Is a female wolf called a bitch?
If not, why not?
Discrimination perhaps….?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
41 Answers
Here’s what I found:
The female wolf is referred to as a She-wolf or bitch. If she is the highest ranking female in her pack, she is called the dominant female. Usually, the dominant female is the breeding female. The dominant male and female are referred to as the dominant pair and if they are also reproducing, they are referred to as the breeding pair.
Provided by the International Wolf Center www.wolf.org in accordance with current scientific research.
I believe any Canidae(canine) female is called a bitch.
Except of course Foxy Brown
unless she be trippin where it becomes entirely appropriate…
here’s the deal. Any female k9 that is in heat is called a bitch. Since a wolf is a k9 then if she’s in heat then she is called a bitch.
depends on if she bites me or not
I think you’re thinking of Sarah Palin.
@judochop Is that supposed to be clever? A personal attack on someone I would bet you have never met? If you want to attack her policies go ahead but what you are doing make you sound foolish.
Not to her face, if you’re smart.
missingbite
Although I personally would not use the “bitch” moniker to refer to Sarah Palin – who I rather admire – you’re criticism of judochop’s quip is, in my opinion, not correct. Ms. Palin has been very free with her remarks which pass judgment on others, one of the most notable being her slur of then Senator Obama in the 2008 campaign who she accused of someone who “pals around with terrorists.” Since she can dish it out she should be able to take it.
ps. saying a wolf isn’t a dog is like saying a tiger isn’t a cat
@semblance The difference is that S.P. never called Obama a terrorist. She stated that he had connections with a convicted terrorist, Bill Ayers. Was she wrong, who knows. Obama does have ties to him. Even if she called Obama names or anyone else, two wrongs don’t make a right. My point is, leave the personal attacks out of politics and argue the policy. If we did that we all win.
Back to regularly scheduled thread. Sorry for the drift.
Yes a female wolf is a bitch.
@jamcanfi74 You have that backwards. Dogs were derived from wolves, so in reality, a dog is a wolf. Just a really odd looking one.
I don’t know, but all of this is making me think of Shakira.
…I’ll be in my bunk.
@missingbite
I am sorry. I did not realize that a personal attack on Sarah Palin made me sound as “foolish” as defending her.
While I will give SP one thing and one thing only that I personally feel puts her one step above Dan Quayle is that she broke the ground for women in politics. Other than that I just thought it was kind of funny seeing as her stance on wolfs, especially the “bitches” was fitting to the question. Perhaps a little homework seeing as how you are a fan would serve you some good.
Now to answer the question:
She-wolf or bitch.
Note: If she is the highest ranking female in her pack, she is called the dominant female. Usually, the dominant female is the breeding female. The dominant male and female are referred to as the dominant pair and if they are also reproducing, they are referred to as the breeding pair.
Provided by the International Wolf Center www.wolf.org in accordance with current scientific research.
I am pretty sure you can find about a million articles on this, here is a link to one.
http://www.salon.com/env/feature/2008/09/08/sarah_palin_wolves/
missingbite -
Sorry, but your restatement of what Sarah Palin said is unfairly favorable to her. She said that Obama, “pals around with terrorists.” I heard her say it on national news and I believe that is an exact quote. There was no evidence that Mr. Ayers was anything but a reformed Vietnam war protester who had been convicted for actions taken decades earlier that were violent and unlawful. There was also little or no evidence that then Senator Obama had a close personal relationship with Mr. Ayers. Even assuming that it was fair to label Mr. Ayers as having been a “terrorist”, the way Ms. Palin said it, the remark was obviously intended to – and did – unfairly slur then Senator Obama as someone who was a close friend of someone who was, and still was, a “terrorist”. I stand by my statement that if she can dish out personal attacks she should expect and be able to handle snap personal judgments others make of her. Two wrongs do not make a right, but in criticizig judochop you suggest that a double standard should apply, which is not right either. I would add that I think Sarah Palin can take it, which is to her credit.
@davidbetterman
Actually a dog(Canis lupus familiaris) is a wolf (Canis lupus).
Lupus came first. We just domesticated the friendliest ones.
I wouldn’t. Ever seen a female wolf angry?
No one has because no one survived to tell about it.
@judochop Anyone who followed the election or knows anything about SP knows she hunts wolves. I have no problem with that. I felt that you were calling SP a bitch. If that is what you were doing, I feel it was wrong and made you sound foolish. If that wasn’t your intent, I apologize.
@semblance I guess we will disagree on Ayers. In his own words he wishes he had done more. I guess bombing the NYPD headquarters in 1970, the United States Capital Building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972 isn’t enough to call him a terrorist. He is just a “reformed Vietnam war protester who had been convicted for actions taken decades earlier that were violent and unlawful”. To me, if you commit those crimes and then say you didn’t do enough, you’re a terrorist. Should SP have tried to link the two? Probably. We have Obama on video saying he was barely involved with ACORN and we now know that was a lie.
My original point was that @judochop shouldn’t call SP a bitch when SP has never made a derogatory comment about @judochop. Again, if that wasn’t what @judochop was doing, I apologize.
If the point was to protect wolves, attack SP on her hunting policies, not her personally.
How did this come to politics?
