u/GlitteringRutabaga61

I already made a post yesterday examining Rudder’s breeder, OCOEE, and whether the breeding practices behind him actually support the repeated claim by Maddie (@myboyrudder) that Rudder is well bred and ethically bred. One of the issues I discussed was that his sire had not completed all of his OFA health testing when Rudder was born. In fact, OCOEE bred his sire THREE TIMES before he turned 2, the minimum age for final OFA hip certification.

At the time, I had only looked at Rudder’s direct lineage and hadn’t examined how those dogs were related to one another.

Well, I missed a pretty major detail: Rudder’s parents are aunt and nephew. His maternal uncle is also his paternal grandfather. Rudder’s sire was fathered by the full brother of Rudder’s dam. (Not a littermate, they simply have the same parents.)

Given how Maddie (@myboyrudder) has insisted that Rudder is well bred and ethically bred, finding an aunt-nephew mating in his immediate pedigree is pretty remarkable, especially on top of the incomplete OFA testing. Breeding close relatives before completing basic health testing is very difficult to reconcile with the claim that Rudder is ethically bred and well bred.

The other day I was looking through the OFA database and pedigrees for my childhood dogs. I was a kid when we got them, so this was information I’d never thought to look into before. (We did, in fact, have very well bred dogs.)

That led me to look up the health testing and pedigrees of some pet creators’ dogs as well, including Rudder. I was able to find his littermate, since there is mention of Rudder’s birthdate sprinkled around the internet, and what I found had me floored.

As it turns out, Rudder is NOT WELL-BRED NOR ETHICALLY BRED for a number of reasons, despite @myboyrudder’s repeated claims that he is.

I’ve also included a screenshot of the OFA recommended tests for English Springer Spaniels so there is some context to go off of. 

First, Rudder’s dad had already sired three litters, including Rudder’s, before completing his OFA hip testing. Even though the results were good, those breedings took place before the breeder had those results to inform their breeding decisions. Maddie has made more than one tiktok saying that she wants a puppy with parents that had all the necessary OFA testing (screenshot included).

Second, both of Rudder’s parents are PRA (progressive retinal atrophy) DNA carriers. Not the end of the world, but not ideal either. (The PRA DNA information was not available on his mom’s OFA profile but was on the Ocoee website.)

Lastly, Rudder’s pedigree contains direct inbreeding around a dog with elbow dysplasia. The same dog appears as his maternal grandmother and paternal great-grandmother, and that dog has an abnormal OFA elbow result.

It’s also worth noting that elbow results are omitted from the publicly presented health information for both of Rudder’s parents. That’s particularly relevant not only because elbow screening is recommended for the breed, but because there is documented elbow dysplasia in this family line on both sides. 

The breeding of the sire THREE TIMES before OFA hip tests, the inbreeding of a dog with abnormal elbows, the omission of OFA elbow results for both parents, and both parents also being PRA DNA carriers is not indicative of a well-bred dog nor a responsible breeder. 

This is not evidence of the careful, health-conscious breeding that the terms ethical breeding and well-bred are supposed to describe.

(Note: I did include @goldenagoutis dog Monty’s pedigree to show the comparison because it is spotless. Both parents and grandparents have all the necessary testing and good results for all 6 dogs.)

My jaw actually dropped when I saw this. 

@myboyrudder’s first post acknowledging the passing of Isabel Klee’s dog, Simon, was a sponsored TikTok/reel for Spot & Tango’s unkibble.

Out of everything she could have chosen as her first public acknowledgment of Simon’s passing, she chose a paid advertisement.

Whether the partnership was scheduled beforehand really isn’t the point. She still chose for this to be her first public acknowledgment of Simon’s death.

For a creator who has repeatedly been criticized for monetizing nearly every aspect of her online presence, this feels like the clearest example yet of why it’s so jarring and strange. There are moments where the content should simply be the moment itself. Also, she is fully able to donate in his memory outside of a sponsored post.

