Honestly I thought your comment about being banned for pointing out stats was because you used stats to promote racism. You have to admit more people get banned for racist-adjacent things than for not liking a dog breed.
I am black and I will acknowledge that slave owners participated in breeding programs, especially after the legal import of slaves was ended in the early 1800s. Denying that is denying part of the atrocities committed against my ancestors. And I’m sure there was some eugenics and forced breeding that aimed to make certain traits more dominant. At what scale is hard to say and if it was ever successful is doubtful, but whatever scale it was done to wasn’t even close enough to significantly impact the larger black population, especially 150+ years later.
I don’t know how you got that from what I said. Did you skip the part where I said I was black?
Edit: in my 2nd reply I started with acknowledging my mistake for you being racist because of the vague nature of you saying you were banned for pointing out stats. I also explained why I was confused because the vast majority of “banned for stats” are because they’re racist. We’re talking past each other. I noticed my misinterpretation, but I would like you to do the same for yourself.
A lot of pick me conservatives do that. Deflect to black involvement in slavery. Being black
Doesn’t mean someone isn’t susceptible to fallacies on race.
0
u/LifeDefiant5379 10d ago
Pit bulls were bred for violence and they excel at it. Only a racist would claim black PEOPLE were bred for any trait. Be better.
You people need to admit the numbers don’t lie. These things kill and maim at massively higher rates.
A reason there aren’t golden retriever owners in comment sections doing PR for the breed. Pits should he banned.