Animals, Society and Culture

1. Animals, Society and Culture Lecture 8: Cultures of masculinity 2013-14

2. Lecture outline • Myth of ‘man the hunter’ – changing ideas of masculinity and links between violence and masculinity. • The association of hunting with power and status and how this is gendered. • The phenomenon of status dogs and dog fighting and its association with marginal masculinities, in Connell’s terms, subordinate masculinities.

3. Man the hunter • ‘Success in the hunt hinged on a lust for killing, at least among men’ (Bulliet, 2005:13). • ‘Ethnographic studies concerned with hunting practices suggest that very few people ‘enjoy’ the kill’ (Hurn, 2012: 181). • the rituals surrounding ‘the hunting practices of traditional hunter-gatherer communities governed by animistic beliefs serves to alleviate the guilt associated with killing another living thing, as well as to appease the animal spirits’ (Hurn, 2012: 181).

4. The hunting hypothesis • Hunting and eating of meat made humans into cultural beings • ‘Hunting is… an armed confrontation between the human world and the untamed wilderness, between culture and nature; and it has been defined and praised and attacked in those terms throughout Western history, from antiquity onward’ (Cartmill, 2007: 238). • Western definition of hunting, relies on separation of nature and culture

5. The hunting hypothesis challenged • ‘all humans were the by-products of a single cultural legacy – organised hunting. Group hunting with weapons demonstrated the human (or more specifically male) ability to overcome biological limitations, such as lack of fangs and claws, and create culture for the first time’ (Kheel, 2008: 72). • Hunting hypothesis challenged by new interpretation of fossil evidence of proto-human violence. • Puncture wounds on animal bones hadn’t been inflicted by ‘bone-wielding killer apes’ but by ‘leopards, lions, and hyenas’ (Kheel, 2008: 73) • Early hominids were scavengers, eating leftovers of real predators. So evidence now supports idea that it was early humans’ experience as prey rather than predator, that influenced human development. (Kheel, 2008: 73). • Marti Kheel (2008) Nature Ethics, Rowman and Littlefield

6. Initiation rites • In patriarchal society men separate themselves from women through second birth • Involves violence towards nature, separation from sphere of women, killing an animal • Killing an animal marks a boy’s passage into manhood, hunting also explains the origins of culture

7. Masculinity • Manliness • Masculinity • Masculinist / masculinism • Masculine traits opposed to those considered female • Rationality, universality, autonomy counterposed to non-rationality, particularity, dependence

8. Power, status and gender • Hegemonic form of hunting is recreational hunting – preserve of elites • Opposed to subsistence hunting – merely biological • Dual purpose • Symbolic display of class superiority • Educational programme for men

9. Sports hunting in US • Associated with conservation • Lower classes and immigrants blamed for destruction of wildlife • Sports hunting associated with particular classed and raced masculinity • Self control and mastery – of nature and of subordinate social groups

10. Hunting in Britain • Hunting upper class sport • Relied on patronage of landowners • Fox-hunting dominated by landowners and rural gentry • Cult of masculinity • Animals pursued have masculine qualities of aggression, courage, vigour, strength, cunning, fighting spirit

11. Hunting in the Netherlands • ‘Hunters, mostly men, measure their strength or cunning by comparing themselves to their animal competitors. For this reason, sportsmen prefer those animals which behave like an equal (human) opponent – a male wearing ‘weapons’ and fighting back. Their opponents become enemies as shooting is a metaphor of warfare.’ (Dahles, 1993:6)

12. Status dogs • Media coverage of status dogs as the ‘new weapons’ • Moral panic about young, working class men with status dogs • ‘a status dog is an aggressive or illegal dangerous dog used to intimidate or convey status or authority, with the corollary that such dogs are often (but not exclusively) bull breeds owned or handled by young men in deprived urban areas’ (Harding, 2012:42)

