a good example. The dogs today can do things they could NOT do 30 years ago. Puppies are doing things adult dogs had difficulty with. Selective breeding has improved them tremendously. And yes, that drive to go through a frozen pond, that is prey aggression.

The fact that you can only think aggression = attack people or other dogs shows how little you know. Read a book and educate yourself a little bit.

[KurtNYC]

80. In my experience, people who excuse their dogs' aggressiveness as "protection"

are feeding the problem. No dog should be put in the position of deciding who to bite, who is a threat and who is not and what to do about it because it won't end well for the dog.

[BainsBane]

82. animal control

actually told my brother his German Shepard was protective or boundary aggressive and as a result didn't put down the dog after he bit the Fed Ex guy. That dog is aggressive to strangers and a love to family members. She is highly protective. I know I could take her in the most dangerous neighborhoods in the country and be safe.

People who don't know anything about dogs will run away from mine because she looks like a pit, but she has zero aggression toward anyone but a squirrel or a rabbit. She even is friendly with the neighbors cats and guinea pig.

[Aerows]

94. If she bit the Fed Ex guy

without a cue, she is dangerous. Because she isn't well-trained.

You MUST train dogs like that, and socialize them. Your example is an example of a dog with a bad owner.

[Drahthaardogs]

100. Serious dogs for serious people.

Watch and notice a few things.

1) These dogs are off the "sleeve". Some dogs see the sleeve as a big game and would no more hit an arm without it than your average poodle. The guys are hitting sleeves under clothing...this is the real deal.

2) At about 50 seconds watch the officer screw up and pay the price. These are handler-hard dogs. period!


Now, pups out of dogs like these are generally sold only to the military or police forces. I know several people who breed GSD and they plan litters for this type of stuff, beyond their normal "sport" dogs.

[Sunlei]

83. The problems aren't caused by the dogs -its humans who just get the dog they deserve.

Good post.
Humans get the dog they deserve. A pup is a blank slate. A puppy has all the basic drives, all the genetic cards he has been delt at birth. It all comes down to how the dog is handled and shaped by the humans in his life. Especially the first year or so.

The genetic side are things like pain threshold, sensitivity to training, the ability to adapt quickly to change, prey/chase drives, sharpness.

It's always amazing to me how very good and restrained the great majority of our domestic dogs are. Most dogs are not trained or even go through (with their owners) a basic obedience class.

[pitbulllady]

113. I agree whole-heartedly with what you're saying.

As a multi-pit bull owner, your 3 points are EXACTLY what I feel are the biggest problems, and people like those piss me off more than just about anything else. I'm so glad to see someone else feels the same way.

I do believe, however, that a dog-aggressive pit bull can be re-conditioned to behave differently. Certainly, there are aspects and instincts that can never fully be conditioned out, but they can certainly be dampened and re-directed with consistent discipline.

Good pit bull owners realize that THESE ARE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS ANIMALS that need to be monitored and trained properly. They don't try to sugar-coat the prey drive that these dogs naturally have. Instead, they acknowledge it and address it.

They certainly don't leave a dog unattended with a baby or child.

You don't leave ANY dog unattended with a baby or child. Period. It's just stupid and irresponsible. You're BEGGING for something horrible to happen. Parents who do that should be charged with child endangerment. I don't care how nice and gentle Fluffy seems, they are an ANIMAL with INSTINCTS.

[gopiscrap]

114. Welcome to DU

[Aerows]

90. Indeed they were

Some folks just seem to enjoy tainting any breed of dog as though they could be as unstable as a Pit Bull. I think I will listen to you, and people that I know whom are ex-pit bull owners, longer than I will ever listen to them.

How are your Schutzhund's doing? I know you train some specifically brilliant dogs, I was wondering how they are doing in competition

[MadHound]

22. LOL, still using that biased bullshit website I see.

Tell you what, try telling that bullshit to the AKC, who declared pits to be the best family dog, bar none, for years and decades, up until irrational pitbull hysteria set in.

