Nah, even people with the right ideas on politics can have these blind spots. Nobody is immune and when everyone is vulnerable to something, those blind spots add up. It’s what allows divide and conquer strategies to expand beyond those who are more conservative.

And if that’s what we’re talking about, mastiffs, great danes, and any other big dog should get more attention than they do. The conversation should be refocused from scapegoating specific breeds to handling large and strong dogs. Focusing on breeds derails the conversation every time by inviting in old school eugenics and all the problems that come with it.

That’s hardly debated

Individuals having genetic predispositions isn’t debated, but it being tied to breed is. It’s especially less likely for breeds to play a role if they’re more widespread; were the dog’s parents and grandparents bred for dogfights, or just by people who wanted one? There are also no guarantees in genetics, with even genetically identical animals being capable of great variation. Using constructed and arbitrary categories like breed to tie behavior to looks is silly.

You’d need to compare it to the number of each type of dog in those statistics. Even then, it wouldn’t tell the whole story because people who buy dogs with bad reputations often buy them for roles where they are more likely to bite like guard dogs. And EVEN then, you also need to consider that dogs who cause worse injuries are more likely to show up in the data because when they do bite it gets reported. I know I didn’t go to the hospital when a Chihuahua didn’t even break skin.

Pit bulls undeniably are dangerous by virtue of their size and strength, but so are other dogs. How inherently dangerous they are based on temperament is harder to determine. I’m always skeptical of breed essentialism because it’s so close to human eugenics and scientific racism. We do not have as much control or understanding over nature as we think we do, and our misplaced confidence in our abilities causes harm and keeps us from actual solutions.

You’re not wrong; you can absolutely roleplay toxic dynamics and still have a wonderful relationship. However, these characters are not only terrible for each other, but comically terrible people.

I’m telling you, I’ve seen otherwise brilliant people say the dumbest shit. The world is hard to understand in the first place and it’s often too scary to face the facts.

Class of '09, an infamous dating sim where you’re a psycho and every option is toxic af

That has little to do with being unintelligent

bonus:

never played this game and probably never will, but i do love me some toxic yuri 👀

This is inaccurate; only a minority of people are meaningfully less “intelligent” and it’s rarely those people who are the real problem. The problem isn’t intelligence, but the foolishness of people unable to see past their own biases or think critically.

It is a literal child thinking this in the story

Nah, he doesn’t need to claim regime change because he can honestly declare victory far easier. Unlike most other efforts in the middle east, they actually are trying to accomplish something achievable: decimating Iran’s military to set them back several years and limit their danger in the near future. It’s not worth the cost and accomplishes little in the long run, but it is far more realistic than nation building or anything similar the US has tried.

He understands: Maduro weak, Iran not quite as weak. He just goes along with Israel’s plans because he appreciates how they kill brown people. Maduro was deposed because Venezuela was an easy target to show strength against. It accomplished nothing for the US just like the current war, but Trump never gave a shit about US interests.

Skill in anything depends on your upbringing, free time, and innate desire to git gud.

Very different situations. Maduro was dictator of a relatively smaller nation that would not be the same without him there, while Iran is larger, more powerful, and has a leadership structure less dependent on one person. Even then, kidnapping Maduro does not mean his more pro US replacement is a reliable ally. She could be overthrown and is limited in how much she can help them.

Says the person who misses the bigger picture. The US and Israel don’t want to national build, they just want Iran’s military to be weaker. They know that installing a long lasting puppet would be next to impossible, so they instead want to disarm their enemy.

deleted by creator

The whole goal is to destroy their military capabilities so Israel can do whatever they want unopposed.

That’s not what “change in leadership” means; it means different governments with different agendas coming into power. That will not happen as a result of this war.