 |
This is a place to gain some understanding of dog behavior and to assist people in training their dogs and dealing with common behavior problems, regardless of the method(s) used. This can cover the spectrum from non-aversive to traditional methods of dog training. There are many ways to train a dog. Please avoid aggressive responses, and counter ideas and opinions with which you don't agree with friendly and helpful advice. Please refrain from submitting posts that promote off-topic discussions. Keep in mind that you may be receiving advice from other dog owners and lovers... not professionals. If you have a major problem, always seek the advice of a trainer or behaviorist!
|   |
 |
 |
 |
 |
ARCHX Asher,- RL1X, RL2X,- RL3
Learning is- changing what we- do
 |
 | | Barked: Tue Jun 30, '09 7:13pm PST | |  | |  | | And again, the issue becomes what "dominance" is.
There are many ways to define a word, but when one is discussing animal behavior, dominance is not the same as leadership. There is a very specific definition of dominance and it does include social hierarchies.
Tiller, you are right. Traditional training in the William Kohler/Conrad Most style were NOT dominance based. They did have a "Do it or face the consequences" type of philosphy but still, they were advanced for their time.
The whole dominance idea did not come about till The Monks of New Skeete wrote their book, including such popular moves as the Dominance Down and the Alpha Wolf Roll. There book was based on those poorly contrived wolf studies in the 40's and 50's.
The whole idea of dominance stems from those studies, and, those studies, flawed as they were, used Social Dominance. Social Dominance is a hierarchy established by fighting or displaying behavior that results in a ranking of the animals in a group that is linked to priority access to resources.
This is NOT the same as leadership. Good leadership does not have to be reinterated by every trip through a doorway, position in every walk, and forcing obedience in every situation.
One can define it however one wants to, but when one is dealing with behavior, one simply can not apply a layman's definition of a technical term.
BTW, Calming behaviors are self directed. Appeasement behaviors are directed at others and are not submissive behaviors, but rather behaviors used to diffuse a situation.
And no, I do not feel I ever dominated my children. I provided leadership, reinforced good choices, punished poor choices and hoped for the best. |  |  | |  |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaya
All you need is- love :)
|
| | Barked: Tue Jun 30, '09 7:14pm PST | | | | | | Hehe... ah, I see...
But I am not sure that is QUITE what Asher meant? I could be wrong. But I think she means that the concept of Dominance as portrayed by Cesar is meme. Again, it really does come down to interpretation of the word... but unfortunately, the word dominance has been, shall we say, ruined by the likes of the foot tapping, dog hanging, alpha rolling concepts of TV stars. They misinterpret it... I will never deny the concept of benevolent leader... I like order in society  But I see it all too much around me... people choking the crap out of their dogs (I am not talking a leash pop, which I don't intentionally do - I am human though, but I see down right choking and hanging), pinning puppies for jumping on them to play because they were interpreted as being dominant aggressive (at 4 months old!), or using a "beat stick" (rolled up newspaper) to scare the bejeezus out of their dogs to get them to stop barking. Now I know YOU don't do these things. You are obviously way more well versed in dogs than the average Joe though (which I am surrounded by BOL) I am talking about people that don't dogster, don't research dogs, because they know it all already (in their minds) and base their theories on dominance and a hurt them before they hurt you attitude.
I think articles like this need to get out to the general public to counteract some of the damage the likes of Cesar and the Monks have done (and I DO actually see the value of his work to some extent... he has saved dogs, though IMO there would be better and just as effective ways) but unintentionally put many others at risk due to naive (in some cases) viewers.
ETA - I see Asher beat me to it...Edited by author Tue Jun 30, '09 7:15pm PST
| | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaya
All you need is- love :)
|
| | Barked: Tue Jun 30, '09 7:32pm PST | | | | | | Nope... just talking about the danger the concept of dominance has created among many dog owners... I agree it started with the monks... Cesar is just the popular icon of the day... it doesn't have all that much to do with him, he just didn't help the situation... this is a thread the article, claiming the number of dogs coming in with issues because people felt dominance = physical power over their dogs... harsh responses to their dogs behaviors, escalating issues... though YOU know that is not what the word dominance is supposed to mean, obviously many do not, so it becomes a dangerous word.
Personally, for the average dog owner, (not going to touch the idea of working dogs, because I have "pets") shouldn't be using dominance outside what can be achieved through concepts like NILIF or pos R training. I don't think the average Joe should even be attempting many of the things the Monks do (lets make it about them instead  ). You can tell people until you are blue in the face that things like alpha rolling should only be done by a professional, but they are still going to do it, because they think they have skills like that. Your take on dominance (an mine if we mean "leadership") can be achieved through non aversive methods which unskilled, as well as many skilled, dog handlers should only be doing.
Do you get what I am saying or am I rambling LOL... I am not totally disagreeing with you... I am just keeping in mind many people do not have the same understanding that dominance is supposed to mean leadership not physical dominance. | | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cain
"Strength and- Honor"
|
| | Barked: Tue Jun 30, '09 10:07pm PST | | | | | | "...though YOU know that is not what the word dominance is supposed to mean, obviously many do not, so it becomes a dangerous word. "
So what word would be an appropriate one? How to tell the 'masses' that are being referred to that dominance does not equate overpowering? Nobody I know that trains in the 'traditional' spectrum would consider alpha rolling a dog - WAY too dangerous for the types of dogs being worked with - and equally ineffective.
"Appeasement behaviors are directed at others and are not submissive behaviors, but rather behaviors used to diffuse a situation. "
YOU say TOMAYTO, and I say TOMAHTO....
 | | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Becky RNCL
I support DSL on- Dogster!
|
| | Barked: Tue Jun 30, '09 11:52pm PST | | | | | | On a regular basis I hear stories about people who were instructed by "professionals" (trainers, vets, techs etc) to enforce "dominance" over their dogs in various ways. I hear the word "alpha" used inncorrectly almost every day. Just because there are educated trainers on Dogster who use "dominance" ideals to train, doesn't mean that the widespread concept of using dominance to train and manage your dog is not doing damage to huge numbers of dog/human relationships. And if it's not Cesar Milan, it's the huge number of wannabes out there parading as educated dog trainers. | | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiller- (Skansen's- Ira in the M
Too Much Is- Never- Enough...I'm A- Giant! |
| | Barked: Wed Jul 1, '09 12:37am PST | | | | | | Agreed, Becky, but part of the way to underscore the wrongness is to educate how it is done right. I mean, I have heard "the crank-n-yank Koehler" style, which is some bizarre irony in that Koehler would have slapped a crank-and-yanker silly....constant, repetitive corrections abraded him and were lectured against in his very training ideology. I have certainly used that in real life example....finding a heavy handed handler raving about their Koehler trainer, then showing them his text and having them think twice. I think overlooked in these debates, particularly when they occur in the training community generally, is that there are a heck of a lot of people who simply want a fast and effective way to train their dog with which they can easily relate. Sometimes, asking them to redefine their world as they know it is asking way too much. Helping them to assess the quality of their individual trainer is often more productive. Even if someone feels they need to be "dominant," there are ways it can be done effectively and humanely. Sometimes, you are going to end up making that choice - is it for the training ideology you believe in, or is it the future of the dog you are staring at? As someone in rescue, I know which side I often fall on, and will say that two of my best adopters somehow brought something good out of CM. That they adored him but talked smart, compassionate training in their interview was good enough for me, and subsequently more than good enough for their dogs....one of whom was a chronically shy girl with no popping or alpha rolling on her agenda. Edited by author Wed Jul 1, '09 12:39am PST
| | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
My Account