[Drahthaardogs]

27. And you would trust the AKC why?

Their excellent record in preserving the health, well being, and mental stability of dogs?

[Spider Jerusalem]

31. The AKC won't register pit bulls and doesn't recognise the breed

they say the Staffordshire bull terrier is noted for its affectionate nature especially towards children...but the Staffie is not an American pit bull.

[DevonRex]

63. Hes talking about the Am Staff if he's talking AKC.

Which are unfortunately mentioned in that article above as if they're APBTs. People need to be careful about their terms. You're right. But the article above is misleading at best. Lumps them all in together. I posted below with links to all 3.

[pnwmom]

110. Do you have a link for that? n/t

[Arcanetrance]

30. Can I ask why there's so much hatred directed at this breed of dog.

[madville]

32. Raised in the wrong hands they are dangerous

Pretty much like guns, most will never harm a soul, the ones that kill or maim ruin it for everyone else.

[baldguy]

34. Any dog of similar size can - and does - do similar damage.

The difference is that any dog properly trained and socialized won't. Which is 99.999999999% of them.

[madville]

36. Of course any dog of similar size can be raised wrong

It just so happens that a bunch of this particular breed are abused and raised to be violent. It's not 1 out of 100 billion like your number though lol, I would say 1 out 100 or 1000 would be more realistic

[Drahthaardogs]

39. And that is just completely wrong.

Even Cesear Milan notes in his books that some dogs are just "bred wrong" and have problems no amount of training and socialization can overcome. It was rampant in the American Cocker Spaniel at one point, so much so that people quit buying the little dogs, because, quite frankly, they sucked. Mean little biters with aggression problems and an overabundance of fear biting, all brought about by indiscriminate breeding. 20 years earlier, hunters had them and most of them were black. When they became the designer dog and breeders started inbreeding and doing all sorts of weirdness to get other colors, the cesspool ensued.

Dogs need sound genetics and then good training. As long as pit bull breeders continue to do "their thing", you are going to end up with a fair amount of screwed up dogs in the breed.

[baldguy]

46. Can you imagine what Ceaser Milan would say

To ascribing one individual's problems to the entire breed?

[Demo_Chris]

50. He would say "No shit sherlock"

Not to be rude, but EVERY breed has it's own unique attributes. I have spent years handling, training, and occassionally retraining dogs as a hobby, including for competition. If you do not understand the HUGE difference between a dog like a GSD and a Lab, you have no business owning the dog. And this is equally true with Pit Bulls.

I am not afraid of Pits. I am terrified of Pit Bull owners discussing their dogs as if they were anything other than what they are -- an aggressive, powerful, and unpredictable breed. That's what they are. That doesn't mean they are a bad breed, and there are actually far more deadly breeds out there, but you have to understand and work with the dog accordingly. Every time I read someone talking about their pit bull like it's a freaking Retriever I cringe inside.

And no, "socializing" isn't the end, it's barely the beginning. This is a breed that requires a skilled owner and trainer that watches every single thing the dog does, every moment, and you have to know what you are looking for. You have to KNOW what the dog is thinking. You have to be willing to spend hours each day working with that animal. If you don't then don't own the breed. Buy something else. And in the meantime stop spreading nonsense about how gentle the breed is.

For what it's worth, I spent most of my adult life with aggressive breeds. I know exactly how to handle them and I can read a dog like a book. I gave up on them because I do not have the hours a day it takes to own one responsibly. And odds are very good that most of the people who own them don't either.

[jazzimov]

51. Obviously, you have no idea what you're talking about.

First of all, you say that Pits are an, and i quote:

an aggressive, powerful, and unpredictable breed

What you describe as "aggressive" many others would describe as "protective" - which, frankly, is much more descriptive. I eill not argue that they are powerful, although there are other breeds which are much more "powerful".

"Unpredictable"? Don't make me laugh! This just proves that you don't understand dogs as you purport to. Their behavior is entirely predictable, if you understand the particular dog that you are dealing with.

