It sure would be nice if more people would learn about generalities --
There are ALWAYS exceptions to generalities. That is why general truths (garnered through generalities) should never be applied toward individuals. It isn't logical -- that individual may be one of the exceptions.
The obverse is also true --
Because an individual may be an exception to a general truth, it isn't logical to make generalities about a group based on the conclusions about one individual.
We own a 100% FT-bred Lab who has placed in the Open class in conformation, defeating other Labs. I would hope that we are all wise enough to accept that as an exception. Just as I would hope we are all wise enough to know that the show-bred Lab that attains a MH is an exception.
But neither of these exceptions detract from the truthfulness of the generalities we make about both show-bred and field-bred Labs.
Generally speaking, I do not find field-bred Labs "ugly." Some are, most aren't. (I have one that is way too snipey, fine boned, but has a normal-sized trunk making her all out of balance. But she is the best field-dog I have ever owned.) Yet, I am confident that is what the show-bred person was, generally speaking, saying about field-bred Labs -- "Most are ugly, some aren't." And certainly their dogs, being show-bred, are not ugly! (All hail the show-bred Lab!)
I suppose that is why I was offended. :?
Besides, I think, generally speaking, show-bred Labs are "ugly." I find them so overdone that they lack the athletic appearance called for in the breed standard.
But that could be, just me. :?