Men - it's not you we're neutering! RANT

I stare at both of my “mutts” (one of which has a tattoo from a breeder and is quite obviously a pit bull), and I am SO GLAD they’re altered. Regardless of the risks associated with the procedures, I’m flatly thankful that neither of them will be passing their genes on to the next generation. While they’re lovely pets that I find absolutely irreplaceable, they certainly are not unlike 90% of other shelter dogs out there.

I know a LOT of people whose dogs are the products of “oops” moments that happened in a matter of seconds. Where there’s a will, there’s ALWAYS a way. Hell, even if there’s no way, there’s often still a will. I had an ex-bf with a neutered male and an unaltered female. Those dogs tied more times than I can count on one hand.

You all do realize that Paulaedwina has a gelding don’t you? A bit of a hypocrite I think.

Wow really? This was not a conversation on horses, it was on dogs. I took a great deal of time to discuss that I am considering not castrating my next dog. In the spin off thread I discuss in great detail how I came to this understanding.

Hypocritical? Seriously?

Wow.

Here’s what I wrote in the spay/neuter thread,

[I]I came up the same way as everybody else. I did not think twice about spay or castration. It was the responsible thing, as far as I was concerned. I had no problem with early speuter either.

  1. I started reading Elizabeth Marshall Thomas (Tribe of Tiger, Hidden Life of Dogs, Social Life of Dogs). She is essentially an animal ethnographer. Her observations made me think. She speculated that intact dogs had fewer issues with dog-aggression than castrated dogs because castrated dogs just didn’t seem right to other dogs. They didn’t smell right, they didn’t look right, their signals were ambiguous and lent themselves to misunderstandings.

Mind you these were observations of an ethnographic type. This was not a scientific experiment by any stretch of the imagination, but she made me think of things I had not considered before. I started reading more and more about speuter and its consequences. I read about the consequences of early speuter and found they were different from late speuter, and different from no speuter at all.

  1. Some years ago I fostered an intact (I think he was 3) male Rhodesian Ridgeback. He came into my home where I think I had 2 castrated Rhodesian Ridgebacks (I at least had Milo) and cats. Not a whisper, not an issue, no marking, no aggression, nothing. He was my first experience with an intact ridgie. Of course this is a sample size of one. But he was calm, settled, and handsome as heck. He had cheeks, neck, muscles. He looked different from any male dog I’d ever had, fostered, or transported. He added to my confusion (challenging my preconceived notions about speuter). He walked on leash, he didn’t need to pee on more things than my other dogs.

My other experience with intact ridgies was more brief. I was the Pennsylvania leg of moving a bunch of ridgebacks from a MO puppy mill to New England rescue. I had 4 bitches and 1 stud dog. None of them had any training, but none of them were aggressive or had any issues. I only had them a day (the male was picked up at my house, the females overnighted before I drove them north).

  1. A few years ago I was in Tobago on vacation. Tobago is rural (as opposed to Trinidad which is more urban). Here dogs are owned but run loose. They are not speutered generally speaking. So dogs pack. I noticed (the science geek in me) interesting differences between our dogs and their dogs.
  • They were smart (they had to be to avoid being hit by cars, forage for food, etc).
  • The males were strong (the females were not as sturdy likely because they were probably whelping).
    -They were not people aggressive. More than likely the evolutionary pressure would select against people aggression in this environment because people-aggressive dogs would likely be killed.
    -They were not dog aggressive.

These dogs were intact. There was a pack at the small hotel (a hotel that I loved BTW) that were very interesting. From memory there were maybe 5 dogs, mostly males, 1 female I think. I remember the female because pack behavior seemed to indicate she was coming into estrus. Anyway, the alpha was pretty obvious. He was the dog that made time with her while the other males hung on the periphery.

One day down at the beach one of the periphery males started trying to make inroads with the female. I could see it coming. I was mesmerized. He came in, the alpha confronted him and they fought…for about a second. Snarling, fur flying, and then nothing. No injuries. He was rebuffed, and the pack resumed its dynamic.

Of course here again; pure observation, speculation, and interpretation on my part. I found it illuminating! It challenged alot of my preconceptions about aggression and the intact dog, as opposed to the castrated dogs. Where I’d expected that castrated dogs would be more peaceable because they lacked hormones, and intact dogs being more aggressive, experience showed the other way. I’ve seen dog fights among our castrated dogs and they’re belligerent, long, and messy.