This last point - that they are "unpredictable" - tells me that you have no clue what you are talking about. If you were an expert as you claim, then you would be able to "predict" the behavior of this or any dog - based on information gained from the dog.

Whoa! What am I talking about? Well, first of all, if the breed itself was as "predictable" as you claim, then you should know the dog based on the breed. But, I submit that the breed is not as important to understanding the individual dog as you claim - different breeds are important when you are concerned about the HEALTH of the dog, because there are certain HEALTH issues that are bred into or out of the breed.

As far as personality is concerned - that is how the dog was raised.

If you were the "expert" that you claim to be, you would know that.

Therefore, I totally reject all of your claims for being a "dog expert". You are not.

You obviously know NOTHING about dogs.

Even if you bill yourself as an "expert" on dogs and and make money conning people into believing your BS, you obviously know NOTHING about dogs and I would never hire you.

Although you may bill yourself as an "expert", you are not. I recommend that everyone reading your "expert opinion" ignore it.

I will be more than happy to discuss any issue you may have with my post.

[Demo_Chris]

59. Okay, glad you have it all figured out :)

[axollot]

72. The lovely Malamute is sometimes mixed with wolves for disastrous results

But they already look like one. Have my dad's old girl since he passed 2yrs ago. Malamutes do not tend to get along with cats due to prey instinct.

However I rehab'ed her and she lives with 2 cats and another dog. She is 16.

I have rehabed pits in the past too. They can be great dogs.
In the 70s everyone feared the Doberman; they are great dogs
Next up came the Rotty of which I do not have as much experience -- now? Fear Fear Fear for the Pit Bull.

One of my other dogs is a Labbe. (Beagal/Lab mix) he came to me as a "fear biter" around young children he would growl. I would flip him on his back and let the kids rub his belly. He got over his fear biting and growling. He was an adult adoption too.

Never say never.
Cheers
Sandy

[michigandem58]

45. Not true

The anatomy of their mouths and high pain tolerance make them a far more destructive attacker.

[baldguy]

47. What is it about the "anatomy of their mouths"?

I'd like to see which type of bullshit you're trying to sell here.

And as for their supposed tolerance for pain, you should hear my pibble howl when the killer neighbor cat gets his claws into her.

[jazzimov]

52. Not true.

The anatomy of their mouth is nothing "unusual", and the bite pressure is actually less than many other dogs.

You have been a victim of prejudicial myths - as I was myself. Until I educated myself.

I suggest you do the same. Google is your friend.

[Puzzledtraveller]

75. First time I saw one

At ex-gf's house, I was waiting for her to shower and change before we went out. Her dog was well behaved but getting a close up look, wow, it's head and jaws were massive. Then I applied what I was seeing to children, and saw there is no chance, not much more for an adult either.

[Recursion]

81. Speaking of myths...

DING DING DING. I'll take complete unfounded BS for 1000, Alex!

[Arcanetrance]

40. Raised in the wrong hands we are violent and have the power to completely wipe ourselves out

[madville]

41. That's my point, bans are ridiculous

You can't ban crazy and stupid. The vast majority of large dogs never harm a soul, the bad apples get the press and everyone that fears (insert object to be banned here) calls for an ineffective ban.

[Brainstormy]

84. very bad analogy

I don't have a dog in this fight (sorry, couldn't resist), but guns are inanimate and without volition. Not so with dogs.

[Art_from_Ark]

58. Have you ever seen a dachshund, spaniel, yorkie, etc., do this?

[Arcanetrance]

61. I was attacked by a Jack Russell when I was young I've never been attacked by a pit or

For that matter any large dog. All animals including humans have the ability to be violent killers. If you believe pits need to be eliminated maybe you'd be just as happy seeing the human race eliminated from the planet as well.