(And, because it’s myboyrudder, it’s also yet another video pushing the same tired narrative that the food she’s advertising is somehow “better than kibble.”

It’s the same pattern: take a premium pet food brand, imply that “kibble” as a whole is inferior, and present whatever she’s advertising as the better alternative. 

It’s an oversimplification that ignores the fact that kibble encompasses everything from poorly formulated diets to WSAVA compliant brands backed by decades of research, feeding trials, and board-certified veterinary nutritionists.

It’s just such a bizarre combination of things. The first public acknowledgment of Simon’s passing is a sponsored advertisement, and that advertisement is, once again, being used to push the same anti-kibble marketing narrative.)

Momoandtea has doubled down. Based on her content, I would be surprised if she had a lot of experience with behavioral euthanasia as a concept, and her lack of knowledge around the ethics of it very much shows in her reasoning here. 

Her ethical framework here is fundamentally flawed. 

It is entirely possible for something to be both effective and unethical. The fact that an intervention achieves its intended outcome does not, on its own, make it ethically justified. In this circumstance, we’re talking about corporal punishment of an animal. 

Her argument ultimately boils down to: if the dog was genuinely rehabilitated and avoided euthanasia, then the methods were justified. I don't think efficacy alone answers that question.

Behavioral euthanasia is already an acknowledgment that preserving life is not always the most ethical option. We routinely recognize that quality of life matters, not just life itself. Those decisions weigh the dog's welfare, quality of life, and the safety of the people and animals around them. 

If the only alternative to euthanasia is abusive treatment, it is not self-evident that keeping the dog alive is the more ethical outcome. If the preservation of life was seen as the ultimate goal over everything else, behavioral euthanasia would be seen as unethical. 

"The dog lived" is not, by itself, an ethical justification for the methods used to get there. Also, based on the source material, it is VERY VERY suspect that this dog was rehabilitated. 

(Note: The Dylan Jones video is over four and a half hours long, and from the portions I've watched so far, I think there is a strong argument that the methods being used are abusive. He is also very reliant on flooding as a method to train the dog which, by definition, relies on suppressed behaviors. Something that momoandtea says would then make these methods not okay. I'll go through the full video and pull clips when I have time because there's a lot to unpack. I am basically just going through the transcript because the video is so long and then I’m looking at the timestamps that popped out to me from the transcript.)

Momoandtea disabled comments which is also possibly my least favorite creator move of all time and part of why this sub exists in the first place. She shows she is not interested in reshaping her viewpoint on this and would rather shout into the social media void. I also love the victim card she throws out at the last second. She DESERVES the criticism in the first place.

I should couch this in the fact that I know that these are extremely short clips. She could have been filming a few moments that turned crazy. However, these are some pretty crazy things to allow to happen.

If the video was just the genital biting incident in isolation, I would probably have scrolled past. However, that in conjunction with clips of the puppy interacting inappropriately with the older dog while he's in his crate is bonkers.

Something that sooo many behaviorists and trainers will say, when introducing a puppy to a home with a resident dog, is to give the older dog a "safe space." Usually this means keeping the puppy in a playpen and the older dog's environment doesn't change really at all, and then also the adult dog's crate is fully off limits to the puppy.

In 3/4 clips also the older dog is not reciprocating play. The one at 0:04 is reciprocated, even though it's happening in a less than ideal space, the dog crate.

All this creator says in the comments, when responding to people who are concerned, is that the older dog "corrects" the puppy and also pinned the puppy after it bit his genitals. The caption also says the adult dog corrects the puppy "time and again." I'm like... so when do you maybe give the poor adult some space. The poor guy is putting a literal wall between himself and the puppy with the crate, and it keeps getting violated.

I know boatloads of people who don't know how this exact type of behavior is what can result in severe fights between resident dogs. It can turn extremely well socialized pups dog aggressive.

