i am a little confused!

Get to know other Positively members here.

Moderators: emmabeth, BoardHost

Post Reply
**liz**
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:55 am
Location: Gloucestershire, England

i am a little confused!

Post by **liz** »

Hi all,

I dont want to start a big debate here but i have been using this site for 2 months or so and a couple of times i have come across a post that will say things like ' you dont have to be dominate over your dog'
The word dominate mean to be in charge, make rules and govern! why would people not want to get there dog to understand who is in charge!? i am very confused as i thought that this would be the best thing you could do for an animal that is in human society to keep them safe and happy!

I am not trying to cause offence to anyone nor am i trying to be disrespectful by writing this post!
KayaKoyuWalker
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 4:57 pm

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by KayaKoyuWalker »

It's the difference between dominating by aggression or by guile.

You'll see many dogs who obey commands because they are in fear of the consequences of not doing so.

Positive training results in a dog who follows an owner's commands because it wants to.
"The more I see of man, the more I like dogs." - Mme. de Staël
User avatar
***Melissa***
Posts: 1026
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:30 am
Location: Mafikeng, South Africa

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by ***Melissa*** »

**liz** wrote:' you dont have to be dominate over your dog'
This comes from the dominance theory, which is based on your dog seeing you as part of his pack - in other words thinking you are a dog too, and nog a human. (To my understanding anyway)

Here is a link to an article on Dominance Theory vs Positive Reinforcement: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=600

With positive reinforcement you focus on the positive side, set your dog up for success, reward behaviour you want (while allowing him to be "a dog") and ignore negative behaviour.

BUT, you are still "in charge" meaning that you can still decide (in reasonable terms) what you want your dog to do and what not. You still teach him and he still listen to you. And you still need to be consistent. It's just the way to achieve all that is not by confusing / hurting him, but by rewarding behaviour you want.

Hope I'm making sense :D
There is no psychiatrist in the world like a puppy licking your face. ~Ben Williams
User avatar
***Melissa***
Posts: 1026
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:30 am
Location: Mafikeng, South Africa

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by ***Melissa*** »

Oh, something else I just thought of...

I think the word "dominance" can be interpreted in different ways, which can cause confusion, but because of the "dominance theory" and all the damage it's done to dogs, people on here are usually very clear that "dominance" (as in dominance theory) is not the way to go.
There is no psychiatrist in the world like a puppy licking your face. ~Ben Williams
**liz**
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:55 am
Location: Gloucestershire, England

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by **liz** »

thanks for replying to my post! i understand and agree that to be dominent in an agressive and violent way is deffinatley not the way to treat or train a dog!
The reason for the post was to try and understand in what way people who have dogs and train dogs view the word 'dominence'!

thanks!
x
User avatar
Mattie
Posts: 5872
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:21 am

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by Mattie »

To many people dominant means forcing someone or a dog to do what they want which is why we keep clear of the word, there are other words that will do the job, leader, parent, etc. I prefer to lead my dogs to do what I want by setting them up to succeed, they are my friends and partners but I have the final say. :lol:
[url=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/Nethertumbleweed/PIXIE.jpg][img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/Nethertumbleweed/th_PIXIE.jpg[/img][/url]
jacksdad
Posts: 4887
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:48 pm

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by jacksdad »

because of a lot of misunderstanding around the correct use/definition of the word dominate in how it relates to dogs and dog packs, a lot of people do and think some not so constructive (shall we say) things to/with their dogs. Our dogs do need us to be the leader because we KNOW the rules of living in a human world. They don't unless we teach and lead them. But being the leader/teacher doesn't mean we have to rule with an iron fist and never listen to our dogs and be on the look out for them to try and take over. Which is often how those who view the dog/human relationship though purely a dominate /submissive view point interpret behavior.

reality is, the dog isn't trying to take over, it is just living life by dog rules until taught otherwise.

So in a admittedly over simplified summery.

people who view the dog human dynamic using the common definition of Dominate (ie who is in control, which is actually the wrong definition) tend to end up punishing a dog for not knowing the rules of living in the human world. And end up using a catch all interpretation for any unwanted/undesirable behaviors on the part of the dog.

people who use the positive reinforcement method rather then wait to correct a "wrong", try and bet the dog to the "punch" and teach what we do what our dogs to do in a given situation, making it worth the dogs time to listen and learn. there is also a greater tendency to listen to what the dog is trying to tell you in this line of thinking as well.

Both approaches technically require the human to be the leader/final say. But which type of leader would you want?
emmabeth
Posts: 8894
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: West Midlands
Contact:

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by emmabeth »

Yep - its to do wtih peoples perception of the world really.