13. Unleashed: The phenomena of status dogs and weapon dogs • analysis of the media, documentary sources (relating to the topic of dangerous dogs) and the internet • participant observation in parks and interviews with dog walkers • interviews with professionals working with dogs; professionals, residents and gang-affiliated young people in Lambeth; and with owners/handlers of aggressive breeds (which he defines as bull breeds, including cross-breeds, mastiffs and legally proscribed dangerous dogs) (Harding, 2012:12) • focus groups

14. Moral panic? • Decline of traditional, male, working-class jobs • Inability to achieve status through getting a job, marriage, family • Achieve masculine status by getting large, ‘aggressive’ dogs • Moral panic about young, unemployed, working-class men symbolised in panic over status /weapon dogs

15. Why do people get status dogs? • Pet or companion • Protection • Status • Fashion • Entrepreneurship • Image and Identity

16. Image and identity • Status dogs enable young men to gain recognition and respect in space of the street • ‘Violence and aggression are tools available to young men for them to display their masculinity. When the ‘concentration of disadvantage’ highlights their lack of status or success, they use the resources of violence, intimidation and aggression to both display and construct their masculine identity’ (Harding, 2012: 81).

17. Reputation and protection • ‘Them boys in tower blocks who chain roll dogs, it’s a reputation thing and protection thing, you can’t do nuffink to me, ’cos I got a big dog. The main reason to have a pitbull is to make money from it. The boys in tower blocks are not making money, it’s just for reputation and status really. To make sure no-one goes near ’em. But the dogs often end up starving or abandoned.’ (professional dog fighter)

18. Violence and respect • Being in control of a status dog indicates that you can unleash potential violence (Harding, 2012: 85). • Gives you a reputation – which dogs can then defend by fighting if necessary. • On the street a status dog can be used to maintain control. • A response to disrespect is to fight – exhibit masculine qualities of ‘bravado, hardness, physical courage’.

19. Body image and physicality • Bodily capital created by hard manual work, weight lifting, boxing • Status dog becomes embodiment of this enhanced physicality. Young men control a breed of animal reputed for its violence, virility and strength. These attributes transferred onto the handler of the dog. Even better if the dog is legally defined as dangerous or illegal. • Dogs often full members of the gang – are family or blood. Loyalty to owners and gang rewarded through diamond-studded collars and thick chains. • ‘Stigmatised dogs, such as American pitbulls, also fit with stigmatised communities and subcultures.’ (88)

20. Gender • Interviews with owners of status dogs – 33 (16 white, 13 Black, 4 Asian), two thirds male, one third female. • Only 2 kept their dogs solely as companions. • Most of those keeping them for protection were women (5 out of 7) and aged between 28 and 60. • Only 5 of the 21 who kept them for status were women – all were under 18 – men had wider age range, 16 -30 years. • Overwhelmingly men who use dogs for breeding and/or fighting.

21. Dog fighting • Allows validation of masculine identities • Sport emphasising aggression and violence • Associated with subordinated masculinities • Proximity to danger, accident and death • Performance of violence and carnival, transgressive

22. Three types of fighting • Chain rolling • Hobbyists • Professional fighting • ‘It’s usually pits against pits. A good dog, a big pit, will weight eight stone. They match ’em for weight. There is the referee who takes the money and sets it up. Once you go there, like in a car park or a secluded place, you see how it works. They set up a fight pit with barriers. It’s quite nasty to see, actually. If it’s not your dog, it’s better.’ (Harding, 2012:167)

23. Summary • Different cultures of masculinity associated with status dogs/ dog fighting and hunting • Status dogs – working class, ethnic minority – subordinated masculinities • Hunting – elite masculinities associated with deer hunting (US) fox hunting (UK), subordinated masculinities associated with other types of hunting • Hunting to do with assertion of control – over animals and over the animal within (animal passions) • Status dogs about control of the street • Masculinity, status and power expressed through combination of violence and control – mastery over animals and other human beings