Jesse Bering

With all the negative publicity surrounding pit bulls today, why would anyone choose to have this type of dog that triggers prejudice in many people’s minds? Both the dog and the owner are likely to suffer from the negative stereotypes others hold: killer and thug, respectively. I’m not proud of these bigoted associations, but I must say that, prior to writing this piece, when I thought “pit bull,” my mind immediately conjured up an Eminem soundtrack and naked lady mud flaps.

But that was then and this is now. Although I fully expected to write about pit bull owners being stunningly naive about the inborn characteristics of their own breed of choice, insisting on seeing these creatures as “blank slates” whose temperaments are infinitely malleable to suit their needs, having now read up on the recent literature in this area I have changed my mind.

What made me really begin to sympathize with the responsible pit bull owner was a 2000 case study published in Society & Animals by Hillary Twining, Arnold Arluke and Gary Patronek, a team of researchers from the Tufts Center for Animals and Public Policy. In this article, the authors collected anecdotes and stories from pit bull owners, demonstrating very clearly just how emotionally attached many people are to their pit bulls and conveying the lengths they must go in managing the stigma of having such an “outlaw” breed in a society that doesn’t understand. Twining and her co-authors note that when it comes to acquiring a pit bull:

On the one hand, some people might be drawn to this breed in the hope of exploiting and perpetuating its vicious reputation. Such owners seek to use their dogs as status symbols of power and aggression and to reap the secondary benefits of an intimidating persona. On the other hand, some people might see qualities in this breed that run contrary to its negative image and want to establish “traditional” human-dog relationships with their pit bulls. Nevertheless, they “inherit,” and presumably must contend with, adverse public perceptions of their pets.

The authors interpret these first-person anecdotes about “what it’s like having a pit bull” using the sociologist Erving Goffman’s “impression management” theoretical framework. For example, to “pass” in society as a pit bull owner, many people found themselves negotiating in some way with other members in society. This was usually to avoid confrontations, fear, and embarrassing social scenarios. The negative stereotypes of pit bulls were especially pronounced when children were involved. Nearly all pit bull owners interviewed for the study said that they used one or more of the following strategies to cope with the stigma of having this outlaw breed:

1.    Passing them as a breed other than a pit bull

“A lot of it depends on the people you meet ... If I see people [who are] very timid with dogs, a lot of times I’ll tell them [my dog] is an American bulldog, because he does look a lot like the picture of an American bulldog ... Sometimes we’ll just say—if they’re really afraid of dogs—we’ll say, ‘Oh, he’s a boxer mix.’”

2.    Denying that their dogs’ behavior is biologically predetermined

“My brother-in-law was telling my sister all the reasons why not to [get a pit bull]—you know, the horror stories. Yeah, they happen, but ... any dog could be that way if you train him and treat him that way.”