All these experiences challenged alot of what I took for granted as responsible management of pet dogs. My preference is for males. I’ve fostered females and kept one (that was karma). I had to spay one female and I thought it was a horrible experience! I guess up to that point I hadn’t thought of how spay is serious abdominal surgery! [/I]

Does coming to a new understanding make me a hypocrite? How does having a gelding make me a hypocrite?

Paula

Paulaedwina, I will add only this. I had 26 Jack Russells divided into 3 packs. Most were intact, both males and females. It didn’t matter whether they were intact or fixed. The worst fights were between two intact females, in two different packs. They hated each other from the moment they laid eyes on each other. Left to themselves, Cheer and Kirin would’ve gone the distance; in fact one time I thought Kirin HAD killed Cheer. Turned out she’d only choked her unconscious. Spaying Kirin after she produced two deaf puppies, changed nothing. I finally was able to place Cheer with someone else who had a large number of both intact and fixed Jacks. Cheer has her preferences, but hates none of them and she’s co-existed happily there for 2 years now.

Neutered males were never picked on by my other males. Spayed females were left alone by other bitches (with the exception above). I had one neutered male who tried to kill other puppies his age before he was neutered. He tried to kill puppies throughout his life. Was that a result of being neutered? No, that was just what he was. Twisted, mentally unbalanced. Did neutering make him better? No. But it guaranteed that if he did get in with a female, he wasn’t passing on his gene pool.

So I go back to my original statement. Since most dogs don’t live in packs now; since most dogs are removed from their dams too early and don’t learn proper intra-dog behavior; since over population IS the problem, spaying and neutering is the only solution, and all the rest is bullshit. Spay and neuter your pet unless it is true breeding quality and you’re ready to do the research and take responsibility for any pups your dog contributes to this world. I just wish we could do as the sign says and include our weird friends and relatives in the spay/neuter campaign.

since over population IS the problem, spaying and neutering is the only solution, and all the rest is bullshit.

Again, I am considering not castrating my next dog but vasectomizing. Both result in no offspring.

Paula

Go for it! I’m sure your vet will love doing (and charging you for) a more complicated surgery. No, it shouldn’t be more complicated really but if it wasn’t, taking the balls off male animals would’ve become passe’ a long time ago.

I think you’re spot on. It may well be that my vet won’t do it and I’ll have to find another who will. But I am sure they are out there. And you’re right; vasectomy takes less anesthesia, less cutting, fewer sutures, but darned tootin’ they’ll charge me more.

Paula

[QUOTE=paulaedwina;5854105]
The few intact dogs I’ve met or fostered didn’t seem suffering for having their testicles. As far as disease risk goes I think it is a better life.

JMO of course.
Paula[/QUOTE]

First of all, I have not read every post so I apologize if I’ve missed something.

The few intact dogs you’ve met? Maybe you need to expand your sample size before making statements like this. I mean, if you’ve seriously only known a few intact dogs, that may not be enough to suggest that vasectomizing them is better than neutering.

Obviously the issue with vasectomy v. castration is that the dog doesn’t know it’s been vasectomized, so its sex drive is the same as an intact dog. Which can be no big deal, or it might be a really big deal…

I’ve owned 3 dogs in my adult life – two intact, one neutered. My neutered dog suffered before being neutered…he really did. He had a much harder time dealing with the hormones than my other boys. He was much more high strung and in obedience classes would sometimes get sexually excited and be very distracted; even the obedience instructor commented on it, and the fact that he would be happier if he were neutered. We neutered him at 15 months, by which time it was more than clear that he was not going to be champion material…let alone breeding stock. And the change in his behavior and personality was amazing. I am actually convinced he is happier now.

My youngest dog’s breeder keeps only females for herself, but often shows other people’s males so she keeps them at her home. (She keeps only females partly because she doesn’t want to deal with intact pets of different genders.) It’s difficult to manage this safely (meaning no accidental pregnancies) and they take lots of precautions. They have to be especially careful with the unneutered dogs when the intact females are in heat (keeping in mind also these are not her boys so she has to be sure they don’t fight). Sometimes it is a true pain in the rear for them, and they have owned/shown/bred dogs for 40 years. The average pet owner is far less likely to manage their intact animals as well.

