# dominance, leadership and respect



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

continuing conversation from another thread

***********************************************
SuperG said in another thread
***********************************************

---Quote (Originally by lalachka)---
I just don't believe that every problem a dog has arises from the dog fighting for rank. *I completely agree*

we have to be like good parents, fair, consistent, loving.* *I agree again.*

the dog needs to understand that we control their resources and respect us.* *I mostly disagree...if controlling their resources means feeding them, watering them and exercising them then any individual would have total "respect" of their dog and there would be no problems to any degree. Personally, I believe it is leadership which makes the bigger difference in the relationship and condones the desired behavior we are attempting to create. Yes, having the upper hand in controlling the rewards for proper behavior has merit to it but it is but a stepping stone and small part of the overall process to reach the level where the dog "respects" their particular human. The "leadership" of which I speak is created by the superior intelligence a human supposedly has over the dog amongst other human qualities. Simply, if we shun our responsibility to "control" or provide a dog's resources, the dog would simply die over a period of time or become so unruly, most would give up on the do
*g. Being
* one step ( if not two or three ) ahead of a dog via our intelligence is what cements the leadership which dogs crave for...however if there is no leadership by the human or an ample amount based on the dog's requirement then the dog need not "respect" their human because the dog will provide it's version of leadership to fill the void.* *
---End Quote---
*I am making an assumption of what you mean by "resources"


SuperG

***********************************************
end quote

***********************************************


you assumed correct, that's what I meant however you bring an interesting point. since all owners control the resources then there's something else to it that makes one dog respect their owner and another not. 
I originally thought it's being fair and consistent but there might be more to it. 

first of all, what's respect? how do I know whether my dog respects me or not?

and second, if you're right and it's our superior intelligence then I wonder how a dog picks up on it. we only see in others what we possess ourselves (not my thought, I think it's schopenhauer and it's a loose quote)* 
meaning (the way I understand it) that let's say someone is really good in math, like PhD good. and I only know that 2 +2=4. I can only gauge that person's abilities to the extent of him knowing that 2+2=4 because that's all I understand. I don't know how much is 3+3 and there's no way for me to know whether 6 is the right answer so I can't gauge his knowledge.* 

it's been years since I read it, I'm sure I butchered his thought but do you see what I mean?

so for dogs to gauge our intelligence they have to possess it. they don't so on what level do you think they pick up on it?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I think there's something to this. 
excuse the philosophical stuff on a dog forum, I'm really interested in the 'how' and 'why' behind everything.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

"Dominance" by all too many, simply means brawn and a physical upper hand...imho...this description of "dominance" is but a sliver of the big picture and if solely relied upon, one would have a submissive scared dog which will end up a complete mess. To dominate any creature ( including humans ) via brute force WILL accomplish the mission ..if the goal is simply to control an entity which capitulates to an iron fist...however that is not our goal and a dog living in fear is not our pursuit.

Also, humans are no different than dogs to a great degree when it comes to dominance ( the desire to seek a dominant leader or to be the dominant leader )....as humans we find comfort and ease when a strong, fair, motivated and wise leader is at the helm versus an environment where the supposed "leader" has little if any merit which does not instill in us that they are a quality/competent leader. Imagine yourself on a airplane and the aircraft starts to go through unusual attitudes and motions and the captain comes on the P.A. and asks if anyone aboard might be able to help out with the piloting of the aircraft. The "captains" of life need to be dominant in a sense that they convey their abilities with confidence, precision and consistent positive results where all benefit from their intelligence, experience and leadership. Many of us have been dominated by another's intellect with no brute force required.

Anyway, a very simple example of using our human intelligence to show leadership to a dog and gain dominance/respect is when I was training my current dog an extended down/stay. I would place her on a down/stay out in the yard and then go inside and watch her from a position where she could not see me. The moment she started to budge, I would either come out into view and verbally or using a hand signal correct her. I then took this a bit further and simply left a window open so she could hear the correction but never see me. Now, is this amazing intellect on the behalf of the human?? LOL, I think not but to the dog, it had to leave her scratching her head as to how I could be so aware of her conduct while not being visible. I simply outwitted her using simple tools which all humans have and in doing as such gained a slight upper hand. Hopefully, my dog believes that I always have an "eye" on her even if she cannot see or scent me.

Don't know if this made any sense...but what the heck, it's a wonderful mystery as to what goes through a dog's head and my guess is as good as yours.

SuperG


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

lol yes that's a cool example)))))) so you think things like this is what makes them respect us?

also, how do you know a dog respects its owner? like what do you think are the signs?

ETA the aircraft was also a good example, thank you. that helped me visualize something.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

lalachka said:


> also, how do you know a dog respects its owner? like what do you think are the signs?


That's a good question since the word "respect" might not be the best term for this topic we are theorizing about....but I guess it will work. 

I sense that I have more of my dog's "respect" as the synergy increases and what used to be a chore with the dog has evolved into an effortless team activity. An example...a while back as I was simply trying to master the basic walk with my dog, I asked for advice on this forum. At this point my dog had the heel down and didn't forge but her body language suggested that she felt constrained and walking her was lacking something. Somebody replied that the entire walk need not be so regimented/rigid and perhaps I might allow the dog full leash to roam a bit and enjoy a bit of latitude. I did as such and it was great advice, I now have a 30 foot lead which we use at times and she really gets to roam a bit more on our walks....but part of the deal was ..never pulling...my command was "loose leash" and she picked up on it in short order. So, now we both have our ways, when I tell her to "heel up" she's right in the slot when she should be and when I tell her "okay" she roams but never pulls. Ever since we accomplished this, her body language displays a much more content dog and perhaps this suggests I have her "respect" because she does this ever so willingly...I get my way and she gets her way...no hassle, no strain, no muss no fuss.

