Dogs as a class marker

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anything Doodle screams ‘new money’ to me.

All American money is new money. Pretending otherwise is....pretentious.

Off topic. Move on or I will just start to report your posts.

I think you’re lumping different posters together.

[Anonymous]

Pitbulls are definitely the realm of a few groups. Inner city (guard my drugs), lower rural (fighting), and certain liberal educated people who feel sorry for them and their bad rap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sigh. No.

Horses, breeding and eventing, are the mark of the aristocracy. The Queen's corgis are a little fancy extra because she already has horses.

Dogs are the mark of the middle class. Historically they came into popularity as pets because the wealthy farmers and factory owners wanted success symbols that could fit into their homes, since they could not afford horses and the maintenance that went with them.

There is no upper or lower middle class when you consider that it's all just a grade above the working class and below the aristocracy.

Now if you delve into who owns which dogs, you get the crunchy left-leaning pseudo-educated who swear by shelter mutts and believe breeders are puppy mills, and the saner people who hold a particular breed in their heart. It doesn't matter which breed, because see above.

Interesting word salad.

I bet you have a set of weimaraners.

All grammatically correct, which is more than can be said for your contribution. I do not own that breed.

I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. And your grammar ain’t all that. As an apparent aristocracy expert, you should be introduced to the Oxford comma. I’m too low class to write good. I have a stray mutt.

[Anonymous]

I think having a dog at all is a sign of wealth. I’d like to get one some day but I’m not at a point where I can add dog walker expenses or kennel stays when I travel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pitbulls are definitely the realm of a few groups. Inner city (guard my drugs), lower rural (fighting), and certain liberal educated people who feel sorry for them and their bad rap.

Pitbulls are ubiquitous in my hipster, artsy neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

another icky "class-marker" thread? Very low class, Op.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:another icky "class-marker" thread? Very low class, Op.

Agreed. Sure sign of a full bred twit. Just screams stupidity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Sigh. No.

Horses, breeding and eventing, are the mark of the aristocracy. The Queen's corgis are a little fancy extra because she already has horses.

Dogs are the mark of the middle class. Historically they came into popularity as pets because the wealthy farmers and factory owners wanted success symbols that could fit into their homes, since they could not afford horses and the maintenance that went with them.

There is no upper or lower middle class when you consider that it's all just a grade above the working class and below the aristocracy.

Now if you delve into who owns which dogs, you get the crunchy left-leaning pseudo-educated who swear by shelter mutts and believe breeders are puppy mills, and the saner people who hold a particular breed in their heart. It doesn't matter which breed, because see above.

[Anonymous]

^^^

[Anonymous]

Wait, this messes up my Dcum fact that you are not upper middle class unless you earn over 300K. Define classes first, bcs according to you I am UPM, according to many Dcumers, I am positively low middle class! Yes, I own a Golden. He can catch a rabbit, does that make me "aristocracy wanna be?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cavalier King Charles dogs are always a favorite among my blue blooded, waspy, old money friends.

This is our beloved pooch - but we are new money Jews. So much for doggy stereotypes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think having a dog at all is a sign of wealth. I’d like to get one some day but I’m not at a point where I can add dog walker expenses or kennel stays when I travel.

Or you can be like us and never go anywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think having a dog at all is a sign of wealth. I’d like to get one some day but I’m not at a point where I can add dog walker expenses or kennel stays when I travel.

Or you can be like us and never go anywhere.

I mostly travel for work. Not rich

[Anonymous]

Not sure where rescue mutts factor in to the class equation. But that is what we have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cavalier King Charles dogs are always a favorite among my blue blooded, waspy, old money friends.

This is our beloved pooch - but we are new money Jews. So much for doggy stereotypes

Our dog too. And our HHI is $140,000 which is poor by DCUM standards.