To be honest, I think there would have to be overwhelming evidence that castration is FAR more dangerous to a dog’s health to justify vasectomizing dogs instead of neutering, which is a simple, safe procedure…

ETA: also, I’ve never heard of a breeder who euthanizes puppies that are not show quality. I’m sure they are out there…but I would think they are more the exception than the rule. No one would know the “championship” rate of a breeder unless they register the dogs anyway. If the puppy is not of the quality they desire, they can simply not register that dog and it would be virtually impossible to track the statistics.

[QUOTE=paulaedwina;5856717]
I think you’re spot on. It may well be that my vet won’t do it and I’ll have to find another who will. But I am sure they are out there. And you’re right; vasectomy takes less anesthesia, less cutting, fewer sutures, but darned tootin’ they’ll charge me more.

Paula[/QUOTE]

My dog was neutered in a matter of minutes, and they used glue, not sutures to close him up. It took hours, not days for him to return to normal, and there were zero complications from the procedure.

I did not mean to say that castration was complicated, just that vasectomy should be less complicated. I have rhodesian ridgebacks so I’m used to castration being more than glue and no sutures.

Paula

[QUOTE=paulaedwina;5856980]
I did not mean to say that castration was complicated, just that vasectomy should be less complicated. I have rhodesian ridgebacks so I’m used to castration being more than glue and no sutures.

Paula[/QUOTE]

Are ridgebacks testicles really any different than any other dog? I mean, sure, they are bigger than a yorkie, but not any bigger than any lab or golden… :confused:

I think a vasectomy would be quite a bit MORE complicated. A neuter is snip snip. A vasectomy is locating the vas, cutting it, sealing at least one end and stitching everything back up x2, because you need to do both sides. Google says a vasectomy takes about 30 minutes. An average neuter (if I am recalling correctly from my time working in a vet clinic) takes about 10 minutes. I’m not even sure if a vet would be willing to do a vasectomy on a dog?

And what about failure?

[QUOTE=paulaedwina;5856980]
I did not mean to say that castration was complicated, just that vasectomy should be less complicated. I have rhodesian ridgebacks so I’m used to castration being more than glue and no sutures.

Paula[/QUOTE]

Unless there’s something genetically different about the testicles of a Rhodesian ridgeback, I still don’t know why a neuter would require anything more complicated. My dog was about 50lbs when he got neutered at 6 months, so by no means small if you’re implying Ridgebacks are too large to be closed with glue…

A vasectomy is a much more complicated procedure on pretty much all accounts…

I just went by size. I figured small dogs, like tomcats, are self closing. A vasectomy on the other hand, I’d imagine on the scale of doing it to human males - an out patient procedure. I’m not a vet, I am only speculating.

I am sure I could find a vet who would vasectomize. If you notice in the resources I linked, some of the authors are veterinarians.

Paula

The surgical approach for castration of cats and dogs is different.
In the tom, the scrotum is incised and left open.

In the dog, there is a prescrotal incision which is typically closed with absorbable subcuticular sutures and sometimes tissue glue.

[QUOTE=paulaedwina;5857560]

I am sure I could find a vet who would vasectomize. If you notice in the resources I linked, some of the authors are veterinarians.

Paula[/QUOTE]

I’m sure you could, too, I’m just doubtful that the vasectomy will be less complicated than a neuter would. A vasectomy is far more involved than a simple “snip snip”.

Vasectomies can also fail, as many human pregnancies can attest to. :yes:

Definitely -vasectomy has a failure rate.

Paula

Oh, and FWIW, Elizabeth Marshall Thomas’s stuff is a load of anthropomorphic twaddle.

With a lot of experience in this area, I’ve started to post on it about 20 times. But I can’t seem to write up a post without including an eyeroll, snark, unecessary rudeness and much frustrated sighing. And there’s no way to win this argument anyway

So I’ll just say, I don’t care what any students master’s thesis says, ain’t nothin’ in my house keepin its nuts that isn’t bipedal. That includes dogs, horses, cats, bunnies, whatever. Perhaps one day when I’m burying one of my beloved dogs for castration-related bone cancer I’ll eat my words but somehow I find that reality less likely than burying one of them for fence-jumpin, getting hit by a car chasing a lady, biting or dog fighting.

Having said that, I think we should all take a step back and appreciate that no one here is the enemy, or a bad dog owner. If you’re standing by your convictions with your animal in a steadfast way, it shows nothing more than your dedication to what you feel is their best interest and an effort at self education. The end :slight_smile: