Neutering and the male perspective

Anything that eats poo obviously has questionable judgement!

See? That's what I thought, too!

ORIGINAL: DPU

Corvus, I am surprised at your response and how strong it is.  The comment is hearsay and may have been taken out of contents to support a point.  Oh, I forgot that is not done on this forum.  It is not uncommon for dog owners to project their feelings and believes on their pets.  Afterall the pet is agreeing because the pet is not objecting.  Look at some of the post in the categories Spiritual Cycle and Rainbow bridge.

My comment about the lady not wanting to take the choice from her dog was almost word for word.  I can understand people not wanting to spay or neuter, but because she wouldn't want to take the choice from her dog caught me a bit off guard.  But, maybe she wasn't able to have children for some reason and associated this with the dog.  You never know, but it was just not an answer that I was expecting.

That mindset has always baffled me.  I have never thought twice about spaying my female pets.  The sole exception was my kitten, who I delayed spaying due to a severe heart murmur. (they didn't think she'd make it to 10 weeks..she lived to 10 months) But even she was eventually spayed..I just can't do a cat in heat *shudder*.  I do not associate my own uterus with that of my pets. Although I could take or leave mine as well[]
 
I can honestly say that I've never paid a mind to my pets testicles. Neither, might I add, has the boyfriend (although I'm pretty sure he's fond of his own, he doesn't transfer that over to pets). I checked on this first, as it was not an argument I was going to have..if it walks on four legs and has testicles, they're coming off when they move into my home.
 
At work I have seen many, many male dogs with testicle tumors. (and on the flip side, many breast tumors in female dogs) We have one beagle that comes in who has a testicle tumor, a huge prostate (literally..it's the size of a softball[&:]) and has a perianal hernia. Now, having all three is unlikely most of the time, but if we see that many testicle tumors in this, a smallish town, it can't be all that uncommon. And it's not something I'm risking with  my own pets. Dogs think differently about sex than humans do (probably a good thing) and I've yet to see a male dog act as if he 'misses' his parts. My Chow was neutered as a young dog, and no one has ever mistaken him for a female, or found him to be a 'sissy' dog (or whatever it is men are worried about)

I'd probably let him decide. Dogs can't decide if they want surgery. They can't tell you that they're completely stressed out, because the hot bitch up the road is in heat, and they can't get out to mate with her. They can't tell you that it hurts, when they move a certain way, or that something just isn't right. Hormones are a major cause of behavioral problems in dogs (seriously, over HALF of the unaltered dogs I know [dogs being boys, and bitches being girls] are uncontrollable. the bitches are better, but still crazy), and a major cause of dog dumping.

 
I am sure the dog is letting you know but you don't speak the dog's language.
 
I followed the advice of my vet telling me neutering will calm the male down and not make roam.  I must not have a dog but some other kind of species because the vet was wrong.

ColleenC quote:
But, maybe she wasn't able to have children for some reason and associated this with the dog. You never know, but it was just not an answer that I was expecting.

 
No offense to you and I believe you but like your last sentence I thought something else was going on with the lady that made her say that.  I was just commenting on the critical nature of Corvus's comment.

save a stray:  Faramir, I keep reading your post over and over, and I'm just not sure what you're trying to say.... But whose considerations win out?  ...What are your considerations? What would your reasons be for not having him fixed?
 
i am not sure which considerations would win out...i have not had to make that decision yet.
 
i once read a book that was describing mature and immature decision making.
 
a mature person knows there are often two strong sides to an issue...they write down the pros on side one and the cons on side two...then, based on THEIR value system, they decide which side should win out for THEM.
 
however, people who are immature get very nervous when both sides seem somewhat even...they can't make a decision that way...so what they do is to ignore completely the reasons of one side...they convince themselves that one side is completely the clear way to go...and they are baffled by others who choose differently...they don't even see that there is a logic to choose another side.
 
i see reasons to neuter...i see reasons not to...if and when i need to face that decison, i will decide.
 
meanwhile, i don't like people throwing statistics about health problems without referring to some respected article or book....many times on many issues, the expression is used "scientists have found a higher percentage of a problem in this group from that group", and when you look into it, the percentage difference is minimal...
 
as Mark Twain stated:  there are lies, there are damn lies, and then there are statistics.
 
