I can just guess at what the Euro's think of human circumcision....... <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

This is like the good old debate on 9mm .40 357 and .45 ammo. No one will ever agree and it is better left untouched. <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

 Quote:

Would anyone here advocate neutering/spaying their children to ensure passive, subservant behavior?

Oh man; don't tempt me. I have a teenage daughter <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

It's true, there sure aren't PEOPLE lined up at the spay/neuter clinics, in spite of any potential health benefits. I find it interesting that my uncle with the enlarged prostate gets medication, while a dog with the same problem gets neutered. Hmm.......People have determined size shape and purpose for animals since they've been domesticated. We have OFTEN not done them any favors. Ear cropping is pretty minor when you consider we have created dogs that can't even give birth naturally because of the size of their heads. My concern is less with the ear-cropping of well cared for dogs, than it is with animals that are exploited and mistreated for our financial gain or entertainment. If we have real concern for dogs, then let's get our priorities straight and focus on real problems.

I too wonder how the Euro's feel about circumcision <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

The Euro's I'm familiar with are AGAINST circumcision.

On the spay/neuter thing, people seem to just accept it as a necessity. While it should be for the AVERAGE pet with the AVERAGE owner/handler...it's not the cure-all that people are led to believe. However, I don't think the crop/neuter analogy will ever work b/c the people who are sooo in favor of neutering everything with fur truly believe it's the right thing to do for health reasons, and the same thing can't be said for cropping.

I was in trouble (yet again) at a family dinner this week. My cousin announced that her dog had gotten "fixed." I replied, "Oh, I didn't even know he was broken." She got annoyed with me and cited testicular cancer as her reason for neutering him. (The reason should've been that he's a doxie/aussie mix who pees on the floor everytime he sees me.) To which I replied, "Well, you can now guarantee that he won't get testicular cancer. What are you going to do to guarantee he won't get brain cancer?"

Anyway, while I'm not dead set against either cropping or neutering on certain dogs, I don't think it's the best analogy- not because it's not a good comparison of surgeries and risks, but because of the MOTIVATION behind both procedures. Yes, I would worry much more about ill effects of spaying my APBT than having her ears cropped. But, people have decided (with help from vets) that not neutering an animal makes you a terribly irresponsible owner, whereas cropping your animal makes you terribly vain and superficial, as well as oblivious to their pain. <rolleyes/shrug> I think Steve hit the nail on the head; this debate will probably never be resolved.

Once again you either miss the point, or try to cloud the issue with irrelevant comparisons and analogies.

Spaying is not done for cosmetic reasons, any more than breast or prostate removal is in humans. There are sound medical reasons for choosing to do this.

My point is that we should only be 'cutting' when there is such a need.

As for circumcision, I believe that, historically, it was either ritualistic/religious or for hygienic reasons.

I wouldn't personally impose it upon a male infant, unless medically advised to, and, of course, I am totally horrified that female circumcision is still practised <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Of course we will not all agree on the subject of the thread, but it does no harm, IMO, to air our reasons for holding the opinions we do.
As I have said elsewhere, we may all be a little better-informed at the end of it.

And, BTW, please don't imply that all of us who live in Europe have the same opinions, about just about anything <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" />
We are all individuals, the same as you guys on the other side of the pond <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Nobody "missed the point", but talk about beating a dead horse, WOW.You can't have it both ways! I agree that many spay/neuter advocates would not see this argument as valid, but that is only because of the mind set of the group! Altering a dogs' genitals is a matter of convenience for many owners. They don't want to deal with a bitch in season, they don't want to have to actually train their dogs, etc.. For every health issue in favor of altering, there is another against it. Honestly, all the women I know who have undergone a hysterectmy have told me how painful the recovery process was. I wonder how many of the people against ear cropping actually know how the procedure is carried out, or witnessed the recooperation period? I would hate to think smart people would jump on the band wagon without making sure they know what they are talking about! For the most part, I hope people do get their animals altered because we sure don't need to add to the horrible problem of unwanted dogs. I don't alter my dogs. By the same token, I would not label others as "cruel" just because they disagree. <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> How about hunting? Do you consider this to be cruel? I am not a hunter, but I am pretty sure the wild game had a much better quality of life than the cows on the feedlot. So by your argument, all those who are not vegans are cruel? Roger, what experience do you have with dogs that have docked tails or cropped ears? I am sure you are not one of those people who jump on a band wagon just because it is popular!

 Quote:

But, people have decided (with help from vets) that not neutering an animal makes you a terribly irresponsible owner

It's not the vets it's that damn Bob Barker and the Price is right! <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Well, if I'd had my ex neutered after our last son was born, I wouldn't have had to dump him two years later for cheating with something he found under a rock at work, LOL

Roger, what experience do you have with dogs that have docked tails or cropped ears?

Well we had a couple of docked spaniels, (and I saw lots of others!) in the days when they were done routinely. They were both 'gun-dogs' and tails were thought to be disadvantageous in thick cover.
I do believe that some dogs have such thin, easily-damaged, tails that docking as a preventative measure may be justified.
BUT that was not the issue we were discussing, which is EAR-CROPPING!(not docking, spaying or circumcision!)

I have never owned or had much contact with cropped dogs.
As I've said, there were none about in my youth, and I just haven't seen many since, in any of the countries I've lived in(UK, Spain, Rhodesia, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia). I can't actually recall a single one.
(I used, occasionally, to go to dog-shows in UK, including Crufts)

That being said, I'm not sure why it's relevant?.... It has been admitted that the procedures cause some, albeit little, pain, and that ear-cropping is now carried-out only for cosmetic reasons. What else do I need to know?

I am sure you are not one of those people who jump on a band wagon just because it is popular!

That is surely true, Susan, or I would have left this discussion long ago <img src="http://www.leerburg.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Susan, were you replying to me or to Roger in the first part of your post?