If the 3 neighbor dogs are at the back fence barking and going crazy and I tell my dog as I let her outside to "heel tight" she stays right in the slot where she should until I say " okay...go have fun"...I take this as a sign of "respect" because prior to this behavior she would dash from the door and charge the fence and dogs. 

It would be easy to use obedience and respect interchangeably but it seems to me, if you find a way where the dog gets it's way but first gives me MY WAY first, you have a level of respect which is a two way street at many times.

SuperG


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

I think it's a mixture of leadership and mutual respect. Respect is earned no matter who you are. Example...I respect their space when they eat and they respect mine when I eat. Dogs are loyal creatures and pretty smart, they can pick up what is expected of them. Even in training I allow mine to think, make a choice and execute that choice(if it's what I'm looking for) Mine tend to make the right choices consistently. They watch my body language, my face and listen to my tone. They are very in tune with me as I am with them. I never give the command for them to move off the couch when I want to sit, they see me coming and automatically jump off or move to the other side, that is respect if my space at its best.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

llombardo said:


> I think it's a mixture of leadership and mutual respect. Respect is earned no matter who you are. Example...I respect their space when they eat and they respect mine when I eat. Dogs are loyal creatures and pretty smart, they can pick up what is expected of them. Even in training I allow mine to think, make a choice and execute that choice(if it's what I'm looking for) Mine tend to make the right choices consistently. They watch my body language, my face and listen to my tone. They are very in tune with me as I am with them. I never give the command for them to move off the couch when I want to sit, they see me coming and automatically jump off or move to the other side, that is respect if my space at its best.


lol then my dog disrespects me every day. i have to work on this some more. he's always in my food. i have to say no every time. 

also, he takes my spot on the bed. i have to tell him to move.

it hasn't bothered me enough to do something about it but now i'm wondering if this is all part of the problem (reactivity). thank you for the ideas


SuperG, i don't think that's an example of respect. if you ask me you gave in. 
i also want my dog next to me and to only sniff on command. it's annoying for me to walk any other way so i'm sticking to it. i do stop every now and then and tell him to enjoy himself lol.

i guess this is my version of cooperation. but i don't see where respect comes in


----------



## atravis (Sep 24, 2008)

I fell the notion of dogs "craving" leadership is silly. 

Dogs don't want to listen to you. Dogs want to do what dogs want to do. Dogs DO listen because of selective breeding for bidablity and and ability on our parts to effectively communicate with them. 

Your dog would much rather eat the smashed raccoon in the road than listen to you, but doesn't because he is capable of understand the consequences of that action (being either a reward for not doing it, or punishment for doing). His personal feelings about you likely have little (if anything) to do with it.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

atravis said:


> I fell the notion of dogs "craving" leadership is silly.
> 
> Dogs don't want to listen to you. Dogs want to do what dogs want to do. Dogs DO listen because of selective breeding for bidablity and and ability on our parts to effectively communicate with them.
> 
> Your dog would much rather eat the smashed raccoon in the road than listen to you, but doesn't because he is capable of understand the consequences of that action (being either a reward for not doing it, or punishment for doing). His personal feelings about you likely have little (if anything) to do with it.


i'm on the fence about it. i don't buy into the dominance theory but i do believe they have to respect their owners so to say.

the reason why i might believe it is because i have a reactive dog and have been told many times that i started this by dumb handling (not in those words lol)

what do you think?


----------



## atravis (Sep 24, 2008)

lalachka said:


> i'm on the fence about it. i don't buy into the dominance theory but i do believe they have to respect their owners so to say.
> 
> the reason why i might believe it is because i have a reactive dog and have been told many times that i started this by dumb handling (not in those words lol)
> 
> what do you think?


Here's how I'd break it down-

A dog is reactive. Lets make up an example. Dog is one day charged by a strange dog on a walk and gets frightened. Because he is initially afraid, he then starts barking and growling at other dogs that come up to him afterwards because barking and growling usually make the other dog go away.

Simple enough, and there are many different ways to handle this.

But at what point does the dog think to himself "man I wonder who the alpha/dominant one/pack leader is here?"

In my opinion, they don't. An action caused a reaction, one behavior led to another, its as simple as that. Weather or not you are the "alpha" never played into it. I feel people want to read too much into this notion of "dominance", when what they should be doing is looking at the behavior and fixing that.

I don't consider myself an "alpha" or "dominant" or a "pack leader". I consider myself a dog owner, with two dogs, who do dog-like things and have dog-like behaviors. When one of them does something I don't like, that is counter to the human-like things that I do or my human-like behaviors, I either correct them or teach them something else to do that I like better. Why? Because I'm a human and they're dogs and while I enjoy them being and doing dog-like things, they still have to fit into a human-like world. Not because "I'm alpha and I said so", but because that's just the way it is. And I think, honestly, that's about as deep the rabbit hole goes on that one.


----------



## gsdsar (May 21, 2002)

I think Super G example was a good one. Respect is not earned by forcing my will on a dog. It is earned by the dog realizing that by listening to me, their life is improved. That makes a working partnership work. 

My dogs are off leash a lot. But they have to earn it. When I start a hike, it's on a long line. If they don't pull and behave, they get to be free. If they should decide to not listen to a command, they go back on. 

I don't need to be a dictator. I don't need to have a dog walk right next to me all the time. Yes, I control resources, including off leash time. But I not need to enforce strict rules all the time. My dogs have learned, and respect the fact that when they please me, things are better for them. But that means I have to take them in to account as well. It's not all about me. 

Respect is earned, not demanded. My dogs seek my approval and I give it happily. And I do my best to make sure I earn that respect everyday. Fair, firm, loving, goofy, fun. I laugh with my dog, I enjoy their antics and misbehaviors, I did not get a dog to have a robot. I chose to share my home with another being. Their needs are met and more. 