 

You seem unwilling to elaborate on your position, which seems silly since you're the one that posted your opinion on an opinion-based forum that is in direct contrast to the apparent majority. If you have the courage to stand behind your convictions, then please, enlighten us to the other side of the argument. If these reasons are "personal" for some reason, why post a "teaser" controversial comment in the first place. As for your statistics quote, Mark Twain did not coin that phrase, but nevertheless was a humorist,  People who quote that statement often do not understand statistics, although I admit poorly reported statistics can be misleading. Statistical analysis that is responsibly applied and executed and accurately reported does not mislead the trained analyst . . .you can spot a twisting and tweaking attempt a mile away.

saveastray...i thought i already gave the basics of my uncertainty, but it is reasonable that you would want me to elaborate.
 
first of all, as i mentioned, i do not consider myself his owner, that i have the right to do whatever i want...i consider myself his guardian....i respect his independence.
 
there are dog books recommended on this site, in which we are asked to try to see the world from a dog's perspective...to understand "doglish"...well, when it comes to this issue, i have to try to consider what sparky would want to do if he had all the info, and had the power of reason to decide.
 
cutting off a dog's testicles is major...there are people here who say they don't think twice...well, maybe they are so sure of what is right....and maybe they just are not sensitive enough to respect an animal's rights...as much as they love their pooch.
 
the arguments about health don't move me too much...i would have to see respected scientific evidence that shows a very significant health threat...and i doubt there is.
 
the issue of him spraying stuff is not reason enough for me to do that to him...and even if he wasn't neutered, i think he still would have been a very sweet dog...perhaps different than he is now...but still sweet enough.
 
the issue of dogs being born with no likely owner for them is an important consideration.
 
the issue of sparky running away occasionally when he smells a female dog in heat...and possible never finding his way back...is probably the most significant issue for me to lean towards doing the neutering.
 
but it seems to me to be parallel to the controversy concenrning abortion...there are many good reasons why our society, and many of the women who get pregnant, would be better off if abortion is allowed....however, all those reasons become irrelevant if you believe the fetus is a viable life that has the right to be born...most people believe that a 9 month fetus has the right not to be aborted, even though it is part of a woman's body...the debate centers on earlier stages, and is based on different people's attitude toward the rights of a dependent fetus.
 
similarly, there are many important reasons for society and individual dogs why it would be better to neuter them...however, the question still has to be asked whether it is OUR right to make this decison for them...if everyone feels the answer is yes, i'm not sure i believe in the right of any of us to own a dog then.
 
now, i hope this doesn't lead to an abortion debate...that is not the point, and i have not taken sides...and i also hope that people understand that i am not arguing that we must not neuter...it is just an uncertainty i have.
 

oh year, saveastray...i'm nervous about having this discussion with anyone but you....and a few others...there are quite a few hysterical people on this forum, who consistently misconstrue the points that are being made...

and maybe they just are not sensitive enough to respect an animal's rights...as much as they love their pooch.

Animals don't have rights, and animal rights activists do stupid things, like make sites advocating not altering your dog, because it has the right to have sex with you (don't believe me? neutering.org). They don't believe in eating meat, or feeding their pets meat (even CATS and FERRETS), because those cows and chickens have the right to life. They don't believe that animals should be asked to work or perform in any way, and often believe that animals should not be confined. They end up doing things like going to dogs shows and "freeing" a bunch of unaltered, possibly dog aggressive dogs, "rescuing" animals from shelters and killing them in the back of a van, setting fur animals "free" and destroying local wildlife, and other stupid feats of humanity. Why would you want to be associated with that group of people?

I live in Indiana. It's a giant hillbilly state. I come accross this all the time. I'd say atleast once a month I find a stray, intact male dog running through my back yard. I found a brittany spaniel last week, who I returned to his owner. His response was, "Oh, he's just looking for girls."

Most of my husband's "friends" are "one of these." And most of them only have their dogs for a couple years or months before..."Oh, it ran away," or "My new girlfriend (who he knocked up) won't let me keep it anymore because she doesn't want it around the baby." or "I lost my job and had to move back in with my parents and they don't want a dog in their house."

