I agree with oakview again. Our family has had Shorthorns since 1903, with the purebred herd started in 1917 by my grandfather. When he purchased his first purebreds, they were called Durham Shorthorns, but eventually they dropped the Durham from the breed name.
I also agree about the misconceptions that still exist about Shorthorns. Recently, a long time breeder of another breed commented to me, that he really liked many of the Shorthorns he was seeing now, but it was too bad they had that greasy fat that the packers dislike. I looked at him wondering if he was just trying to make a joke, but he was dead serious. I said to him that I thought fat was fat, to which he said" Oh now, Shorthorns have a different type of fat that is real greasy and hard for the packers to deal with". I have no idea where this crap gets started. I told him that I would stand my Shorthorn carcasses beside his Polled Hereford carcasses any day.
I am old enough to remember the Shorthorns of the 60s and I cringe a bit when I see some breeders using semen from any sire they can find from that era. Yes, there were some pretty good bulls back then, and they can be very useful when combined with today's genetics, but the biggest majority of the cattle in that era were bad then... and they are bad now... and they should be forgot for the rest of history. I also remember how long it took us to correct the problems of that time, including adding some frame size, and I wonder why some breeders want to go back there.