Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

493

I was in the grocery store parking lot and I drove by a car filled with older ladies; they were all wearing rainbow tie-dye clothing and had poodle haircuts. I was thinking about how they kind of looked like the human equivalent of those stupid little yapper dogs, and it was a kind of lightbulb moment for me.

I started thinking about how those stupid little yapper dogs have become the predominate dog breeds in the United States, along with every other manner of weird-looking mutt; the kinds where, out of curiosity, you say to the owner, "what kind of dog is it?", and the owner replies, "oh it's just some kind of mutt." This theme has become so common place that such replies have become a figure of speech.

Most people never really ever stop to think how strange this is. Imagine you were in a park and a birdwatcher was nearby; you see a pretty bird fly by and ask, "that's a really pretty bird, what kind is it?", and the birdwatcher replies, "oh that's just some kind of random mutt bird". Imagine this with regards to any other family of animal; this would be very strange.

This is probably coming across like a race post of some kind, but it's primarily not. The thing that struck me about these ladies and most everyone else you see around town these days, and how their fitness and stature relates to my thoughts about dog breeds, is that the DNA of animals in nature tends to change very slowly, not because of any kind of in group preference, but because the very existence of each species is predicated on a never ending contest amongst the best and fittest of each kind there is little room in most animal families for mating preferences based on trivial social matters or temporary styles (of which, primates perhaps offer the closest analogs in nature).

Dogs of the past for noble creatures, good for hunting large game or birds, or for defending individual humans or tribes from outside threats. They were big and beautiful animals, such as German Shepherds, Golden Retrievers, Hounds, 1800s original Doberman Pinschers, etc.

Then life became easy in the west and people, in our excess, began to cross breed dogs to obtain traits that were practically worthless but socially important. The end result is this mishmash of worthless little yappers that serve no purpose other than to make their owners say "awww"; these breeds live twice as long and have huge litters.

Dogs and humans seem to be the only families of animal that have been bred down from noble creatures into slovenly mutts. And the interesting part is that the way in which dogs have changed through this process mirrors the way humans in the west have changed; we've become shorter, and uglier by classical standards, but standards change so quickly that now ugly fat mutts are worshiped as gods and goddesses (e.g., Kim Kardashian, et al), we all live longer, and as a group we are becoming practically worthless, in terms of traits that would serve to further our existence as a species and protect it against unknown threats.

What are your thoughts on this?

I was in the grocery store parking lot and I drove by a car filled with older ladies; they were all wearing rainbow tie-dye clothing and had poodle haircuts. I was thinking about how they kind of looked like the human equivalent of those stupid little yapper dogs, and it was a kind of lightbulb moment for me. I started thinking about how those stupid little yapper dogs have become the predominate dog breeds in the United States, along with every other manner of weird-looking mutt; the kinds where, out of curiosity, you say to the owner, "what kind of dog is it?", and the owner replies, "oh it's just some kind of mutt." This theme has become so common place that such replies have become a figure of speech. Most people never really ever stop to think how strange this is. Imagine you were in a park and a birdwatcher was nearby; you see a pretty bird fly by and ask, "that's a really pretty bird, what kind is it?", and the birdwatcher replies, "oh that's just some kind of random mutt bird". Imagine this with regards to any other family of animal; this would be very strange. This is probably coming across like a race post of some kind, but it's primarily not. The thing that struck me about these ladies and most everyone else you see around town these days, and how their fitness and stature relates to my thoughts about dog breeds, is that the DNA of animals in nature tends to change very slowly, not because of any kind of in group preference, but because the very existence of each species is predicated on a never ending contest amongst the best and fittest of each kind there is little room in most animal families for mating preferences based on trivial social matters or temporary styles (of which, primates perhaps offer the closest analogs in nature). Dogs of the past for noble creatures, good for hunting large game or birds, or for defending individual humans or tribes from outside threats. They were big and beautiful animals, such as German Shepherds, Golden Retrievers, Hounds, 1800s original Doberman Pinschers, etc. Then life became easy in the west and people, in our excess, began to cross breed dogs to obtain traits that were practically worthless but socially important. The end result is this mishmash of worthless little yappers that serve no purpose other than to make their owners say "awww"; these breeds live twice as long and have huge litters. Dogs and humans seem to be the only families of animal that have been bred down from noble creatures into slovenly mutts. And the interesting part is that the way in which dogs have changed through this process mirrors the way humans in the west have changed; we've become shorter, and uglier by classical standards, but standards change so quickly that now ugly fat mutts are worshiped as gods and goddesses (e.g., Kim Kardashian, et al), we all live longer, and as a group we are becoming practically worthless, in terms of traits that would serve to further our existence as a species and protect it against unknown threats. What are your thoughts on this?

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (20).
[–] • 0 pt

Adopting a rescue dog is more ethical than buying from a puppy mill and when adopting you cannot really avoid mutts. My mutt is 1/2 German Shepard though

Imagine you were in a park and a birdwatcher was nearby; you see a pretty bird fly by and ask, "that's a really pretty bird, what kind is it?", and the birdwatcher replies, "oh that's just some kind of random mutt bird"

But that is because different birds are different species, they cannot interbreed to make mutts. Dogs breeds are called different breeds because they CAN interbreed, and hence mutts.

Dogs of the past for noble creatures, good for hunting large game or birds, or for defending individual humans or tribes from outside threats. They were big and beautiful animals, such as German Shepherd, Golden Retrievers, Hounds, 1800s original Doberman Pinschers, etc.

Then life became easy in the west and people, in our excess, began to cross breed dogs to obtain traits that were practically worthless but socially important. The end result is this mishmash of worthless little yappers that serve no purpose other than to make their owners say "awww"; these breeds live twice as long and have huge litters.

You know that most of the little 'little yapper' breeds were originally bred for hunting? It's just that we as a society don't hunt the same ways anymore. We no longer send dogs down a rabbit hole or use dogs to control rats dock side.

[–] • 0 pt

But that is because different birds are different species

Dog breeds were created by people.

My thesis is predicated on this fact; people bred dogs based on an abilities-driven symbiotic relationship (hunting, etc.).

My point is that, in the past we created powerful dogs because we were powerful and did real things. Now we sit around and watch Disney movies, eat junk food, and masturbate, and our dog breeds reflect this reduced state of productive existence.

[–] • 1 pt

Yeah, ok... I agree that dog breeds reflect what people want in a dog. We breed them for what is popular in society.

I disagree in two areas:

1) Timeline: Most of the "small useless yappy dogs" have actually been around for a long time.

2) Original use: Most of the "small useless yappy dogs" used to in fact be very useful.

...But I agree that what makes the "small useless yappy dogs" popular TODAY is that we have lots of useless yappy people.

[–] • 0 pt

I agree with your version, with regards to purebred yappers, after looking into some of the histories of the yapper breeds just now. Some of them, like Yorkshire Terrier, or only 150 or so years old or less, but others, like Corgi and Chihuahua, are a thousand or thousands of years old, respectively.

The mutts though; nothing excuses them. Also, I don't mean any offense to anyone who owns one of these; most everyone has owned at least one mutt, and dogs are very loyal & loving pets.