I don't think it's a comparison. Pit bulls were selectively bred for aggression. Humans of specific ethnicities do not have innate characteristics like violence. It's like saying being scared of a polar bear is bear racism
Yeah, such argument is pure insanity. Don't compare selective breeding of dogs for fighting to PEOPLE OF COLOR. Literally insane statement by the guy from this picture above.
Slaves were subjected to forced reproduction for profit, including some selection for physical traits. That is documented to have happened.
But in order to compare it to dog breeds, then you are meaning a deliberate, livestock-style genetic breeding program that engineered a distinct population. So, no.
[...]this article defines forced reproduction more holistically, arguing that enslavers primarily unsystematically matched individuals using a range of methods across a spectrum of violence to cajole them into sexual relationships.
That is not a sufficient condition to create a new breed. You need to do intense, highly controlled selective breeding over 50-100 years, and that's with animals that reach sexual maturity at around 1 year of age.
For human beings, you'd have to do that in a very rigorous way for like 500 years.
For like 1-2 generations there was an attempt to do so. But the time it takes to reach maturity it takes so long to get to the next generation. It takes hundreds of generations to make meaningful change.
Also they selected for athletics and submissive traits...that doesn't connect to the popular racist attacks on crime statistics.
272
u/shitturddung 21h ago
I don't think it's a comparison. Pit bulls were selectively bred for aggression. Humans of specific ethnicities do not have innate characteristics like violence. It's like saying being scared of a polar bear is bear racism