posted May 07, 2000 11:27 PM            

------------------
Think big. Become BIG.

posted May 08, 2000 01:12 AM            

He just got on three weeks ago, so we've only seen small gains and his strength is going up, but we'll see....

Huge&Co, if i remember correctly you're the idiot from Toronto who came on the board a couple of months ago touting how knowledgeable you were and how we should all stand back and bask in your intelligence. Well i think it's blatently obvious to everyone from the questions you ask and the comments that you make, that you're just another one of those retards to ignore.

Oh and please tell me when i posted how educated and dedicated i am, i'd be interested in seeing that. It amazes me that you think that giving juice to a dog is somehow a horrible thing, when we do it to ourselves, out horses, our cows, and our dogs all the time. It's nothing new.

posted May 08, 2000 08:30 AM            

------------------
Pain is Weakness Leaving the Body
http://ectomorph420.tripod.com/home.html

posted May 08, 2000 10:09 AM            

Before I realized that it would make him fat, and becuase breeding dogs is pointless when there are so many unwanted ones in pounds and on the streets, I had my pit bull Petey (looks like the "Little Rascals" dog) fixed upon adopting him. (I rescued him from a couple of sadistic neighbors whose idea of fun was letting their larger dogs use him as target practice.) So in this case -- and LOTS of other legitimate veterinary cases -- YES, it probably WOULD be a good idea to give him just a little bit of Equipoise or something to help him lose fat and be healthier.

But what some of the people on this board are talking about is NOT health. It's about using their dogs to boost their own low self-esteem ... their own pathetic insecurities about their masculinity and social position.

And greed: The member who posted that someone he knew fought dogs, and it was cruel, but oh well, it was very profitable, is clueless. And oblivious to his ironic statement that roiding dogs isn't cruel, despite the fact that the whole reason the dogs were BEING roided in the first place was to fight and kill other dogs.

This type of behavior is something that people with decent ethics, morals, or values would never do -- and they're confirmaing public opinion that pit bulls are vicious, while most of them are the friendliest and most loyal dogs EVER. Except, that is, for the bad examples that emerge from animal cruelty like this.

So to all the loser bodybuilders who think it's cool to roid your dogs for fun and profit: If you want to debate the politics of the matter with me, then let's go for it. But don't waste my time by flaming me on a personal basis, as you've done to other people, because you can't come up with a decent argument for your criminal behavior.

posted May 08, 2000 10:31 AM            

No, I'm NOT a vegetarian. But I AM more educated, experienced, and knowledgable on this subject than you assume.

I'm responding emotionally because people who unjustifibly roid their dogs are being motivated by less than honorable intentions, and the results of their actions are very often suffering animals. And I tend to respond to that emotionally.

If you would take the time to go back and read my post again, you would see that I'm definitely NOT talking about withholding anabolic steroids from animals who need them for medical reasons. And "medical reasons" is a broad category: it includes anabolic steroids for preventative medicine, depression, obesity, dysplasia, etc.

After all, since having my dog fixed made him fat, I would certainly give him a little bit of EQ if I knew I could get it on a reliable basis so I could give him weekly testosterone replacement instead of massive cycles on and off.

posted May 08, 2000 10:45 AM            

Now the dogs health is well monitored and he is treated like a king. We don't juice him for fighting, nor do i condone such actions, he gets juice because we want him to be the most incredible looking dog you've ever seen, and frankly that's why most of us do it as well. It's about show.