Sorry went off a tangent there. But the word Alpha and Dominance theory really annoys me. It's a dictator way of thinking. Dogs are not stupid. They know I am it a dog. I don't have to try to be a dog to gain their respect.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

gsdsar said:


> I think Super G example was a good one. Respect is not earned by forcing my will on a dog. It is earned by the dog realizing that by listening to me, their life is improved. That makes a working partnership work.
> 
> My dogs are off leash a lot. But they have to earn it. When I start a hike, it's on a long line. If they don't pull and behave, they get to be free. If they should decide to not listen to a command, they go back on.
> 
> ...


in my case walking next to me is not about forcing my will. it's annoying for me to walk any other way so after a year of being annoyed I decided to stick to it and only let him sniff when I'm ready

but still I don't see how this makes dogs respect their owners. I can see how owners might think this can earn them respect based on human values but I don't see how the dog would process this. 

I also don't think they can make the connection between them being let off leash and behaving good and not pulling and going back on leash for misbehaving

I might be wrong 

I don't believe in the dominance theory, too simple. also too ego stroking and that's why it stuck this long. good to feel like you're an ALPHA MALE, LEADER OF THE PACK. or an alpha bitch in some cases


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

atravis said:


> Here's how I'd break it down-
> 
> A dog is reactive. Lets make up an example. Dog is one day charged by a strange dog on a walk and gets frightened. Because he is initially afraid, he then starts barking and growling at other dogs that come up to him afterwards because barking and growling usually make the other dog go away.
> 
> ...


I agree with most of it. I do think reactivity stops once a dog decides his owner has control of things around him and he doesn't need to worry about all these dogs and scary people. 

but i only think it because that's how it has been explain to me by some trainers and here 

also another trainer (world class) said that the dog walking on a loose leash is a prerequisite to stopping reactivity. so he's implying it's connected. he explains it as the dog needing to be focused on you and not sniffing. his job is to follow you. once that's achieved he will stop reacting because he will know that you make all decisions and you take care of things. 

I butchered his thought but still. 

any thoughts on this?


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

They do absolutely understand why they're on leash, if they have a known command and they break it, and the consequence is being back on the leash. If I tell my dog to stay with me, and he runs ahead, and then he's tethered to my side....he understands why. The thing is, he has to have enough freedom off the leash to appreciate that freedom. If I forced him into a perfect heel either on or off leash, why would he care, and how could he make that distinction?

I do believe in the 'dominance theory' as people like to call it, lol. But it's not about having a domineering presence over my dog: it's about being consistent with my discipline and by that, having my dog able to predict which action will have which results, if you know what I'm trying to say, lol. I'm not a bully to my dog, but bad behavior will have negative results, from his point of view. It's not harsh or heavy handed abuse - it's an easy to understand undesired result.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

And, too late to edit:

The dog walking scenario that you quoted is a perfect example of my own experiences with my dogs, and how it relates to our 'social hierarchy' or 'dominance theory' or whatchacallit: when my dog was a tiny puppy and roaming dogs ran up to him, I picked him up. When he was an older puppy and this happened, I swung an object at the dog if it got too close in a malicious way. Snarling or growling or nipping was a sure bet for something to happen. I'm not above whacking another dog to protect my own. I've threatened dogs off my property with a broom, in a pinch, lol! So of course my dog sees me in a leadership role, since he's known since he was a baby puppy that when crap hits the fan, I take charge of the situation.


----------



## wyoung2153 (Feb 28, 2010)

I know I can definitely relate to my dog viewing me as a leader, because I truly believe that they crave leadership, as much as any other species, including humans, do. 

A small/simple example would be when another dog approaches us or if another dog starts humping him. In the approach, Titan will stand tall, no hackles, and be alert, but always, always, look at me and wait for me to "make the first move" so to speak, which turns into a command of some kind, situation dictating. At an early age he learned that I would take care of things and rarely ever goes ont he defense. Same with another dog humping, he will always look at me and give me the opportunity to remove the dog and stop the interaction.. to me that says he knows I'm in charge and will take care of it. 

I know too that when I have others watching Titan who don't have the kind of authoritive personality he is used to, he walks all over them, does what he wants, until they show him who is in charge.. which is why I select very certain people to watch my Titan.. if you aren't in charge he will be, it's just nature.. in, really, any species. 

To me, it's about consistency, discipline and fairness which is exactly what leadership is on any level. It's not about bullying a dog into "respecting" you, which I have seen those types. I know that Titan percieves me as his leader and respects me because I respect him too. He has set boudaries and rules, and if he respects those, he gets to enjoy life  if not, there are concequences.. no playtime, no treats, staying in his bed for an extended time, etc. But I too have to respect him and his boundaries. I don't try to take food from him when he's eating just to make sure he won't snap (as a puppy in training, yes, but not as an adult) I don't ask things of him and get upset when he has no idea what I'm saying. If I know something about him that can't be changed, a behavior, a medical issue, I learn how to live with it and deal with it instead of forcing to change it, when he's tired and doesn't want to play, I respect that and don't force him to, etc. It's a two way street. He needs to trust and respect me just like I need to respect him as a dog.

(as someone said, respect may not be the BEST word to use here, but I can't really think of another one to use in it's place) 

I hope that made some sort of sense to someone. Lol.. if not.. sorry. In my head it really makes sense, lol.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

llombardo said:


> I never give the command for them to move off the couch when I want to sit, they see me coming and automatically jump off or move to the other side, that is respect if my space at its best.


Or self preservation, they don't want to be sat on.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Perhaps a lot of this has do to with the definition of the words we are trying to suggest our dogs either display or do not.

In the case of "respect", I believe this definition ( Merriam-Webster ) is something a dog is capable of showing.