Sarah Palin will never say goodbye if we don’t let her go away.
missingbite
You are applyig a hopeless double standard. Sarah Palin is your heroine. Fine. She is kind of close to that for me, too. However, during the campaign she made personal attacks on then Senator Obama when he had never attacked her personally. That’s violating YOUR standard, as articulated in your own post. Worse still, her attacks had no basis in fact, as already explained. You are even twisting what I said in your desperation to defend yourself. You want to call Mr. Ayers’ a “terrorist”, fine. In my last post, I said, “Even assuming that it was fair to label Mr. Ayers as having been a ‘terrorist’ . . . .” The problem with Sarah Palin’s remarks against then Senator Obama is not that she labeled Mr. Ayers as a past “terrorist”, but that she suggested he was still a terrorist, even though he had led a lawful life since paying for his crimes, and, most importantly, that he was a close friend, a “pal” of then Senator Obama. The fact is that Sarah Palin had no facts which justified making a personal attack on then Senator Obama – who had never attacked her, at least at that point. From your own post, there still is no evidence which justifies making that connection. All you have to offer is speculation and a non sequitur remark about ACORN.
If you admire Sarah Palin, as I do to some extent, than you probably have conservative values, a lot of which I share. However, why don’t you try remembering one of the most important freedoms, which is the right of free expression, particularly in the political arena. That wasn’t thought up just by the men who drafted the First Amendment to the US Constitution. It goes back way farther than that. Double standards don’t work when it comes to free speech.
Captain Fantasy
Good question. If you have not been following all of this, judochop made a quip about Sarah Palin, apparently intending to tie into Sarah Palin’s position about wolves. Missingbite, a Sarah Palin fan, got huffy and jumped on him. Although I am something of a Sarah fan, too, I am an even bigger fan of free speech and a bigger enemy of double standards, so I have been “defending him”.
Off subject for sure, but defending free speech is never a waste of time, where and whenever the forum.
Having said that, as for saying goodbye to Sarah, well, not all of us want to do that . . . . But that’s a whole ‘nother story.
@syz regardless a wolf is still classified as a dog ask a vet
@jamcanfi74
Which came first?
They are both essentially Canis lupus yet one has had certain instincts bred out of him by man for thousands of years creating canis lupis familiaris. But the wolf preceded the domesticated dog.
Well, I will finally wade in on the merits of the question rather than the political sideline.
jamcanfi74 is right. A wolf and a dog are the same species, which is why they can cross breed freely. However, the dog is a domesticated animal – in fact, the oldest domesticated animal. The process of domestication entails extensive genetic modification over thousands of years So, the two are closely related, but distinctly classified animals.
And yes, I checked this answer with a vet.
@semblance
But a dog is a wolf. A boy is a “Smith” because his father was a “Smith”. A father is not a “Smith” because his son is a “Smith”. A father was Mr.Smith before his son existed. Likewise before a dog was ever domesticated there was a wolf.
YOU WILL RESPECT MY AUTHORITY!
Please do not insult the 4 legged bitches (wolves, dingos or dogs) by including SP in their ranks!
SeventhSense
Sorry, but your analogy to family names is not authority. Scientifically, a dog is considered a distinct animal from a wolf.
Having said that, where I live we have a significant amount of domestic dog blood which has bred back ito the wild wolf population. Current studies suggest that this is why the wolves are darker in color in this region than the traditional gray wolf. It doesn’t seem to be much of a survival trait, but putting domestic dog genes back into the gene pool seems to darken their color.
@semblance
Umm well I tried to give you some humor but you insist. And yes Cartman is certainly no authority but the scientific classification is an authority and my analogy could not have been any clearer other than to say that the offspring derive their genetic material from their parents. Canus lupus familiaris is a subspecies of Canus lupus. It’s irrational to say the progeny is the forerunner.
No one doubts that a wolf and a dog could interbreed. But the gray wolf has stayed relatively the same for thousands of years while the dog originally looking quite similar like this has now even become this and this
While a wolf never exhibited these extreme traits of a dog naturally it can certainly be said that a dog at one point in its distant past was in fact a wolf before it diverged with man’s help. So they are the same genus but a dog owes its ancestral genetic markers to the wolf. It’s not a case of chicken or egg because we know which came first. The wolves, coyotes, foxes and dingos.
P.S.- Apart from Paris Hilton and assistance from man our little chihuahua would have little chance to pass on it’s genes for it would in short order be food in the wild and rendered extinct quickly.
Scientific Classification
Gray Wolf
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Carnivora
Family: Canidae
Subfamily: Caninae
Tribe: Canini[2]
Genus: Canis
Species: Canis lupus
Dog
Kingdom: Animalia
Subkingdom: Eumetazoa
Phylum: Chordata
Subphylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Subclass: Theria
Order: Carnivora
Suborder: Caniformia
Family: Canidae
Subfamily: Caninae
Tribe: Canini[1]
Genus: Canis
Species: Canis lupus
Subspecies: Canis lupis familiaris
SeventhSense -
You know, I think you must have me confused with someone else. You just said, “Canus lupus familiaris is a subspecies of Canus lupus. It’s irrational to say the progeny is the forerunner.”
My comment on the merits of this question (not my comments on the entertaining but off subject political sideline) was that: “A wolf and a dog are the same species, which is why they can cross breed freely. However, the dog is a domesticated animal – in fact, the oldest domesticated animal. The process of domestication entails extensive genetic modification over thousands of years So, the two are closely related, but distinctly classified animals.”
I certainly never suggested that “the progeny is the forerunner”. In fact, by referring to genetic modification as part of the process of domestication I implied the contrary. Of course wolves came first. I never suggested otherwise. I just said that they’re different now. That’s why they are classified as a subspecies.
Please read and think before you write criticism.
What do we want?
Rights for female wolves!
When do we want them?
Nowoooooooo!
@semblance
@syz
said this to @jamcanfi74:
You have that backwards. Dogs were derived from wolves, so in reality, a dog is a wolf. Just a really odd looking one.
You supported @jamcanfi74 and that’s where I took issue. No one ever questioned dogs not being the same species.
No offense. It’s probably good that we fleshed this out anyway
Answer this question 