You are right in that the dog doesn't have the ability to make the decision for himself, but i dont' feel as though we're being cruel. We don't beat him, work him to death, chain him up, mistreat him or abuse him in any way. He's one of the family, a ver close part of the family that we all love, granted it's my friends dog, but we're very close friends and i too feel a bond with the dog. The dog doesn't have a want in the world, he's fit as hell, looks incredible and i'm sure he feels great.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but we have differing opinions on this. I don't agree with juicing a dog for fighting or to turn him into an aggresive attack dog but for cosmetics i think it's fine, after all i do the same with myself.

posted May 08, 2000 10:52 AM            

strange how you came out screaming how wonderful you are, and now you claim that i've done that.

posted May 08, 2000 10:55 AM            

I understand what you're saying, and you may be right to a certain degree but i think you're taking it a little far, if i'm going to try and look the best i can, then i'd want my dog to look his best as well. In my eyes it's just that simple.

posted May 08, 2000 11:15 AM            

The point I'm trying to make is an abstract one. It's that you can and should do whatever you want to your own body. But it starts and ends with YOU. It doesn't extend to your neighbors, coworkers, families, friends, lovers, or pets. So if being a bodybuilder isn't enough of an attention-getter for you, if it isn't enough of a respect-getter for you, then don't you think that says something about you? I mean, when do you stop and say "enough already"?

E2, I'm using "you" plurally, so it's not just you I'm talking about.

posted May 08, 2000 03:18 PM            

I personally wouldnt fight my dogs, but i have been rasied around pit men and watching these fights.

You cant walk into a contest with a big ass dog that is on roids and would normally weigh 20lbs less. Dog fights are all about skill and conditioning. Have you ever seen a pitfight. Those dogs are skinny and dont have a inch of fat on them. They take them down to fight weight which is 10 to 20% lighter than normal a few months before the fight. I big ass dog on roids is going to have to fight a big ass skinny dog that will kill that bastard in the pit everytime. Plus the badest ass dog i ever saw fight was only 43 pounds pit weight and had more fighting ability than he knew what to do with.

SUPERMAN you may have seen a bunch of drunk rednecks fighting some dogs out in the woods but you didnt see a real pit fight!

posted May 08, 2000 03:25 PM            

As for this "it's natural for pits to fight" line ... if we stuck to what was "natural", we'd still be living in grass huts ... and we sure as hell wouldn't be shooting up with gear! In other words, just because it's natural, that doesn't mean it's right.

But the question in the previous post remains: Would those of you who support recreational pet-dog roiding to help make you/him look good ALSO support recreational 14-year-old-son roiding to make you/him look good?

posted May 08, 2000 05:56 PM            

Save the juice for yourself E2.

posted May 08, 2000 06:27 PM            

As for Curious, it's curious that he (and others in this thread) prefaced their defense of dog roiding by saying, "I may be wrong, but ..." Perhaps, deep down, they KNOW it's wrong, but they just don't like the fact that I'm SAYING it's wrong. So is THAT why I seem close-minded and holier-than-thou to him? Or is it because my position and the way I'm defending it comes off as a bit strong? Or does it just get under his skin that I think there's more to life than roiding everyone and everything in sight?

He can call it "stubborn", but I prefer "focused". When a lawyer's in a court of law, or when a politican's in a legislative debate, he doesn't win by saying, "Well, maybe you do have a point, and maybe you don't really mean any harm, so maybe I should just leave you alone" ... blah blah blah. He wins by articulating and attacking. So if you don't like my style, then get over it and defend yourself with something a little more compelling than "come up with something wrong that he is doing to his dog" when ALL of my posts in this thread have explained EXACTLY what I think is wrong. Furthermore, I don't care what E2's intentions are. E2's intentions don't matter. If we went around judging people based upon their intentions, no one would ever get put in jail. After all, does anyone ever really have "bad intentions"? No. What DOES matter -- and what we must look at -- are the RESULTS of a person's intentions. So let's do that.

Objectively, dog roiding worsens the social standing of pit bulls, who are already perceived as dangerous. And regardless of breed, when it's motivated not by medical need but rather owner selfishness, a situation is created in which the dogs are more likely to cause harm or be harmed themselves. Subjectively, I think anyone who roids dogs to elicit viciousness or cosmetic enhancement has a serious inferiority complex AND a warped view of personal rights versus social responsibility.