[roody]

67. Pussy is a sexist, anti-woman slur.

[Enrique]

37. next you'll be telling us that King Cobras are dangerous for kids

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017103066

[JoeBlowToo]

101. No but Chihuahua's are killers...

Chihuahua attacks boy in Springfield Township, IN


Posted on Oct 30, 2008
According to The News Dispatch out of Michigan City, Indiana, a six-year-old boy named Owen Ott was attacked by a dog at his family's place of business, Stateline Blueberries, in Springfield Township. The boy was bitten by a Chihuahua in the face, causing his lip to tear from his mouth.

"The chunk was sticking out of his face. It looked horrible at the time but he's resting comfortably now," Diane Ott, the boy's mother said.

http://www.2keller.com/news/chihuahua-attacks-boy-in-springfield-township-in-20081030.cfm

[Honeycombe8]

49. I think some take the term "nanny dog" too literally. It just means they were good

with kids, is how I take it. Which they probably were, since they would've been all 'round family/farm dogs. If they weren't good with kids, they would've been killed, I expect.

They're also apt to put up with pokes & prodding that kids will do, I think, so in that respect, they probably tolerated kids in their family pretty well, unlike more nervous or delicate types of dogs.

Not that I know a lot about pits, and I wouldn't want one. They're pretty scary looking. But I think a lot of people think certain dogs are pits when they are not. Pits have a very distinctive face..the shortish wide muzzle, devil eyes, hazel eyes and matching nose usually. Most people identify a mid-sized short haired muscular dog with small ears as pits. IMO.

[DevonRex]

54. First, specify which breed we are discussing.

The American Staffordshire Terrier: http://www.akc.org/breeds/american_staffordshire_terrier/index.cfm
Breed Standard: http://www.akc.org/breeds/american_staffordshire_terrier/breed_standard.cfm

Staffordshire Bull Terrier: http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk/services/public/breed/display.aspx?id=3080
Breed Standard: http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk/services/public/breed/standard.aspx?id=3080

These 2 breeds are recognized in both countries. In addition, note the opening paragraph of the UK Kennel Club's description of the breed and what it says about the dogs' love of children. Not saying it proves the author of that piece wrong. But there may be more to it than that person is sharing with the internet.

The UK recognizes the American Pit Bull Terrier. The AKC does not because it has breeding issues, shall we say. Here's the UKC site for the APBT: http://www.ukcdogs.com/Web.nsf/Breeds/Terrier/AmericanPitBullTerrier12012012

Note the wide range in weight: 30 - 65 pounds. For a medium sized dog that's huge. I would caution dragging the other 2 breeds into this mess, first of all. It's apparent that people who who shouldn't be breeding animals have been breeding animals. And it is not the fault of the dogs. The author of that piece did not distinguish among the 3 (or even more, since the standard is so lax in the APBT) breeds. I wouldn't take it as gospel.

[JVS]

55. Nonsense. I was raised by a pack of Cordoba Fighting Dogs when I was young...

after getting separated from my parents. This worked out well for both the pack and me because this breed generally prefers fighting each other to breeding. So it was kind of pack with no kids finds kid with no family situation. Anyway after several years and after the dogs had killed each other off except for one of them, I was lucky to find my parents and return to human civilization. Those dogs raised me just about as well as any humans could, and I'm sure that without their nurturing I'd have never gone on to become a national merit scholar and graduate college Phi Beta Kappa.

[donheld]

68. Leave it to a Kitty pick on Dogs.

j/k

[baldguy]

74. My neighbors' kitty picks on my Pit Bull every day.

Orchid just wants to play & be friends, but the little killer cat will have none of it. His name is Sabre -and it fits too. When the cat comes into Orchid's yard hunting pigeons or mice, the dog will come bounding up to him all goofy & silly, and the cat will stop, stand his ground and hiss at her. That stops Orchid in her tracks. She knows that if she gets too close she'll get poked in the nose or scratched, and Sabre knows that this is HIS territory, no matter who happens to be occupying it at the time. After a little back & forth Orchid usually comes to her senses & lets Sabre go on his way. But the next day it'll start all over again.

It's hilarious watching this little 8 lb black cat staring down a 65 lb Pit Bull - and winning!