Respect : a feeling or understanding that someone or something is important, serious, etc., and should be treated in an appropriate way

My doggy shows me this "respect" day after day.


SuperG


----------



## wyoung2153 (Feb 28, 2010)

SuperG said:


> Perhaps a lot of this has do to with the definition of the words we are trying to suggest our dogs either display or do not.
> 
> In the case of "respect", I believe this definition ( Merriam-Webster ) is something a dog is capable of showing.
> 
> ...


I can definitely agree to that definition in this case then.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I don't know. I don't believe in most of the dominance stuff. Yes, dogs will often try to set up a pack order with other dogs. But I think most dogs are smart enough to realize that the human controls the resources and is different then they are. We just need to help them out by _expecting_ certain behavior from them and acting accordingly.

I think that through training we learn to communicate with the dog, the dog learns that certain reactions get certain results, and he can become more comfortable because of the boundaries that are clearly set. We learn to give a group of physical and audio cues to the dog, get a response, and the give another set of physical and audio cues. The dog becomes more comfortable as we become more predictable.

If we walk out with our dog, wondering when he is going to show dominance, is he lickling his lip? Was that a yawn? What is he going to do when he sees that dog? Better get him in a choke hold now. Well yeah our dog is getting prepped for something awful to happen. And he may act accordingly, especially if he has little or no confidence in us to communicate properly to him and to act in a predictable fashion. 

For newbies training is the key. They need to learn to communicate in a very basic way, and the dog needs to learn to function around distractions. A good trainer can help an owner recognize the dog's body language, and recognize what they are doing to cause the dog's reaction. 

After a while, someone will be good enough in general dog-communication-skills, to pick up the leash of a dog they do not know and get behavior from that dog that they want. Quickly trust will grow between the dog and handler. But getting to this point doesn't happen overnight. You cannot get there by typing on the internet or by reading books. I don't know if you can get there by volunteering at a shelter. I think you have to live with a dog, and for some of us it takes more than one to get to this point. And that dog that some people would take back to the shelter or breeder is often the one that can teach us the most. 

I read through these threads sometimes with dogs that bite kids, and reactive dogs, and the problems people have with dogs, and at this point, I have a number of dogs, all of whom do not get as much people-time at home or out in the world than the typical pet dog does, and yet I can let a pair of seven year old kids into each kennel, ladle out food, get up close and personal with their dishes, hug them, pet them, etc. And these girls do not even live here. 

Is it the dogs? Is it the kids? Is it the management and training? Well, the latest addition I've had for about 2 months. He is 18 months old, and I have done no training with him. But he accepts/trusts me, and loves the girls. They can horse-play around him, with me. They can give him food or treats. They can touch him anywhere. They can let him climb on them. He's twice their size. The dog does not like horses, and barks at the Amish buggies going by. I don't know how he is around strange dogs, but I can let him in with Hepsi or Karma. Babs thinks he is a bit too much and wants to put him in his place. 

And at the vet, I hear horror stories about people's dogs being terrified or totally out of control. I can hand mine off calmly and tell them to go with them. I can bring three in and no one gets eaten, or overly crazy. No muzzles. No dogs shaking our peeing themselves or going for the vet or tech. I dunno. I know that it is not because I have done a superior job of training or socializing them. I was not a natural either when it came to dogs. My first was a disaster, and still my worst thing is still teaching them to heel properly. They all come, no problem with that. 

I think that we gain experience, and we gain experience x 2 or raised to a power when we work with a dog that is soft or hard, and we learn to match their personality to our method of training. As we gain experience our dogs just get better and better. And I am not talking about the dog that we have had all along. But each dog that we obtain. Sure, we might find that dogs A, B, and C were a piece of cake and then D is a nightmare, but having gone through D and having gotten him to 6 years old, dogs, E, F, G, and H are all that much easier. It can be attributed in part by selecting good genetics, and not falling into some common mistakes in early training, but its also stepping out experienced, and not over-reacting, and being predictable -- trustworthy in the dog's eyes. 

Ok, now everyone can say I full of ka-ka. But I guess that is what I have seen over the years.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

The reason I do believe in the...whatever you call it, social order thing, lol...is because I had to move into a home where DH came 1st, then came his AmBull, then came me - what??!! Are you kidding me, you big white and brindled blob??!! Ha, AS if!! She adored me on her own terms, and she made no mistake that when she said (snapped) "Jump" then she expected me to jump. No can do, doggie. 

But what I CAN do is revoke your furniture privileges, since you like to bite at my feet under the covers, and be a beast on the couch. And I can also now be the one to feed you, so that you can learn to accept the fact that I'm not beneath you on the social ladder. I was never looking for "respect" from her, if that's the word to use. To me, a better word would be "acquiescence" but that could just be semantics? The nuances of the English language, lol.


----------



## lauren43 (Jun 14, 2014)

I only skimed this. I simply believe you need respect between you an your dog. I don't buy into pack mentality, dominance mumbo jumbo.


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Susan_GSD_mom (Jan 7, 2014)

SuperG said:


> "Dominance" by all too many, simply means brawn and a physical upper hand...imho...this description of "dominance" is but a sliver of the big picture and if solely relied upon, one would have a submissive scared dog which will end up a complete mess. To dominate any creature ( including humans ) via brute force WILL accomplish the mission ..if the goal is simply to control an entity which capitulates to an iron fist...however that is not our goal and a dog living in fear is not our pursuit.
> 
> Also, humans are no different than dogs to a great degree when it comes to dominance ( the desire to seek a dominant leader or to be the dominant leader )....as humans we find comfort and ease when a strong, fair, motivated and wise leader is at the helm versus an environment where the supposed "leader" has little if any merit which does not instill in us that they are a quality/competent leader. Imagine yourself on a airplane and the aircraft starts to go through unusual attitudes and motions and the captain comes on the P.A. and asks if anyone aboard might be able to help out with the piloting of the aircraft. The "captains" of life need to be dominant in a sense that they convey their abilities with confidence, precision and consistent positive results where all benefit from their intelligence, experience and leadership. Many of us have been dominated by another's intellect with no brute force required.
> 
> ...


