Just a Dog: Understanding Animal Cruelty and Ourselves

Animals, Culture, and Society

by Arnold Arluke

In Just a Dog, Arnold Arluke argues that animal cruelty must be understood in terms of social relationships rather than an individual's psychological problem or personality disorder. Arluke situates cruelty in actual situations where groups of people decide, on their own terms, what constitutes the wrongful harm of animals and how best to communicate their understanding to others. He captures how law enforcement agents, shelter workers, humane marketers, the general public, and animal abusers (or neglecters), make sense of animal cruelty. In each case, cruelty's meaning reflects the practical, personal, and ideological concerns of these groups and the wider social and cultural confusion over the nature and significance of animals and their proper treatment. He shows that these divergent definitions are not mere reflections of the social world but are actively created and used by group members to achieve sought-after identities.

Genres: Nonfiction

232 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 2006

Reviews

[zoe jade · Rating 3 out of 5]

"We are all, in the end, as much a part of our mistreatment of animals as are animals themselves."

I read several chapters of this book for one of my classes last quarter and sought to complete the picture with this read. Unfortunately, the most interesting chapters (to me) were the ones that were assigned reading. In this class, Arluke was probably the most prolific author we read from, and his work was undeniably among my favorites; though—I will admit—I enjoyed his shorter pieces far more than this book as a whole. Thought-provoking and revealing, I have to give this book credit and admit my own enthusiasm for it as it is woven throughout—and provided much of the framework—for my final paper, and that counts for something.

[Louis · Rating 4 out of 5]

“A lot of calls we get are fake. These people, they don’t care about the dog, but they get mad at the guy next door and want to cause problems. Callers want agents to remedy problems unrelated to animal welfare and will lie or grossly exaggerate, claiming there is cruelty to get police intervention. Civil bullshit complaints also arise when animals are used as pawns in domestic struggles. Divorced couples, for example, who want to hurt each other by making false accusations of animal cruelty: “People don’t always have the best interest of the animal at heart. They have their own agenda when they call.”

“It’s difficult to explain to people that they should be caring for their animals in a certain way when they don’t care for themselves as good or any better than they do their animals. Or they don’t care for their kids any better than they do for their animals. And yet you’re trying to tell them, ‘You need to do this and you need to do that and you need to have all these stupid things for your animal,’ but yet they don’t have it for themselves or their kids. So if someone is living in squalor, you can’t expect them to give the dog a steak.
Should they be allowed to have a dog? Should we deprive them of their animals?”

“Vicious acts by children against animals are part of the process of interpretive reproduction. It is part of a larger process whereby identity emerges in adolescents as they appropriate adult culture. Animal abuse can be inspired by children’s interest in being like adults, particularly when what they do is forbidden. It is less about the animal than it is about making claims. Little destructive claims.”

“During the Great Depression in the United States, animal hoarding was a way to cope with the inability to obtain needed goods. A similar response to uncertainty and deprivation has been reported among those who withstand prolonged military invasion.”