Most of the trainers who use the word 'dominant' or with regard to dog behaviour, actually mean 'attempting to become dominant', which of course the dog is not.. hes attempting to earn some form of reward that he has learned may well result from his actions - ie pulling on the lead. Dominant? nope. Gets to the park quicker, yep!

Some dogs do dominate their owners lives - mine sure as heck do - I work from home, moderating this forum and making dog collars and leads for dogs, my life, my job, my house even, have come about or were bought in the case of the house, with my dogs in mind, so sure... my dogs dominate my life, but this is the crucial part - they did not choose to do th at. I chose that.

Some dogs dominate their owners lives in unhealthy ways - they cant cope alone and so trash the place when left, they are fearful of other dogs and so react aggressively, they have learned because of some human action, that they need to defend themselves using growling and have found that this works.. These things can dominate an owners life, but did the dog set out to do that intentionally - no. So he did not seek this out, he didnt start out with an ulterior motive, again the owners actions (or in some cases the previous owner), have allowed this to occur.

Most trainers who use the word dominant with regard to human behaviour - actually and effectively mean 'bully and frighten'. That you can be the dominant element in someones life without doing that is not being debated here, the problem lies in the fact that these trainers who use this word in this way MEAN 'force, punish, threaten, bully', with physical contact and aggressive threatening body language.

For example, they claim a dog lying in a doorway is dominating you because he is controlling where you go in the house. The prescribed remedy for this is often to purposely walk at and INTO the dog over and over, no matter where he lays until he automatically moves himself out of your way wherever you are.

To my mind (and ill be blunt here as its the end of my day and I need to sleep) - thats codswallop. Dogs lie in doorways not to control, but to monitor - to an anxious dog knowing where everyone is, knowing people cannot come in or go out without him knowing about it makes him feel safer. To then bully this anxious dog by purposefully threatenign to step on him and knocking into him constantly, wherever he lays is neither kind, nor is it going to build his confidence in himself or in you. Sure, he may move out of your way like lightning - but does he trust and respect you? Heck no!

I ask my dogs to move if i want them to move - if i dont mind i step over them. They trust me that i wont stand on them and thats a big deal to me, having someone stand over you even for a few seconds, for a dog is a BIG deal, it shows me my dogs are relaxed and happy around me and each other. Thats what I want from a dog, not some on edge antsy creature not knowing when im going to start randomly bullying him next, leaping out of my way in fear.

I havent yet come across a dog trainer who uses the terms 'hes being dominant' or 'you need to dominate him' who DOES NOT mean 'punish, frighten, challenge, force' by that. Not once.
West Midlands based 1-2-1 Training & Behaviour Canine Consultant
User avatar
Mattie
Posts: 5872
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:21 am

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by Mattie »

emmabeth wrote: Some dogs do dominate their owners lives - mine sure as heck do - I work from home, moderating this forum and making dog collars and leads for dogs, my life, my job, my house even, have come about or were bought in the case of the house, with my dogs in mind, so sure... my dogs dominate my life, but this is the crucial part - they did not choose to do th at. I chose that.
I prefer to say my life revolves round my dogs, when I was looking for a house it had to have a suitable garden with plenty of decent walks round about, it had to have room for me being able to seperate dogs if necessary because sometimes I foster. I bought a caravan so we could all go away on holiday, it was one of the best things I ever did, we all enjoy discovering different places.

In a way they do dominate my life, but it is more of my life revolving round my dogs.
[url=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/Nethertumbleweed/PIXIE.jpg][img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/Nethertumbleweed/th_PIXIE.jpg[/img][/url]
thepennywhistle
Posts: 669
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:20 pm

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by thepennywhistle »

KayaKoyuWalker wrote:It's the difference between dominating by aggression or by guile.

You'll see many dogs who obey commands because they are in fear of the consequences of not doing so.

Positive training results in a dog who follows an owner's commands because it wants to.

Damn, that sounds like my employer, whose management technique is pretty much the epitome
of dominance training. Rather like the quote from the Princess Bride movie. "Thank you, Wesley.
Good job. I'll most likely kill you in the morning." If that sort of training makes my dogs feel toward
me the way I feel toward my employer, which is wary at best, resentful most of the time, and expecting
the worst always, I would cry buckets, then find them a better place to live.

I knew that I did not like 'dominance' training, but thank you for making the empathy lightbulb of
understanding go off.