I agree with this post. The word "dominant" has a bad rap. A leader can be a benevolent leader, and still be strong, i.e. dominant. Way too many people nowadays equate "dominance" with cruelty, and, granted, there are way too many humans who use cruelty to achieve dominance, whether over dogs, horses, or other humans. But I really like the analogy in SuperG's post, of the captain of a plane. We need confidence in him and his position, just like a dog needs trust and confidence in us as his leader. Cesar Millan (whether you like him or not, don't want that argument here) uses what he calls positive energy. I think that there are people who, perhaps genetically, have that positive energy, or whatever it is, so that most domestic animals trust them immediately. My father was that way, and I believe I have inherited (or was taught) at least a portion of what he had, because I rarely find a dog, horse, cat, cow, whatever, that doesn't soon trust me. I wish I could teach that, but I don't know for sure what it is myself. I do know that a good leader cannot exude any fear or hesitancy, and there must be a genuine love for animals there... Beyond that, I can't explain it any better. Can it be taught? Yes, by better people than myself. I used to teach it to my riding students, but, again, the person learning had to have (or WANT to have) at least a portion of those two qualities. Some students failed miserably. They could learn the mechanics of riding, grooming, etc., but never won the respect of the horses they rode. I have seen the same with dogs. I have neighbors on both sides of me whose dogs make it obvious that they would rather be with me--one neighbor has told me that their dog gets all excited and wants to get outside when he hears me drive into my driveway. Can I explain it? No, not any further than I have above.

Sorry about the length of this post, but SuperG, you got my mind going.

Susan


----------



## lauren43 (Jun 14, 2014)

Well let's just say I hate the word dominant and the whole dominance theory. Because from what I've seen/read from books and ppl like Cesar Millan...it assumes dogs interpret your signals as if you are another dog and it also puts a lot of value in dogs' relationship to wolves. Dogs do not for one second confuse you as another dog and you couldn't mimic dog behavior no matter how hard you tried. Dogs are subtle, fast, and have so many facets of communication we can't dream of imitating it. And our dogs, the ones we keep in house, were never truly pack animals. Perhaps as wolves they were but we took them from that environment and trained and bred them for our needs. They never had to rely on one another to survive, not in the way wolves do. So dogs are a seperate entity all together. 

And the dominance theory originally stemmed from the observation of unrelated wolves in captivity, in an enclosure much smaller than their natural habitat. Which is why they observed so much fighting among these specific wolves. Wolves within a pack do not fight for leadership. They simply follow their alpha, and a glance is all the alpha needs to remind the others who's in charge. All this wolf nonsense though means nothing when it comes to the dogs we keep in our house. 

So my dogs are going to get off the couch when I ask because they know what is expected of them. They will go outside when I ask too, because I don't take "no" for an answer. I didn't have to show any special power over them, demand leadership or prove I'm dominant. I just have rules and expectations and they will follow them. We have a mutual understanding, and I did nothing physically to the dogs to create it.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

*".it assumes dogs interpret your signals as if you are another dog and it also puts a lot of value in dogs' relationship to wolves. Dogs do not for one second confuse you as another dog and you couldn't mimic dog behavior no matter how hard you tried."

*I agree with most of what you posted but this particular thought I tend to disagree with, as certain "signals" made by the human to a dog in "dogspeak" do seem to be recognized/interpreted by the dog as a display of dog behavior.....I will cite just one example many of us have utilized.

All 4 dogs I have shared my life with, each and every one of them completely understood my mimicking of the "play" posture exhibited by canines. When I would get on the ground...hands and knees..and lower my forearms onto the ground, lowering my upper body...all of them...no exception...knew it was playtime. This body posture is not part of human communications but canine communication and when a human mimics this canine posture, they most likely will find it sends a very loud signal to a dog.

SuperG


----------



## lauren43 (Jun 14, 2014)

SuperG that's fair enough, I guess I mis-spoke. My big point is your dog doesn't think you are a dog. Yes they can read some of our mimiced (sp?) signals...

They just have so many subtle facets of communication we can't hope to mimic.. 




Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## atravis (Sep 24, 2008)

An interesting thing to make note of here, is that by all accounts, at least in the canine world, dominance is not a stagnant thing- its extremely fluid, and what constitutes a "dominant" animal in one instance is not in another.

Take the airplane pilot example that was given. So you're on this plane. The pilot is in control and calls the shots because his is the one with the most knowledge and experience in that situation, thus you defer to him willingly. Simple enough.

Now lets say you're a financial adviser. The pilot from that plane you'd been on comes to you for advise about some of his investments. You, now, are the one with the most knowledge and that pilot, who previously had been completely in control, is now differing to you. 

That's life. There isn't this holy "alpha" figure who is in control over everything 100% of the time. That's not how things work. Being a human being with vastly more mental capacity than that of a _dog_, you are better able to call the shots in most situations and thus have more control over the dog. If you were lost in the woods, lets say, with no one or nothing to help you but your dog, I doubt you'd force the dog in a heel position the entire time you wandering around aimlessly seeking help and not let him make some decisions of his own that might help you out. 

Which is a crude example of course, but you get the point. You are the "pilot" in most situations because you understand this human-like world you cohabitate with your dog better than he does, thus it makes more sense for you to be the one guiding him through it. Its not because he looks up at you with a tear in his eye and thinks to himself "geez, I'm so glad this person is here controlling me 24/7 and not letting me make my own decisions".


