Opinions on neutering?

B

bobbybobz

Tourist
My family is much for neutering animals as a form of population and behavior control. I disagree, thinking neutering is pretty fucked up, because there are better alternatives like vasectomies or training your dog use a something else to mount on. When they need to release. (I’m just saying this because it’s not generally common for people to let dogs mount humans)

Idk, what are your opinions on this?
 
Unless there is a serious reason for this it should not be done.
Convenience and behavior control are not serious reasons. You can learn to control your dog's behavior and you can jerk a dog off a few times a week to keep the hormones low. And you can make your garden secure enough to prevent your dog from running away. If everybody does that a male and a female would have to escape at the same time in a small time window to be able to mate. Castrating dogs for population control is lazy convenience and genital mutilation.
 
I want to breed my dog one day and produce a lot of puppies, especially considering his pure-bred bloodline. I can understand for other pet owners who have lesser breeds that they dont want to accidentally reproduce and create unwanted mutts, however I think these people are essentially mutilating their animals especially without their consent, as if an animal would ever want their own genitalia cut off.
 
I dont want to have my dog breed with other dogs for puppies (when i get one eventually) but I dislike the idea of neutering a dog purely to prevent it
 
Current info suggests neutering at a young age, especially for large breeds is detrimental. Waiting at least one year, typically two, is recommended as it can cause/exacerbate many health issues. I would suggest reading up on the topic, it's an easy way of defusing the conversation.
 
I had a bad medical experience with a quack doctor when I was very young. It stripped 6 months of my life away. I was bedridden, bored, and completely beside myself. (Alliteration intended) That doctor shared a species with me. He had the same basic parts, in the same general configuration, and he RUINED my childhood, and if we didn't get a different doctor, they may very well have ruined my life permanently.

I shudder to think what would happen if a doctor of such low standards was giving me advice on my fluffy companions. The complications from putting a pup under the knife for my personal convenience, or worse, for the chance of slight mood changes... I think that would be almost unforgivable.

Any behavioral issues are easy enough to train a smart dog out of, that's on the prerogative of the owner/daddy/mommy
Any chances of them getting out and getting impregnated or knocking up a stray... ALSO fully on the owner/daddy/mommy.

The few medical issues that are alleviated by Spay/neutering are usually things that are genetic in nature, or infections. Which are either rare... or avoidable... again by the provider/pappa/mam. If there's some cancer or genetic problem that comes up further in their lives, and surgery would improve their quality of life, ABSOLUTELY I would provide for them. But not for some misguided vanity.

There's a profound YouTube video recorded 8 years ago by a Doctor Becker, about this very topic.

The Truth of Spaying and Neutering
 
How can a zoo actually consider castrating their animal for convenience? :D Not only does it damage the animal but it also removes the sex drive and the body parts responsible for cum. So it destroys any chance of sex which does not make sense when you are a zoophile.

Sometimes I really have to wonder whether people know what castration/spaying/neutering actually is and does. :D
 
pes said:
Sometimes I really have to wonder whether people know what castration/spaying/neutering actually is and does.
Click to expand...
do you really need to wonder with how often threads like "how to make my neutered dog interested" pop up?
you can see almost daily how little many ppl actually know about non-human anatomy... which seems kinda given seeing how many of them seem to only have any "intel" from porn.
 
I think that any kind of neutring should be done only as last resort and only if there are very serious medical conditions for it, like for example genetical mutation that would cause deformed or very sick and unhealable desies (not sure if I wrote it correctly).

In other cases it should be treated as cruelity towards animals and causing them unessecary pain and suffering, same as murdering (called for missleading as euthanasia or putting down) blind, short born puppies telling that it was done in a humane way, but that is not true because the pups are suffering thru the time till they die
 
mcgiwer said:
I think that any kind of neutring should be done only as last resort and only if there are very serious medical conditions for it, like for example genetical mutation that would cause deformed or very sick and unhealable desies (not sure if I wrote it correctly).