By the way these "friends" only come around when they need something (a car fixed, a computer fixed, a beer out of our fridge, and before my husband married me, money). My husband was once the personal bank lender for many of his looser friends. Not anymore. We are also no longer the storage yard for his "friends" junk vehicles, band equiptment, or car parts. My husband worked hard to buy his house and works hard for his money and I'm not letting his friends who don't know how to work or save use my husband anymore. I wish I had before and after pictures of when I moved in.

What is it with these people taking on pets before they are mature enough to have one? And further, at 23-28 years old why aren't they mature enough to figure this out?

And these immature hillbilly types always want to make $ and breed. [:@] Thankfully, their girl friends/wives talked them out of it.

ORIGINAL: faramir

Have you talked to him about the risks of cancer and perianal hernias?

so, if you found out that your son was at greater risk for cancer or perianal hernias, you would neuter him too?
besides, i never see anyone refer to real scientific literature as to how much these different risks go up.

Would you take care of your son's babies for him?

Faramir, yes I understand your concern about not being able to carry on a discussion, forums are often not conducive to such things. I do appreciate your elaboration. I see your point about the uncertainty regarding the medical issues, etc. However, given the approximately 6 million companion animals that are killed every year in the US alone, I find that reason enough to spay/neuter. To risk even one unplanned litter that will result in some animals being put to death is an overriding reason in my opinion. All the arguments against it (my dog/cat doesn't get out, I'd find good homes for all the pups, etc.) just don't hold up. Animals get out now and then, and it's not like it takes all that long to do the deed . . .they don't really need dinner and a movie.  So if you're dog slips out for even 15 minutes,  pups can result. As for the rights issue, I'm sure you have trained your dog to NOT do many things the he would "consider" right for him, like jumping up on people, nipping at you or chewing on hands, peeing on all your furniture. Why is this issue more important? It's probably less important for him than his right to eat a half-decomposed mouse for dinner every night rather than the food you put in his bowl, and less of a pressing issue for him than shredding your slippers instead of chewing on a Kong.  I just don't see any validity in the argument that it's not right to impose your will on him because you're already imposing your will on him in so many other ways. The spay/neuter debate is charged only because of our human psychosocialsexual opinions/hangups/biases or whatever term you want to use. If you truly believed that his rights were paramount, then he would be peeing and pooping in the house instead of outside in the rain and the snow, not wear a collar or be on a leash (really, can a collar be comfortable all day?) and able to treat you like he instinctually knows how to . . .as a dog. Now maybe I'm wrong and he DOES get to do all those things, but if I'm not, then the real issue is your own personal HUMAN attitudes about sexuality that are coming in to play.  And I forgot to add that that, then, brings us back to the original point of mydogishalfgazell's question. I had to stop several times in typing this in order to do chores, so I hope it makes sense!

Animals don't have rights, and animal rights activists do stupid things

...Why would you want to be associated with that group of people?

jennie...i do think animals have rights...doesn't mean i associate myself with extremists.
-------------------------------------------
 
jojo: Would you take care of your son's babies for him?

jojo, that is another issue, a good issue...i take it  though, that my point about the medical issue was a good one, since you did not address it, and went on to something else.
------------------------------------
saveastray, i think maintaining the integrity of his testicles is a larger issue than allowing him to pee in the house or jump on people.
 
i go out of my way on a daily basis to make sure he gets off-leash activity...i feel it is his right...i also try not to make him feel like an inferior member of the house...which does get me in trouble with the family at meal time.
 
my point...is that if it is necessary to neuter in order to have dogs in our society, then perhaps we should not be allowed to have them as pets...perhaps we should only adopt the current supply of dogs that are in shelters now...and that's it....maybe that's what the extremists believe...but  i don't like that they are too sure of themselves...and not tolerant of others choices.

ORIGINAL: faramir
------------------------------------
saveastray, i think maintaining the integrity of his testicles is a larger issue than allowing him to pee in the house or jump on people.

But does HE?

It still seems to me that you are imposing your values on him, whether you realize it or not, and your value is that testicular integrity is important, whereas he may well think that whole mouse-for-dinner issue is a bigger deal. Which again, was one of the whole points of the thread.

I agree that you can agree with certain points the extremist groups hold, but not support their tactics or even their general principles, although I don't agree with that particular one.