I think that this article does a good job of highlighting, and it really should have been the center focus of the article, the problematic term “pit bull”. The

I think that this article does a good job of highlighting, and it really should have been the center focus of the article, the problematic term “pit bull”. The article points out that the term “pit bull” is used for several breeds that aren’t actually “pit bull” and goes on to discuss an anecdote of an animal shelter employee who discouraged a potential adopter from going towards a potentially good match with a dog labeled “pit bull”. There is a lot of negative stigma around the “pit bull” family of breeds, probably for a lot of good reasons. How many apartment complexes these days outright refuse to allow dogs of this family? I’m willing to bet it’s over 50% in some areas. But what the article points out, and it’s an important lesson, is that there is a lot of variance between dogs of the same breed, such that breed isn’t as important as people make it out to be. I think it will be a long time before society comes to that same conclusion, however. For a long time, I have always deeply despised the yearly dog show, and had several reasons for it, but haven’t really been able to voice my feelings into a coherent narrative. This article does a great job of doing just that. By compartmentalizing dogs into breeds that supposedly exhibit personality traits, aren’t we limiting the way we view dogs in general?