She doesn't have a huge platform thank GOD, but this video did get 1.5M views and 70k likes. I could be giving this video an extremely ungenerous read, but it also exemplified something I see a lot, not just on social media, but with the average multi-dog owner.

Ethan McMahon is a social media dog trainer who claims to be balanced. Even though, in entirety of this video, you never see him reward the dog for doing the desired behavior. (Balanced training as a philosophy hinges on using a combination of both punishment and reward.)

The presentation is honestly what bothers me the most. Whether he meant it as a joke or not, he’s still posting a training video where he says, “you kind of have to hit this dog hard,” and adds punching sound effects while kneeing the dog. Not to mention, the dog lands on its back legs weird when he knees if for the second time.

This video somehow has almost a million likes on tiktok. He has 250k followers on tiktok and almost 300k on insta.

Joke or not, this is content that endorses hitting a dog as part of training. I just don’t think that’s a productive message for a trainer with a large audience to be putting out there, especially when there are much clearer ways to explain what you’re actually trying to teach.

Note: I have other issues with this guy. However, this video is one of his most popular, and, yet, one of his most egregious.

I’ve been meaning to make a post on this guy, Charlie Hall, owner of the dog training company Cherry Hoggs and dog food company Posh Nosh. He is the full nine yards when it comes to social media nonsense around dogs. This video is barely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to him. I will likely make more posts about this account in the future due to the size of their following online and the lack of critical discussion I see about Charlie and his wife Frankie (who also runs the organization).

A common theme in this sub, but these trainers/influencers who market extremely expensive and un-researched pet food speak with their whole chest in a way that is so misleading. 

I have stitched this video of Charlie saying that chicken is a 1/10 ingredient with a veterinary nutritionist responding to a different trainer who is dissing chicken.

(Note: The jury is still out on how I feel about this lady. She is board-eligible but not board-certified which... why not take the test? She has at least done the actual education necessary to be eligible though. However, I did cross-reference what she said with information from other veterinary nutritionists that I really had to dig for. As far as I can tell, she is one of the only people even tangentially connected to veterinary nutrition who has an accessible, easy-to-interpret account for the general public, which is such a bummer. The algorithm really favors controversial takes from non-experts. The closest thing I found to accessible information was this article from the Purina Institute, which is specifically written by Board Certified Veterinary Nutritionists and people with PhDs in Animal Nutrition.)

There is a VERY GOOD reason chicken is in a large portion of pet foods: it is nutritionally beneficial and very affordable, making it an accessible option for pet owners.

This guy has a very good reason to diss chicken, though, which is that he has his own food company called Posh Nosh. The formulas are extremely high fat, contain tons of legumes, and are extremely expensive ($100+ for 4,000 kcal, which is basically four days of food for a 60 lb dog).

I still will never understand how people get away with this grift. It's apparent that a veterinary nutritionist hasn't gone anywhere near this food, and from the macros alone, I have serious concerns about it.

On the bright side, this dude's Instagram account was suspended a couple of weeks ago (he had well over a million followers). I have no idea why, but at least his audience has been temporarily reduced.

Here I am, watching the new season of Love Island on Peacock (with ads), and who else graces my screen but a one ALEX BORDY!

To give context, Peacock often themes its ads within whichever show you’re watching. (Ex- when watching Traitors, ads with Rob Rausch, a contestant, were playing incessantly.) When watching Love Island, the ads will often feature cast members and have the show name watermarked somewhere on the screen.

For a brief moment though when I saw Alex, I was wondering if they were featuring him because he was going to be featured on the show. I doubt though the age of the cast members of the show skew significantly younger than that of the Bachelor franchise.

What bothers me with @myboyrudder here isn’t that she feeds raw. People are entitled to do what they believe is best for their dogs.

What bothers me is the constant branding as a uniquely “logical” and “data-driven” person. That framing signals to viewers that her feeding decisions are based on a body of evidence and research.

Until I watched this video from a veterinarian a couple of days ago, I thought there were at least some researched benefits to raw feeding, even if WSAVA-compliant foods were still far safer overall.

