Selective Breeding, Thoughts?

[curiousnorway]

Selective breeding = When you breeds animals with wanted features with other animals with other wanted features, so you can get an animal with both of the features. Selective breeding is used a lot in the meat and milk production to make it more effective and beneficial.

#BelgianBlue #SelectiveBreeding

It's okay (Why)

It's not the best option, but better than gene manipulation (Why)

It's wrong (Why)

Other (Explain What & Why)

[Dause]

In my unpopular opinion, it would be better to let animals be free, traditional hunting could in more than a few ways be considered more ethical than even the most ideal form of Animal Husbandry. Of course, that would make the milk and dairy industry almost non-existent, but that only really existed in specific areas until it was popularized during the World Wars.

Regardless of how you go about it, animals have brains very similar to humans, and it is blatantly obvious they would be oppressed living in captivity. Maybe it is good for some animals and let's them bypass survival of the fittest rules but🤗

When we go off planet one day we would probably give animals more room to grow if we can start turning land to be livable faster than our population grows.

[Anonymous]

I mean if you have a problem with it you must have a problem with dogs and cats because we have different breeds via selective breeding also. I think in a way you could also call humans that pick good partners selective breeders. I supose it comes down to purpose. In which case who is the moral Arbiter of what is write and wrong. I think a problem is if a cow in England is forced to have it off with a bull from America, the reason I say this is because you are forcing it you haven't moved the bull and let him prove himself with British bulls you have forced it. Maybe I don't know

[AdorableLilo]

People choosing their partners is actually natural selection. Same with animals. They go up to a mate they think they want to reproduce with. If selective breeding would accure among humans there would be people taking a male and a female they would want certain genes to pass to the offspring. So let's say blue eyes from a male Caucasian and the hair texture of an African American. When both are extremely turned on and fertile the people will get them together and make sure the male ejaculates in the female by putting the female in a certain possition, jerk off the male if necessery.

[Opinion Owner]

So the destination is third party involvment. I'd say selecting a quality you want is selective breeding regardless of how many people are involved. A woman who likes a guy with blond hair will date said guy because of the selected quality.

Regardless the point still stands dogs are the byproduct if selective breeding the difference is justification

[AdorableLilo]

So what you are saying is natural selection doesn't exist when it comes to reproducing?

[Opinion Owner]

I don't belive it's either or. I belive it's a combination of the two. I think that selective breeding shares elements of natural selection though selecting superficial stuff, this guy is hotter or this girl has the type of hair I like is selective breeding.

[AdorableLilo]

And what's natural selection in your opinion?
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass. I'm just curious of how you see it

[Opinion Owner]

I think if it's based on natural influences then that makes in natural. A gorilla that looks attractive isn't the alpha, the gorilla that is the strongest is the alpha. A woman who has the widest hips is likely to give birth more times guys I know like a big arse not big hips that's what I'm defining the difference

[Opinion Owner]

Natural selection takes social influences out of it.

Selective breeding is based on superficial elements.

But I would never say that the two are isolated from eachother

[AdorableLilo]

If it's done to a certain extend i think it's wrong. Sometimes people want to pass on a certain gene so bad they will have the animals perform incest. Which, just as with humans, can be harmful. Not only with the meat and milk production, but also with common pets such as dogs and cats. Like the persian cat for example. People played so much with the genes, that decades later (our modern time) the cat has a flat face which causes giving birth dangerous. I don't even want to start about the English bulldog. Those are just ruined.. they are prone to almost every disease imaginable

[Anonymous]

It is both good and bad.
I think it's good in military, guard and police dogs, etc.
Or for sheep meant to give warm and soft wool.

But it's more bad in the meat industry - the body might become too heavy for the bones, causing suffering, and they may get troubles moving and walking.

[WalterRadio]

Slaves were sometimes selectively bred in America for strength of doing plantation work. This is still seen today.

Nazi's selectively bred too for certain traits, also seen as traces today, but since the program was not multigenerational, it is not as permanent.

In western civilization today we have selective breeding, otherwise known as assortative mating, primarily for intelligence. Over the past 50 years, highly intelligent people are reproducing with highly intelligent people, and stupid people are reproducing with stupid people. We are starting to see a bifurcation among the 2nd generation of this.

If the trend continues, in about 6 more generations it will result in extermination of a class or indentured servitude/slavery of a class.

[ShortCircuit]

They're going to be killed anyway, so what does it matter? Whatever feeds more humans without negative health effects is positive in my opinion.

[jacquesvol]

It's been done in Europe for thousands of years.
For animals and for plants. That's how Dutch growers got tulips of all kinds and much more potent cannabis.

[jacquesvol]

And that's how wolves became dogs

[esotericstory]

Humans have been doing this since initial domestication of animals. Which was roughly ten thousand years ago. We do it with crops too. Even humans, partner selection is very strong in some human ethnicities.

[Redstang88]

It’s just natural selection amplified, nothing wrong with it
Those examples you posted have all been pumped full of steroids and other hormones, that’s not just breeding

[Johnnie1000]

I'm not against cross breeding. However, t heir should be some control over the results and whether they are painful or cruel to animals.

[ertyuiopa]

As long as there's no steroid use, it's fine. That first pic looks like an elephant!

[Leviathan_Charmer]

You're just breeding more intentionally.. what's wrong with that?

[ThisAndThat]

The first picture looks a lot like my x girlfriend, I wouldn't be surprised if it was her.

[curiousnorway]

Neither do I. Ha ha! x'D

[Anonymous]

The third photo looks very very scary!!! Poor Pig!! That pig was surely injected with some steroids he is humungous!!!

[curiousnorway]

The farmers claimed they put the sperm in the lab, so scientists could put in some genes and removes others, before putting it in the female pig. It's because of they wants big muscles. So according to them they can get this result with gene changes and no steroids involved.

[MarketData]

We're tampering with forces we don't comprehend. Also I'm really hoping those pics are fake.

[curiousnorway]

Belgian blue is real.

[MarketData]

That's appalling.

[Anonymous]

Black slaves were bred selectively and it really shows.

[RideTheRedWave]

When I read this post I immediately thought Hitler posted it lol

[SwoleCook]

We’ve been doing this for a long time. It’s how we got dogs from wolves n shit.

[Poormanscomedian]

We would all end up with cancer. In humans , it would be all white blue eyed males of 6'5.

[Anonymous]

That pig's pretty gunned up at the bottom. Reminds me of Schwarzen..

[alice55]

It's okay if done well

[Anon-ymous1]

... What's to have thoughts about? No vote.

[Rexxx]

It put it's wrong, but I thought you meant humans.

[BeHappy1985]

Really great. Go science!