[Erose999]

79. The "Bull" in "Pit Bull" comes from the sport of "Bull Baiting". If you think what Mike Vick did was

bad, research the sporting traditions of the aristocracy of the not-too-distant past. Bullfighting as it is today was tame compared to some of the stuff that was around in Shakespeare's day. And they thought they were progressive at the time, because they weren't watching humans fight like the Romans.

Pitbulls are sweet dogs, in spite of their history and breeding though. Keep in mind that most breeds of dog descend from hunting/working dogs and they all have a mixture of traits of the wolf in them. Some of the most dangerous/vicious dogs I've ever encountered have been the "lap dog" breeds like Toy Poodles, Chihuahuas, Pomeranians, etc. The dogs temperament is maybe 5% breeding and 90% training (to the good or bad).

[Aerows]

96. My obedience trainer

for my Doberman would not accept pit bulls. She had Golden's that could pretty much operate a computer and drive a car, she was fearless when the dogs got aggressive, and she didn't take pit bulls.

Any questions?

[JoeBlowToo]

102. Your trainer was a numbskull...

Dogs are dogs until people start training them to be aggressive.

[Aerows]

105. She trained world-class obedience dogs

including Golden Retrievers that could get a wallet out of a purse, distinguish ID and ATM cards, and hit the right number on a cell phone.

But clearly, she was a numbskull.

[JoeBlowToo]

107. When it comes to this topic yes,,,

According to the American Veterinary Medicine Association, “controlled studies have not identified this breed group as disproportionately dangerous.” The American Temperance Testing Society (ATTS) puts thousands of dogs – purebreds and spayed and neutered mixed-breeds – through their paces each year. The dogs are tested for skittishness, aggression and their ability to differentiate between threatening and non-threatening humans. Among all of the breeds ATTS tested – over 30,000 dogs through May 2011 — 83 percent passed the test. How did pit bulls do? They showed an above average temperament, with 86 percent making the grade. Pit bulls are the second most tolerant breed tested by ATTS, after only golden retreivers.
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/05/in_defense_of_the_pitbull_partner/

[Aerows]

108. All depends on your thoughts

Okay. I won't have one. Will not advise others to have one. And you can do your own thing, too.

[roody]

109. Do you find that ridiculous? Do

you know that pits are easy to train?

[DiverDave]

103. Scream all you want, it WAS called the nanny dog.

man, get a life

[MadHound]

106. Hmm, who to believe? A biased, bullshit blogger,

Or groups like the AKC, ASPCA, and the American Veterinary Medical Association. Thanks, I stick with the opinions of the experts, and my own personal experience.
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/05/in_defense_of_the_pitbull_partner/

[fairiesinflight]

112. pictures don't lie

pit bulls are the sweetest most loyal breed that have a good sense of wanting to protect the innocence of a child... take a look at pictures of these dogs with children before they were misused and bred for fighting...

[MichelKS]

115. Weaker than you think

You presume that people regard the SBT as 'the nanny dog'; if they didn't, I'd wonder why you bothered writing your post. That said, the 'nanny dog' reputation is common knowledge. Generally we give common knowledge the benefit of the doubt and presume its veracity until proven otherwise. For example, you may never have been to Antarctica, but you believe it exists: a person who claimed that it doesn't exist would have the onus to prove so. In your case, you ask for a 'preponderance' of evidence, despite that you have the onus to provide that level of evidence for your claim against common knowledge. Moreover, you don't provide evidence for your claim, you provide a lack of evidence against it. Can you find proof that I'm not Bill Gates? You see, you've approached your claim backward. You want to prove that the nickname is a 'myth'. But if you have to prove that, then the nickname itself must not be a myth, people must actually call the SBT 'the nanny dog', otherwise you would have nothing to prove. So then, you must mean that the nickname is inaccurate. If that's what you mean, then you ought to cite sources that evidence that claim, instead of making arguments that depend on what they refute. By approaching your argument that way you can use positive evidence to make a real claim.

Good luck. You'll need it.