I'm expecting someone to come back at me with the argument that a dog is the property of his owner so he should be able to do whatever he wants with it. But it's not about the legal right to do so. It's about the ethical desire to do so. So don't tell me to stop being so judgemental. The whole point is to be judgemental, to make a judgement that are well-reasoned and fair, and to fight for it. Funny: You'd think that someone whose footer is a quote from Nietzsche would know that.

posted May 08, 2000 07:08 PM            

You said that most owners are supplementing their own testosterone vicariously through their dog. My point is that they shouldn't. That's why the side effects don't matter. It shouldn't get to that point in the first place.

posted May 08, 2000 08:05 PM            

Now, what are we talking about here, the cosmetics of life. Unfortunatly most of the world is incredibly superficial. It's part of us, we're all raised that way, it's incredibly hard to get away from.

Now, if you're against me giving the dog juice because it has no choice and there may be side effects, let me say that i have given juice to many many dogs with no problems what so ever with their health or with the length of their lives.

The dog is treated like a king, a real part of the family, he is given nothing but the best, we even feed him real food not dog food crap. He eats as well as we do.

The dog looks great and is healthy, and to my friend that's all that matters. I'm sorry that you disagree, but it's natural, we selectively breeds dogs for looks and traits that we desire. Men imposing thier will on animals happens all the time everywhere around the world, i'm not saying it makes it right, but we're not harming him in any way. What's good enough for me is good enough for his dog.

I was going to write more, but i'm very tired, damn lower back is killing me, no it's not the kidneys, it's the muscle.

posted May 09, 2000 09:29 AM            

E2, I never said that you or your friend abuse the dog in the traditional sense. In fact, I'm sure the dog is treated like a king and enjoys a better life than many people. I'm sure the dog is mentally and physically fine. So why am I spending all this time on all these posts? Because I DON'T believe in "if it feels good, do it". Because I DON'T believe the legal right to do whatever you want to animals necessarily makes it moral, appropriate, or in the best interests of the community.

Regardless of whether or not the dogs are beaten or fought, roiding them is ETHICALLY objectionable. It places them in a position where thery are more likely to cause harm or be harmed themselves. It creates a negative environment for properly socialized pit bulls and other feared breeds. Finally, it doesn't say good things about the self-confidence, self-esteem, or social skills of the people doing it.

posted May 09, 2000 09:48 AM            

Now if you think i've got low self-esteem, self-confidence, social skills or i'm lacking in the morality department all that shows is how little you know me. I can't expect you to have any clue as to who i am or what i'm about as the sum of our interraction has been on this BB.

I'm sorry you feel as though my friend and I are of such low moral character but we see nothing wrong with what we're doing, so we'll continue doing it.

posted May 09, 2000 10:12 AM            

To answer your question about animal endangerment, I realize that someone as steroid-savvy as you can dose dogs safely and effectively for cosmetic purposes. But once again, you need to STOP thinking about yourself. Most people DON'T have that skill or experience, so your approval of dog roiding opens the door to their brutal, painful, and potentially lethal mistakes. (Off the subject of YOU and YOUR DOG once again, why do most people roid their dogs? To fight them. The fact the YOU don't do that doesn't matter.)

And then there's the social standing of pit bulls and other breeds that are perceived to be vicious. Dog roiding, the intersection of steroid hysteria and pit-bull hysteria, puts fuel on that fire.

posted May 09, 2000 12:41 PM         

"But when you take similar measures to improve a pet's appearance, hoping its improved appearance will reflect upon YOU, that's indicative of a warped sense of reality (at best) or whopping inferiority complex (at worst)." -Ed O.

That sounds pretty personal to me. If someone said you had a whopping inferiority complex Freud...wouldn't you take that personal.

posted May 09, 2000 01:56 PM            

If someone accused me of having an inferiority complex, I sure would take it personally, and I'd be angry, too. But I've learned (through Freud, by the way), that it's important to step back and analyze whether or not the accusation has any merit before casually dismissing it. Because sometimes the accuser has a point.