A key question for me as I began investigating the phenomenon of status dogs was why is this occurring? What motivates young men to obtain aggressive dogs, or to obtain a placid puppy and train it to be deliberately aggressive? This chapter considers the motivations of owners by first establishing a typology of motivations. Second, it draws on sociological and criminological theories to help us understand why some people feel the need to boost their status and why dogs may fit this purpose – for example, for use as gang dogs (dogs used by one or more gang members exclusively within the context of the gang or weapons dogs. Finally, it considers the characteristics of owners and the general influence of cultural imagery.

Chapter Five sets out the extensive primary research that underpins these arguments, but suffice to say for the moment that extensive interviews permitted identification of some common groupings. Analysis of these interviews permitted construction of a broad typology of motivations for ownership of aggressive breeds (working dogs, for example, farm dogs, were not included). The typology of motivations for ownership is shown in Table 4.1. The motivational details of those owning dogs as pets or family companions are not further investigated here and the focus is rather on the motivations for owning status dogs.

What this typology tells us is that owners acquire and use aggressive breeds for a variety of reasons. This suggests a spectrum of ownership, where owners use dogs for different functional purposes in different situations (even among those using dogs to convey status).

A motivational spectrum suggests the operation of different social domains or social fields; for example, using a dog to acquire status is probably more relevant to gang-affiliated young men than to a family of five in a leafy suburb. So just what are these different social domains/fields and why and how is status achieved or acquired? These issues are examined before establishing how and why aggressive dogs fit into this picture, by employing the theoretical perspectives of French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu (1986; 1991).

Different social fields

Bourdieu developed a theory of practice by considering the relationships formed between individuals and society (Bourdieu, 1990). He argued that social groups or domains (fields) sit in a broad social landscape where relative positions are a function of class and power.