Man charged with having sex with pit bull at city pound
Before anybody asks, no, there are no pictures or video.
Questions abound: (1) Why pit bulls? If you are determined to have sex with a dog, wouldn’t one of the larger, gentler breeds work better? (2) Did the man succeed in achieving penetration? (3) Was it all he thought it would be?
Perhaps the man will move on to apes, and settle some of the SDMB’s most-frequently-asked questions.
That guy has balls to be pokin’ a pit bull, I’ll give him that much.
While this is really the extreme of physical contact and many dogs, pit bulls included, wouldn’t tolerate it, pit bulls are generally friendly toward strangers and like physical contact including roughhousing. They put up with a lot of abuse and they love people.
They are often one of the safer breeds to manhandle (again, this was pushing the envelope).
I think he misunderstood what a dog pound is.
Too late to add: I don’t think it’s considered “having…with” if there’s no consent. It’s just plain rape.
Are we sure it was a pit bull? This board has made me an apitbullist. No one can give me a definition of one, so I have decided they don’t exist at all.
Not sure I understand. I’ve refrained from opening the “other” pit bull thread for some time now in order to keep my cardiac health and SDMB privileges, but surely it’s not hard to understand. There’s one poster who traditionally claims no one will define pit bulls for him, but that’s based on selective interpretation of reality.
There are, I admit, some different schools of thought on defining a pit bull.
The traditional definition goes like this: “Pit bull” is not a breed per se, but a type of dog. The three breeds traditionally recognized as “pit bull type digs” are:
[ul]
[li]American Pit Bull Terrier[/li][li]American Staffordshire Terrier (essentially the “show ring” version of the APBT)[/li][li]Staffordshire Bull Terrier (the shorter British version)[/li][/ul]
Additionally, there’s been a movement to designate the “super wide” big-headed dogs that have been a fad breed in the last two decades or so – which don’t much resemble the lean, athletic APBT – as a new breed, the “American Bully.” This initiative might or might not succeed – establishing a dog breed is a little like language, it’ll only become fact if enough people take up the usage – but if it does, the AmBully may then be considered the fourth “pit bull type” breed.
There are numerous “Bully Breeds” with bulldog heritage, all loosely related to the pit bulls: English, French, and American Bulldogs; Bull Terriers (think Spuds McKenzie); Boston Terriers; Boxers; and the like, but they are relations to the pit bulls, not normally called pit bulls themselves.
A minority school of thought with at least one prominent advocate (Diane Jessup) holds that the term “pit bull” properly applies ONLY to the American Pit Bull Terrier.
Meanwhile, for a third perspective, breed-specific legislation (legislation aimed at banning or restricting specific breeds) is often written over-broadly, permitting law enforcement personnel untrained in breed identification to designate which dog is, and which dog is not, a pit bull, based on murkily-written or even nonexistent criteria. Often the legislation will include language specifically overriding a veterinarian’s determination, presumably to prevent vets from shielding pit bulls from the effects of the law.
By that reckoning, whether a given dog is a “pit bull” is relatively arbitrary. But bad laws have attempted to redefine our common understanding many times before, and I urge readers to regard such laws as carefully as they would “separate but equal,” and Dred Scott.
It was a wiener dog.
I like pit bulls, but not in that way.
Shouldn’t this be in the Pit?
That’s what he said!
Well, can’t say this was entirely unexpected. Similar thread, '04.
That or he was confused over the concept of heavy petting.
Shit, I give up. Everything has been done before. Everything. I feel like that South Park episode “Simpsons did it.”
I want this made into a movie, with Ralph Macchio reprising his role from MY COUSIN VINNY.
“I screwed the pooch. I screwed the pooch.”
Oh. I guess I’m just real slow, then. Because if all the things you have written that I snipped equals something that is simple and plain and not hard to understand at all, then I cop to being thick. Seemed a bit more complex to me, than, ‘hey, that dog there is a pit bull.’
I confess, I’m not clear what your comment was supposed to mean, either. If it’s just to say that the term “pit bull” is fuzzy and inexact and means different things to different people, that’s correct. But Sailboat’s run-down is about as good an answer as you’re going to get as to what is a “pit bull.” I personally don’t consider Staffordshire bull terriers to be pit bulls (they seem different enough to me), but APBTs and AmStaffs seem to me to be two names for the same breed, although some may say that AmStaffs are a bit bigger and taller.
I don’t disagree that he gave as good an answer as I’m going to get. I disagree that it is simple. He seemed perplexed (and you do too) that I find the whole “is it a pit bull or isn’t it” issue complicated. I think it is obviously more complicated than he made it seem when he said…“I don’t understand…it’s not hard to understand”.
But folks are sensitive on this topic, so I won’t hijack this thread further.
Well, no. I don’t think it’s a simple issue, which is why I say that it is fuzzy and inexact. I just honestly wasn’t clear what you were trying to say. I don’t care either way but, yes, I agree that the term “pit bull” is inexact and a bit loaded.
I regret it. I regret bringing up the word “pit bull”. In my heart of hearts, I believe too many posters have a hidden agenda on either one side or the other of the “pit bull” war, and these posters start to read too much into what anyone writes on the topic.
I came into this thread to say that I find the whole idea of “what is a pit bull” confusing.
Sailboat said, “it isn’t hard to understand”
I disagreed with that. I think it is confusing. You yourself said it is confusing. So you and I agree. I am hopelessly trying to figure out what the conflict is between you and me right now. You and I agree that the topic is confusing. We agree that Sailboat broke it down very well, but we both disagree with him that it is simple.
We have no conflict. We’re good. 
I just wanted to clarify in my response that I’m not perplexed that you find the issue complicated.
Whew! I had already pulled out two hand fulls of afro over here!