In other cases it should be treated as cruelity towards animals and causing them unessecary pain and suffering, same as murdering (called for missleading as euthanasia or putting down) blind, short born puppies telling that it was done in a humane way, but that is not true because the pups are suffering thru the time till they die
Click to expand...
Destiny's or desires or disabilities? (That's literally how I read it)
 
mcgiwer said:
more disablities, but also that some body parts wouldn't work propperly, causing the animal pain or discomfort. That also apply to at latest medium brain disfunction
Click to expand...
Why do people allow life crippling disabilities to exist? Humans or animals. Why aren't they concern of the other individuals quality of life
 
Me personally, I don’t not agree with it one bit, except under specific and medically necessary circumstances.

Overpopulation and behavioral issues are the cause and responsibility of humans and irresponsible owners, not the dogs. I firmly and passionately believe that dogs should never suffer for the shortcomings, negligence and ignorance of humans. And this a prime example of dogs suffering because humans are terrible.

Anyone that tells you that intact dogs are too hard or too stubborn to train should never be allowed to handle, own, train or otherwise interact with any animal ever again. And if you need proof of that, watch any Schutzhund competition...FYI Schutzhund and show dogs are REQUIRED to be intact for those that didn’t know.

However, I cannot deny that there are (not many) legitimate health benefits to spaying/neutering. The prevention of pyrometra for example, which can be swift and fatal. For me, the negatives of spaying/neutering and the benefits of keeping them intact FAR FAR outweigh the very few positives of altering. However, we are all free to make the determination ourselves, and I respect the decisions of those who make an informed and educated choice. Those that blanket spay and neuter because “it’s just what you do” or those who believe it’s required or the norm or it’s wrong to not do it, absolutely no respect or remorse.
 
pes said:
Unless there is a serious reason for this it should not be done.
Convenience and behavior control are not serious reasons. You can learn to control your dog's behavior and you can jerk a dog off a few times a week to keep the hormones low. And you can make your garden secure enough to prevent your dog from running away. If everybody does that a male and a female would have to escape at the same time in a small time window to be able to mate. Castrating dogs for population control is lazy convenience and genital mutilation.
Click to expand...
tbf thats the same argument people use for being against pro choice: "people should use protection responsibly if they dont want an unplanned pregnancy, therefore abortion is unnecessary and for the irresponsible"

like obviously people should ensure their pet cant escape, or that another dog cant sneak in, but it happens. moreover, in locations with major stray populations, catch and release spay+neuter+shots have a factual, measurable benefit for the health and wellbeing of diseased, starving and immensely overpopulated strays that even if they did find a way into an overcrowded shelter like BARC theyd be euthanized, and if left on the streets theyd reproduce, making multiple litters, and die of illness, malnutrition, heat exposure or vehicle impact before they turn 2.
 
Last edited:
shortbutfast said:
tbf thats the same argument people use for being against pro choice: "people should use protection responsibly if they dont want an unplanned pregnancy, therefore abortion is unnecessary and for the irresponsible"

like obviously people should ensure their pet cant escape, or that another dog cant sneak in, but it happens. moreover, in locations with major stray populations, catch and release spay+neuter+shots have a factual, measurable benefit for the health and wellbeing of diseased, starving and immensely overpopulated strays that even if they did find a way into an overcrowded shelter like BARC theyd be euthanized, and if left on the streets theyd reproduce, making multiple litters, and die of illness, malnutrition, heat exposure or vehicle impact before they turn 2.
Click to expand...
You can compare abortion laws to spaying/neutering. You just can’t.

Anyway, I think there’s a difference when referring to the context of the spaying/neutering. This question is more about the voluntary spaying and neutering of pets, and the choice of such. Not spaying and neutering strays, as evident by everyone’s answers here. Spaying and neutering in lesser developed counties to combat wild overpopulation is a more complicated issue and one I don’t have an opinion on.
 
Okami said:
You can compare abortion laws to spaying/neutering. You just can’t.

Anyway, I think there’s a difference when referring to the context of the spaying/neutering. This question is more about the voluntary spaying and neutering of pets, and the choice of such. Not spaying and neutering strays, as evident by everyone’s answers here. Spaying and neutering in lesser developed counties to combat wild overpopulation is a more complicated issue and one I don’t have an opinion on.
Click to expand...
lol, im mainly referencing houston, texas. thanks for the chuckle at lesser developed countries, though!

in my experience at a no kill breed rescue for a few years, i saw that ore often than not the stray problem and the irresponsible ownership problem go hand in hand, which is why i find it crucial to discuss in this topic. to expound, folks get a dog when things are flush, work is good and steady. they get a truck just as often. couple years go by and things arent flush anymore, the trucks on lien and the dog, if fortunate, given away on facebook. if unfortunate, its released somewhere at night thats either desolate (warehouse districts etc) or poor as all hell, with the same goal of no people no cops.

a stretch of neighborhood in houston called the fifth ward thats about 2 square miles accounts for 2500 dogs a year at the nearby BARC. Current estimates put us at a population of 1 million stray dogs. folks get an animal and they mean well, but when youre as hard up as a significant portion of this city is meaning well doesnt extend past your next paycheck. private individuals getting their animal spayed or neutered, like catch n releases and rescues, has a measurable benefit on the health and wellbeing of the dogs already here and suffering. but when you have a million strays, of course it does.

www.fox26houston.com

UK filmmaker making documentary says Houston is like a third-world country regarding stray dog overpopulation

“Any day you wake up, you’re never going to save every dog, it’s impossible. But what you can do in that day is make sure that your work saves more dogs the next day,” said Tom.
www.fox26houston.com www.fox26houston.com
 
Well, yes. They go hand in hand. The stray population is a direct result of humans’ poor decisions and judgment. It’s pretty simple...don’t get a dog if you can’t afford one. A dog isn’t a day to day thing. If you cant afford one for 10+ years, then you can’t afford one at all. Spaying/neutering is a nothing more than an tiny band aid on the massive gash that is the issue. You can spay and neuter all the livelong day...it won’t stop people from dumping dogs, backyard breeding, etc. If you truly believe that responsible owners, responsible meaning owners that care for and afford their pets, not scumbags who dump dogs or people who can’t afford them, spaying and neutering their dogs has any measurable impact on the stray population, then you are as big a part of the problem as people who dump dogs. I should also point out since you worked at a shelter, where you see nothing but abandoned, dumped and strays dogs, your data is flawed and skewed. If you worked as a Schuzthund judge, where you only see intact dogs, your views may be different. Still skewed though. You use to look at the whole picture. You’re only seeing the bad owners because you’re surrounded by them. The good and responsible ones far outweigh the few bad ones. Again, my point is not about the validity or opinion on how strays are affected by spaying and neutering. It was merely to point out that it’s an entirely different subject than when referring to pets and responsible owners. That is all. This is akin to discussing the illegality and dangerousness of speeding when driving on public roads, and saying that they should enforce speed limits on private race tracks and drag strips because it would have a measurable impact on the safety of our roadways. Same topic, 2 very different contexts.
Just remember, if you could Thanos snap and spay/neuter every dog on the planet in an instant, after 10 years, there would be no dogs left. They’d be extinct.
 
Last edited:
Okami said:
Well, yes. They go hand in hand. The stray population is a direct result of humans’ poor decisions and judgment. It’s pretty simple...don’t get a dog if you can’t afford one. A dog isn’t a day to day thing. If you cant afford one for 10+ years, then you can’t afford one at all. Spaying/neutering is a nothing more than an tiny band aid on the massive gash that is the issue.
Click to expand...
i dont think you can just brush aside the effect of spay and neutering as a form of population control so lightly. animal population control is a very complicated, data dependent field with many decades of research. the effect of private owners spaying and neutering through free programs in LA, for instance, reduced per diem strays born by a few thousand, just one program.