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

lauren43 said:


> SuperG that's fair enough, I guess I mis-spoke. My big point is your dog doesn't think you are a dog. Yes they can read some of our mimiced (sp?) signals...
> 
> They just have so many subtle facets of communication we can't hope to mimic..
> 
> ...


Couldn't agree with you more regarding the " your dog doesn't think you are a dog."...


SuperG


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

atravis said:


> An interesting thing to make note of here, is that by all accounts, at least in the canine world, dominance is not a stagnant thing- its extremely fluid, and what constitutes a "dominant" animal in one instance is not in another.
> 
> Take the airplane pilot example that was given. So you're on this plane. The pilot is in control and calls the shots because his is the one with the most knowledge and experience in that situation, thus you defer to him willingly. Simple enough.
> 
> ...


This situation is most apparent in working dog teams doing scent work. A detection / SAR team is constantly changing leadership roles. OB can be very strong, as well as control in bite work, but when the search starts, the dog is in control. The handler can suggest searching an area, and the dog will comply because the handler has proven to be a good source of information for finding odor. If Fama is on odor, I can not call or physically pull her away without overpowering her. She is the leader. 

But the same dog will obey a recall when chasing a cat or out when apprehending a suspect. 

I am certainly dominant in the relationship I have with Fama, as if she challenges me, which she has in the past, I will win. I do not, however, continually exert or express my dominance over her in any way other than expecting her to comply with commands when appropriate. I give her very few verbal or physical corrections. We are a team, and I have allowed her to develop her own way of being part of that team. I let her be the dog she is within the constraints of living in my house. 

In other words, I don't sweat the small stuff


----------



## Moriah (May 20, 2014)

I think of it as dancing. After years of being with dogs, I dance better. Don't step on toes, go with the flow of the relationship, think of it as partnership, talk soft, be positive, keep criticism to a minimum, be reliable with scheduled moves. Relax.

I'm a much better dancer when I'm relaxed. The dog knows I know how to lead when dancing. Dog relaxes and can bring his best self to the party, too. It's fun....


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

David Winners said:


> We are a team,


These 4 words say it all.


SuperG


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

atravis said:


> Its not because he looks up at you with a tear in his eye and thinks to himself "geez, I'm so glad this person is here controlling me 24/7 and not letting me make my own decisions".


It's not about controlling, or decision making. I'm a firm believer that dogs need autonomy, but that doesn't have anything to do with our social order. I'm still team leader to my dog. He's my shadow, and I didn't insist on this behavior - he chooses to be my shadow. That must say something? Why would he want to follow my every step? There must be something there, for him to think that this is important. He'll even walk away from his food, to follow me and find out where I'm going. That's being led, literally, lol.


----------



## atravis (Sep 24, 2008)

Blanketback said:


> It's not about controlling, or decision making. I'm a firm believer that dogs need autonomy, but that doesn't have anything to do with our social order. I'm still team leader to my dog. He's my shadow, and I didn't insist on this behavior - he chooses to be my shadow. That must say something? Why would he want to follow my every step? There must be something there, for him to think that this is important. He'll even walk away from his food, to follow me and find out where I'm going. That's being led, literally, lol.


You think all dogs are like this?

Do you also believe that there are no other influences that might be shaping his behavior other than this sort of supposed hero-worship people seem to think their dogs have for them? Did you not raise him from a puppy, teach him all that he knows about this world he lives in, guide and support him through every step of it? And if not you, didn't SOMEBODY?

I think of it less as an "almighty leader" situation, and more like one a child would have with a parent. 

When you are young, your parents have complete control over you, because you are too young and too naive to control yourself. By the time you're 30, I'd sure hope you had control enough over yourself to not have to be taking orders from your parents on how to live your life. No doubt some people do of course, and I'm sure there are plenty of dogs like this as well... dogs, much like people, have wildly ranging personality types and how they interact with their world varies just as wildly. 

FYI, don't discount yourself as a reinforcer to your dog. You make coming away from food sound like an act of God himself, but remember that you are the _provider_ of food, shelter, toys, and all things good in life. If you don't think that bears some weight to the dog, then you are selling yourself short


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Blanketback said:


> It's not about controlling, or decision making. I'm a firm believer that dogs need autonomy, but that doesn't have anything to do with our social order. I'm still team leader to my dog. He's my shadow, and I didn't insist on this behavior - he chooses to be my shadow. That must say something? Why would he want to follow my every step? There must be something there, for him to think that this is important. He'll even walk away from his food, to follow me and find out where I'm going. That's being led, literally, lol.


My dog is my shadow too and I'm not his leader. this is genetics and gsds are known to be clingers. he will leave anything to follow me anywhere. he's never more than 4 feet away. if he is then he's crying to get to me.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

lalachka said:


> My dog is my shadow too and I'm not his leader. this is genetics and gsds are known to be clingers. he will leave anything to follow me anywhere. he's never more than 4 feet away. if he is then he's crying to get to me.


Well I have 6 shadows and not all of them are GSD's, only 2 of them are. So it's not about being a GSD.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

llombardo said:


> Well I have 6 shadows and not all of them are GSD's, only 2 of them are. So it's not about being a GSD.


Ain't that the truth?

Lala - why do YOU think your dog follows you?


----------



## LaRen616 (Mar 4, 2010)

llombardo said:


> Well I have 6 shadows and not all of them are GSD's, only 2 of them are. So it's not about being a GSD.


Yup, I have 2 shadows, a GSD and a spotted beast. Wherever I go, they go.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Lilie said:


> Ain't that the truth?
> 
> Lala - why do YOU think your dog follows you?


bad case of SA? I'm not going to lie and say I don't like it but I didn't do anything to earn it. I'd say it's genetics, no?


