The term “pit bull denialism” was recently used by a blogger at scientopia.org. The post, “Pit bulls are inherently dangerous,” by DrugMonkey comments on the recent Maryland Court of Appeals decision that holds owners and landlords accountable when a pit bull attacks. Like many of us, DrugMonkey is sick of reading about pit bulls attacking people. “Pit bull denialism” describes the blind Nuttery of pit bull owners and the many ways in which they distort the truth about the breed in hopes of persuading people that despite being the top maiming and killing dog breed, pit bulls are trustworthy and loyal pets.
The term appears to have originated at Dr. Joan Bushwell’s Chimpanzee Refuge blog in 2007. Pit bull promoter Erv was offended and promised to never read “Dr. Joan’s” blog again. (We know the truth hurts Erv, but closing your eyes to the well-documented 30-year track record of pit bulls maiming and killing people doesn’t make the truth disappear!)
Pit Bull Denialism
“He won’t hurt you”. Check out this thread which popped up after a report of a child being killed in a pit bull attack. We can thank commenter scorp1101 for jumping right into it with the pit bulls are just fine and I know because I own one argument … It would be naive to assume that a dog’s behavior (or that of pretty much any animal) is entirely or even largely dependent on training and environment. To discount inherent biological factors is specious. The reality is that pit bulls have the “biological equipment” to inflict damage that other breeds, say basset hounds, do not… – Doc Bushwell