Skye (who is still glad to have a paycheck) and the white collies
thepennywhistle
Posts: 669
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:20 pm

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by thepennywhistle »

thepennywhistle wrote:If that sort of training makes my dogs feel towardme the way I feel toward my employer, which is wary at best, resentful most of the time, and expecting the worst always, I would cry buckets, then find them a better place to live.
Oops. Did not make myself very clear there. :oops:

What I meant was if I was using a training technique that made my dogs feel like toward me that
I'd be devastated. Thankfully, I am not, and I'm fairly confident that they like me :)
emmabeth
Posts: 8894
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:24 pm
Location: West Midlands
Contact:

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by emmabeth »

I do have every reason to believe that this is how dogs do feel - wary, distrustful, fearful, trying their damndest to avoid *whatever*..

The other human comparison that can be drawn, and I tend not to that often as its scary, quite honestly (and tends to make supporters of the method get extremely defensive)..

Is that of an abusive human relationship - where one partner controls the other partners life - without apparent reason things are punished, often wayyyyyyyyyy out of proportion to the 'crime' if one can even be identified which often it cannot.

One partner then constantly seeks to avoid this punishment yet still doesnt entirely know what it is that earns the punishment - just like the dog who is trained by being punished for the wrong thing rather than shown and set up to do the right thing.

It breed fear, confusion, hatred, distrust, anxiety... in humans, and yet many people still stay in abusive relationships because they do still love, and can see no other option than stay with, the person who is abusing them.

In the same way, I see dogs who clearly distrust, are wary and watchful and avoiding punishment without ever realllllllly being 100% clear what it is they are supposed to do or not do, but one kind word and they are all over their owner who they love - because they know nothing else and have no other option.

When you can see that it IS the same thing, it breaks your heart to think that people set out to choose to train animals this way, to choose to show others how to do this ..

Interesting, whilst I am pondering at this hour of the day - people who are bullied/abused/dominated by someone... will often freak out in the end - normal, gentle people, who are constantly squashed down by others, are primed to seek ways to undermine, overthrow, avoid, decieve... from the mild disgruntled employee who steals stationary from the office or the cafe employee who spits in the gropey guys coffee, to the bullied kids who take a gun into school or the abused person who beats their abusive partner to death with a golf club...

The people who train dogs by punishment and fear... some of these do wind up with dogs who seek to fight back, take any chance to fight back that they perceive, and they dont realise it is their methods causing it. It is usually those people with high drive high energy incredibly sharp working Sheperds, Malinois etc that seem to need to keep a cast iron control and complete and rigid domination over their dogs... which they state one needs to do with all dogs - I suspect they need to do this because of the way they train and nothing more.

Horrible isnt it!
West Midlands based 1-2-1 Training & Behaviour Canine Consultant
User avatar
Mattie
Posts: 5872
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:21 am

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by Mattie »

thepennywhistle wrote: Damn, that sounds like my employer, whose management technique is pretty much the epitome
of dominance training. Rather like the quote from the Princess Bride movie. "Thank you, Wesley.
Good job. I'll most likely kill you in the morning." If that sort of training makes my dogs feel toward
me the way I feel toward my employer, which is wary at best, resentful most of the time, and expecting
the worst always, I would cry buckets, then find them a better place to live.

I knew that I did not like 'dominance' training, but thank you for making the empathy lightbulb of
understanding go off.

Skye (who is still glad to have a paycheck) and the white collies
Employers like that are bullies, I was bullied a lot as a child by several others, one day I got so fed up with it I turned on one of them, I can still see the shock on her face :lol: Once I stood up to her the others never bothered me again either.

Many people who train by dominance are bullies, they love the control that bullying give them, if dogs do retaliate they are usually beaten and pts. Taking on a dog that has been treated like this is heartbreaking but very rewarding to see them change and develop.
[url=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/Nethertumbleweed/PIXIE.jpg][img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/Nethertumbleweed/th_PIXIE.jpg[/img][/url]
jacksdad
Posts: 4887
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:48 pm

Re: i am a little confused!

Post by jacksdad »

emmabeth wrote: The other human comparison that can be drawn, and I tend not to that often as its scary, quite honestly (and tends to make supporters of the method get extremely defensive)..

Is that of an abusive human relationship - where one partner controls the other partners life - without apparent reason things are punished, often wayyyyyyyyyy out of proportion to the 'crime' if one can even be identified which often it cannot.

One partner then constantly seeks to avoid this punishment yet still doesn't entirely know what it is that earns the punishment - just like the dog who is trained by being punished for the wrong thing rather than shown and set up to do the right thing.

It breed fear, confusion, hatred, distrust, anxiety... in humans, and yet many people still stay in abusive relationships because they do still love, and can see no other option than stay with, the person who is abusing them.
This is an extremely good analogy. The damage done by this type of chaos can not be overstated. Nor can it ever truly be 100% undone.
Post Reply