They have been selectivly bred for the deformity, the differance lies with the fact that they are not cast asside and forgotten about or distroyed because of it.
Like I said… Same deformity, just came about differently (one by accident, one on purpose).
Just something to think about, but does that then make it ok, to produce debilitating deformities in animals, if the deformed animals are NOT then cast aside? In other words, is a deformities “goodness” or “badness” determined only with how we treat those deformed animals after they are born?
ruffian wrote:
I have no clue what you mean by the “twisted cat” the fact that you are comparing them with bassets I am gonna guess you mean “munchkin cats” which does have the same form of dwarfism that bassets, doxies and corgies have. They belive that it is a lethal gene, TICA does register them though. Lethal genes are not to be played with and a huge number of dog breeds have them, any breed where piebald or merle is present, you cross 2 merle dogs and pups are often re-absorbed, born deaf, blind, without eyes and parts of the ears, or just dead, but all are 100% preventable with proper breeding practices.
Twisted cats are not munchkin cats. They are cats with twisted front legs that some lady started breeding on purpose and got a lot of people upset. I can’t find any pics right now, but I remember seeing a pic a few years ago and the front legs looked the same as basset legs.