im not saying this is the only or even the most effective method, but the problem of hundreds of thousands of dogs dying in pain and distress every year in my city bothers me to a much greater extent than irrelevant hyperboles about thanos neutering every dog ever.
 
shortbutfast said:
i dont think you can just brush aside the effect of spay and neutering as a form of population control so lightly. animal population control is a very complicated, data dependent field with many decades of research. the effect of private owners spaying and neutering through free programs in LA, for instance, reduced per diem strays born by a few thousand, just one program.


im not saying this is the only or even the most effective method, but the problem of hundreds of thousands of dogs dying in pain and distress every year in my city bothers me to a much greater extent than irrelevant hyperboles about thanos neutering every dog ever.
Click to expand...
You’re missing the whole point. Everything you’re saying ONLY applies to IRRESPONSIBLE owners. The third sentence of the article you linked begins with “irresponsible owners.”
Please read this very carefully...spaying and neutering RESPONSIBLE owners pets has 0 effect on the stray population. Keyword: Responsible. Got that? Read it again.

I am a responsible owner. And I absolutely will not spay and neuter, by choice or by force, my dogs because there are irresponsible owners out there causing all of these problems.
 
bobbybobz said:
My family is much for neutering animals as a form of population and behavior control. I disagree, thinking neutering is pretty fucked up, because there are better alternatives like vasectomies or training your dog use a something else to mount on. When they need to release. (I’m just saying this because it’s not generally common for people to let dogs mount humans)

Idk, what are your opinions on this?
Click to expand...
I think its useful for cats, as they can produce lots of kittens every year. But i dont think dogs should be neutered, its cruel.
 
Okami said:
You’re missing the whole point. Everything you’re saying ONLY applies to IRRESPONSIBLE owners. The third sentence of the article you linked begins with “irresponsible owners.”
Please read this very carefully...spaying and neutering RESPONSIBLE owners pets has 0 effect on the stray population. Keyword: Responsible. Got that? Read it again.

I am a responsible owner. And I absolutely will not spay and neuter, by choice or by force, my dogs because there are irresponsible owners out there causing all of these problems.
Click to expand...
responsiblity isnt a boolean value, and literally every pet owner says that. if you want this threads topic to be whether you and only you are equipped to own an intact dog, fine. in the meantime though, youre missing the point that generally promoting the concept of spaying and neutering yields a net positive impact on dogs. irresponsible people are gunna get pets whether you like it or not. maybe dont evangelize to them to not fix their pets so that theres not yet another borderline backyard breeder selling """akc certified""" puppies on facebook and craigslisy. sorry, its not selling, its a "rehoming" fee.
 
pes said:
How can a zoo actually consider castrating their animal for convenience? :D Not only does it damage the animal but it also removes the sex drive and the body parts responsible for cum. So it destroys any chance of sex which does not make sense when you are a zoophile.

Sometimes I really have to wonder whether people know what castration/spaying/neutering actually is and does. :D
Click to expand...

It doesn't always remove sex drive. I have known some who persisted to have a sex drive and I don't mean short term while the hormones are at higher levels, but for years/rest of their lives. I don't know how common that is, but I can attest it does happen.
 
Many people just want their cute fluffy fur baby and no part of the actual real dedication required to have an intact pet... neutering is promoted simply because it is easier than getting people to be responsible.
 
egoldstein said:
It doesn't always remove sex drive. I have known some who persisted to have a sex drive and I don't mean short term while the hormones are at higher levels, but for years/rest of their lives. I don't know how common that is, but I can attest it does happen.
Click to expand...
From what I understand, they're almost always not interested with a few exceptions scattered here and there. As well as it being more likely if castrated after sexual maturity. Now granted, when you preform a spay (ovariohysterectomy) or a neuter (castration) the body still requires sex hormones to function properly, so the adrenal glands are unnecessarily taxed. Removing their sex organs doesn't remove all of their hormones. But the amount the adrenal glands can produce is only a fraction of what they naturally produce when left as nature intended.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top