ETA ok that's not really true. I did something to earn it but it wasn't leadership. just lots of affection, playing dumb games, cooing. 
however, I can see him follow someone else if I disappeared. it'd take some time but I think it'd happen


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

lalachka said:


> bad case of SA? I'm not going to lie and say I don't like it but I didn't do anything to earn it. I'd say it's genetics, no?
> 
> 
> ETA ok that's not really true. I did something to earn it but it wasn't leadership. just lots of affection, playing dumb games, cooing.
> however, I can see him follow someone else if I disappeared. it'd take some time but I think it'd happen


Ding ding ding ding!!!! Your dog is NORMAL!

Yes, we all want to believe we have dogs that are so loyal that they would trot over to our grave stones and lie on them until they starve to death if we die, but actually, it is in a dog's nature to attach itself to other beings. If you rehome your dog, it will take a couple of days, and then he will begin to attach himself to the new person. It is not a lack of loyalty, it is a need to be connected to other beings. Dogs do not thrive on their own. 

I used to say that my dogs would go home with anyone giving better treats than me. Yes, yes, some of them cling to us like glue, and don't want anyone else to take them away from us, but they can and do adjust to new owners pretty readily. And that is what they ought to do. There is nothing wrong with the dog. 

Yes, a dog will follow us around. We are the most interesting thing he currently has hanging about, and we even might give him something he wants. Could be SA, could be a good opportunist. But the dog will chase around someone else too. If we have more people around, we are the one he is comfortable with.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

lalachka said:


> bad case of SA? I'm not going to lie and say I don't like it but I didn't do anything to earn it. I'd say it's genetics, no?
> 
> 
> ETA ok that's not really true. I did something to earn it but it wasn't leadership. just lots of affection, playing dumb games, cooing.
> however, I can see him follow someone else if I disappeared. it'd take some time but I think it'd happen


But in no way, shape or form have you become an entity in the dog's life which could possibly fit into this definition ....???

*re·spect*

_noun_ \ri-ˈspekt\ : a feeling of admiring someone or something that is good, valuable, important, etc.
: a *feeling* or understanding that* someone* or something is *important*, serious, etc., and *should be treated in an appropriate way*
: a particular way of thinking about or looking at something




Just asking...LOL....

C'mon.....you can admit to it.....your doggy respects you....you know it, I know it, the German Shepherd Dog Forum knows it....even if you don't know it.....

Oh, another thought....respect is not necessarily commanded just through leadership...please see the above definition....LOL. I certainly have respect for those who exhibit prowess in many sectors of life which have little if anything to do with "leadership".

SuperG


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

The only one of my dogs that wouldn't leave my side and adventure away is drumroll.....my youngest golden. Even in class as part if training the trainer could not get him to leave. It was to test recall. I would tell him to go ahead and She tried food, squeaky toys, high pitched voice, nothing. He would start to go then after two steps turn around and sit at my side. She said not many dogs respond that way and it's the way they should respond. All my dogs love her and would venture over to her then come back when called. Not hi, he wouldn't go to begin with.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

SuperG said:


> But in no way, shape or form have you become an entity in the dog's life which could possibly fit into this definition ....???
> 
> *re·spect*
> 
> ...


It's ego stroking to think he respects me))))) and loves me and will starve on my grave as selzer said. but I'm thinking it's just what dogs do. 
similarly, we have some people here whose dogs are more independent and aren't as affectionate. so what happened there? they're sucky owners?
what about those that abuse their dogs and the dogs still cling to them?

I love seeing him trail me but I don't want to gas myself more than I need to))))) he's been bred to be this way. all dogs are. maybe some aren't as needy but I do think genetics decide the level of neediness

I can be wrong))))


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

llombardo said:


> The only one of my dogs that wouldn't leave my side and adventure away is drumroll.....my youngest golden. Even in class as part if training the trainer could not get him to leave. It was to test recall. I would tell him to go ahead and She tried food, squeaky toys, high pitched voice, nothing. He would start to go then after two steps turn around and sit at my side. She said not many dogs respond that way and it's the way they should respond. All my dogs love her and would venture over to her then come back when called. Not hi, he wouldn't go to begin with.


so then it's not breed specific lol
I don't know much about other breeds so I can't say how they are. but gsds are pretty clingy. huskies arent, they're the independent type. so it might be breed specific to an extent but really dogs were selected for this trait for hundreds or thousands of years. 
not my accomplishment lol


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

A dog does not have to be willing to starve at your grave to be loyal and to respect you. 

The number of dogs that will starve at their owner's graves in the history of the dog-human relationship is approximately 2. I think. There may be isolated cases no one has heard of, and it may just be possible that the ones that did, were not true, just a good story that stuck.

We do not have to be great at training to have a dog's respect. We do not have to be good at NILIF. We do not have to be excellent with our timing and pay perfect attention to the dog. In fact, if we step back a bit, a lot of dog's will be a little more comfortable and respect us even more.

Respect/relationship -- I am not sure what you think it means. Is it all or nothing to you? You either have a dog that knows what you want and does it before you tell him, and without training him, or you have a dog that doesn't respect you? It's kind of black and white.

Respect is not that Cesar-dominance baloney. It has nothing to do with that. Respect is where each being accepts the other for whom they are. If you respect your dog for who he is, my guess is that he respects you as well. Does he trust you in ALL situations? Does he listen 100% all the time? Well, maybe, maybe not. He may be a work in progress, and you may be too. But that doesn't mean there isn't respect.

And it really isn't ego-stroking to think the dog respects you. It is ego-stroking to think your dog would lie on your grave and starve to death without you.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

lalachka said:


> so then it's not breed specific lol
> I don't know much about other breeds so I can't say how they are. but gsds are pretty clingy. huskies arent, they're the independent type. so it might be breed specific to an extent but really dogs were selected for this trait for hundreds or thousands of years.
> not my accomplishment lol


Well I also have a husky/ greyhound mix that I trip over because he is everywhere I am. In the picture I attached he wanted to be on the couch with me but had nowhere to go, so he slept on the golden, just to be by me. This is how all my dogs are with me and each other.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Ok so those owners that have dogs that don't like to be petted are what? abusive? bad owners?
what about those that abuse their dogs and still have dogs cling to them

I guess to me it's more about the dog you end up with. maybe not.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

atravis said:


> You think all dogs are like this?