This is only two clips from the video, but the veterinarian references multiple studies throughout and also cites consensus statements from veterinary organizations. The most striking point is the warning from the American Academy of Veterinary Nutrition—veterinarians who specialize in nutrition.

The result of @myboyrudder’s self-description is that viewers may come away believing raw feeding is the scientifically established choice because it is being promoted by someone who repeatedly presents herself as following the data. In reality, the research is far less definitive than that portrayal suggests.

Link to veterinarian video: https://youtu.be/TyIOGwe_CRo?si=tSbbuG6nznmYtaSq

(Related note: Maddie regularly criticizes kibble in her videos, but that framing overlooks other balanced options that are available. For example, Purina offers many high-protein wet food formulas (40%+ protein; the standard adult Purina Pro Plan wet food is 50% protein) that are significantly less expensive than the raw alternatives Maddie recommends.)

When Maddie made the post about a Shih Tzu as a potential alternative to a Cavapoo, I didn’t necessarily disagree, especially somebody is looking for a dog that is going to be an at-home companion.

There are certain traits an owner would have to give up if a Shih Tzu is chosen. Most notably, activity level (Shihs generally aren’t as versatile as Cavs and Poodles are less likely to enjoy longer walks the way Cavs and Poodles often do) and trainability/intelligence (Poodles are frequently ranked among the most intelligent dog breeds, and Cavs often score higher than Shihs in measures of trainability).

That said, it’s worth noting that, in the past, Maddie herself has recommended alternatives that involve far more significant tradeoffs than the ones she’s criticizing here.

In her doodle-alternative content, she suggested Portuguese Water Dogs as an option despite the fact that they differ dramatically from the breeds most people are trying to emulate with doodles. If recommending a Miniature Schnauzer as a Cavapoo alternative is unacceptable because has more energy and drive, then recommending a Portuguese Water Dog as a stand-in for the typical doodle owner is an even more extreme example of the same logic. (More on that later cause I want to emphasize how bonkers recommending a PWD as a doodle alternative is.)

However, Maddie’s outrage over someone suggesting a Miniature Schnauzer as an alternative strikes me as both bizarre and selective in terms of which breed characteristics she chooses to acknowledge and discuss.

She also constructs a strawman argument. Maddie claims that people who want a Cavapoo are looking for a dog that is “affectionate, social, easy to own, easy to train.” But we actually have no idea which traits the commenter asking about Cavapoo alternatives valued most. 
In addition to this, she’s engaging in some revisionist history about Cavaliers because, while their modern role is that of a companion dog, they are descended from sporting spaniels. This is even acknowledged by the breed club itself:

Known familiarly as a toy “Comforter” spaniel, the cavalier was never bred to be anything other than a small, beloved gentle pet, a lap dog to be sure, but also sporting in nature in that he could run behind a horse and enjoy a day’s activities outside the palace walls. Those breed characteristics endure to this day, and indeed are essential to a sound and happy cavalier. (https://ackcsc.org/about/defining-the-cavalier/)

[The cavalier] is biddable and very trainable-not only as a household pet, but also as a Therapy, Obedience, and Agility dog. Remember, though, that he cannot always be relied upon to come when he is called if he is chasing a butterfly or following the flight of a bird. For most owners, a fenced yard and/or a leash is a ‘must have.’ (https://ackcsc.org/about/defining-the-cavalier/)

Temperament: Gay, friendly, non-aggressive with no tendency towards nervousness or shyness. (https://ackcsc.org/about/breed-standard/)

Maddie describes the Miniature Schnauzer as a dog bred to k*ll and descended from guardian dogs. That’s true, but it’s also highly selective framing.
Miniature Schnauzers were bred primarily for rodent control.

She neglects to mention that many breeds with historically harsh working purposes are now bred almost exclusively as companion animals. A good example is the French Bulldog, which descends not only from bull-baiting dogs but also from ratting dogs, much like the Miniature Schnauzer.

The same consideration should be extended to Miniature Schnauzers, whose breed clubs actively promote and preserve companion-oriented traits.

Some quotes from the Miniature Schnauzer Club of America:

Miniature Schnauzers are sweet, smart, loving and loyal. Their signature eyebrows and beards give them a very distinct look. They are hardy little dogs, originally bred to be ratters and companions on German farms.

They make excellent companions because they are obedient and quick to learn, extremely devoted, very playful and very affectionate. Their alertness and sometimes vocal nature makes them an excellent watch/alert dog. They delight in chasing (and sometimes catching) small prey; therefore a fenced yard or on-leash walks are recommended. (https://amsc.us/all-about-miniature-schnauzers/)

Miniature Schnauzers are as much at home in the city with a moderate amount of exercise as they are in the country where they appear tireless. They adapt easily to any change of condition or climate. They need to live as a part of their family, going where they go, doing what they do. Sleeping on the bed, or in his own, being near their people is their greatest joy. (https://amsc.us/all-about-miniature-schnauzers/)

There are virtually no breeds that serve as a perfect low-shedding equivalent to a Cavalier. Any recommendation will inevitably prioritize some traits over others.

Given that reality, suggesting a Miniature Schnauzer is not unreasonable for someone who values the intelligence, trainability, and a smaller dog that is both confident and has a higher activity level than a Shih Tzu.

That’s why the intensity of Maddie’s response feels disproportionate. Recommending a breed that sits on a different point of the companion-dog spectrum is not the same thing as setting someone up for failure, and framing it as though this kind of suggestion is why dogs end up unhappy or in shelters seems like a significant exaggeration.

The reason this particular rant bothered me so much is that Maddie previously made a video suggesting doodle alternatives, and one of the first breeds she recommended was the Portuguese Water Dog.

I understand why she made that recommendation. Portuguese Water Dogs and Poodles were bred for somewhat similar working purposes- water retrieving.

However, SIMILAR PURPOSE DOES NOT MEAN SIMILAR TEMPERAMENT AND SIMILAR HOUSEHOLD FIT.

Compare the breed standard temperaments:
[Poodle] Temperament: Carrying himself proudly, very active, intelligent, the Poodle has about him an air of distinction and dignity peculiar to himself. (https://poodleclubofamerica.org/akc-breed-standard/)

[Portuguese Water Dog] Temperament: An animal of spirited disposition, self-willed, brave, and very resistant to fatigue. A dog of exceptional intelligence and a loyal companion, it obeys its master with facility and apparent pleasure. (https://www.pwdca.org/site_page.cfm?pk_association_webpage_menu=8853&pk_association_webpage=18267)

For context, I grew up with Portuguese Water Dogs. My family chose them specifically because we wanted dogs capable of handling demanding outdoor adventures. (To give context of our activity level, we were also considering German Shepherds.)

We got exactly that and then some. We did extensive research beforehand and still weren’t prepared for dogs that were only a step or two removed from Border Collies in terms of energy and drive.

Unlike Poodles, they often display herding tendencies, a strong independent streak, and an extremely vocal communication style (they babble and bark at you as if they’re “talking”).

They can be wonderful family dogs, but ONLY for families that are exceptionally active.

Those bold, intense traits are not accidents; they are part of the breed standard and continue to be selected for. Yet Maddie recommends Portuguese Water Dogs to people looking for breed traits similar to Poodles, Bernese Mountain Dogs, Golden Retrievers, and Labrador Retrievers.

In my view, that’s a far bigger stretch than recommending a Miniature Schnauzer as a Cavapoo alternative.

As a result, it’s difficult to understand why Maddie is so upset about someone suggesting a Miniature Schnauzer - a breed that, in its modern form, is intentionally bred as an intelligent, energetic companion dog.

It still falls squarely within the category of small, trainable companion breeds that could appeal to someone looking for a versatile dog capable of accompanying them on longer walks and a wider range of activities.