I have no clue, lol. I've only ever had GSDs, so I can't say what other dogs are like. I don't see the "hero worship" thing going on though - I see my dog wanting to be with me first, and taking care of business second. If I take the garbage out, he needs to go too. But he won't just follow me to the curb, because he needs to make sure that the cats next door aren't on our property. This is a job he takes very seriously! But he'll keep me within view. We're both getting our chores done, together.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

lalachka said:


> Ok so those owners that have dogs that don't like to be petted are what? abusive? bad owners?
> what about those that abuse their dogs and still have dogs cling to them
> 
> I guess to me it's more about the dog you end up with. maybe not.


I really don't understand. A dog can be more independent, and not be abused. Heck, Babsy sticks to me like glue while I am eating. After she's licked off my plate though, she heads down the hall to go and lay on My bed. But she respects me. She knows I am the one that can give her something from the table or fridge, but it is more than that. We have a relationship. She is comfortable enough for me to be out of sight at times, but she is always ready to go with me, and when out with her, she is a superstar. We connect to that point where she and I can move in a harmony of sorts, complementing each other. I can walk her off-lead and allow her to go ahead, and when we go to cross a street, I can call her to heel. She can precede the kids to the park, and will not chase the squirrel crossing the road if I say, Leave it. There is no yelling, no forcing, no harshness. We sit together on the bench up town, and then she will hop down and lie in front. She waits for me to give her the signal, and then will run to the SUV and load herself up. 

Babs is not an independent dog. There are dogs that are a lot more independent than she. But she doesn't need to stick to me every moment and walk with me from room to room. 

I know what she really likes, and she knows when to come to me and sit in her chair next to mine, and be there. What independence she has does not indicate lack of respect, nor does it indicate any abuse, it is who she is. When I respect that, then I gain her respect and make the bond stronger. 

SA does not indicate respect. It indicates a weakness of nerves, and more dependence on human half of the relationship. But it does not indicate a lack of respect either. Some dogs have SA. Some dogs are shadows, without having SA.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

I know what SA indicates and that's why I said I'm not sure why he's following me and it's not necessarily respect IF that's what following means 

the reason I brought up abuse and stuff was because people are using dogs shadowing thrm as a sign the dog respects them. so I'm saying then those owners whose dogs don't shadow them don't have their dogs respect?

also some owners abuse their dogs and though I don't know any but I'm sure there are some. so their dogs respect them too? if so then respect from thrm doesn't mean much in terms of saying something about our leadership or ownership style


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

A good example of a dog with SA is one that is destructive if left alone or will pace, cry and just not give up looking for their owners. Of course there are different levels if SA but most dogs with it should be crated for their own safety. When I got Batman back from my dad he was showing signs of SA. At my dads he had freedom, wasn't in a crate, and my dad was home with him all the time. I had to go get him a hard plastic crate because he freaked out in the wire one. He was drooling profusely and looked a mess. I got him a thunder shirt, he got it off and ate it within a couple weeks, but he already improved drastically by that point. Now he is fine and nice and calm, he just needed to get used to a different lifestyle. The only one left in a crate when I go to work is the youngest golden. He was out for a while, but he decided to eat the area rug, so back in he went. Eventually all of them will be out of the crate. They walk me to the door in the morning and go lay down. The air is set to 68 degrees and they have a full bowl of water, they have it good and they know I'll be back soon


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

I mentioned my dog following me, but not to indicate that he respects me - just that he wants to do what I'm doing, at all times. Rest? OK. Chores? OK! Play? OK!!! I brought it up to say that he willingly accepts me guiding the path to our day-to-day existence. To me, that's what leadership is, it's a 'git 'er done' attitude that we share.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

lalachka said:


> I know what SA indicates and that's why I said I'm not sure why he's following me and it's not necessarily respect IF that's what following means
> 
> the reason I brought up abuse and stuff was because people are using dogs shadowing thrm as a sign the dog respects them. so I'm saying then those owners whose dogs don't shadow them don't have their dogs respect?
> 
> also some owners abuse their dogs and though I don't know any but I'm sure there are some. so their dogs respect them too? if so then respect from thrm doesn't mean much in terms of saying something about our leadership or ownership style


There aren't many people that will say their dogs don't follow them or like to be near their owners. That is what dogs do. GSD's probably do top the list.when I was training Robyn we did a follow me exercise and the trainer said to me that I shouldn't have a problem with the exercise because I have a GSD. Even if they don't follow, they still check in, it's in their nature . You might not realize it, but they are watching. It's kinda creepy


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Respect is something that can mean different things. You might respect the strength and power of the other guy, understanding you are no match to him. 

But do you want for people to respect you for your muscle and ferocity, your brute strength? Or do you want people to respect you because of your intelligence and decision making ability? Or do you want for people to respect you because of your honesty and fairness?

We can gain a level of compliance from our dogs by starting out bigger and stronger and maintaining a strong front. The dogs will follow a strong leader and that can be a form of respect. We can tolerate no misbehavior and by correcting what we do not want, we set the dog up so that we can correct or reward, the dog will accept our leadership, and it can be respect. 

But there are other ways to build a strong relationship of respect/trust between dog and owner. Some of us choose to train the dog by rewarding the behavior we want, being consistent, being fair, using corrections to teach dogs what we want, and using games and treats and praise and training to build confidence and experience between the dog and the owner. Dogs will respect this leader as well. By being predictable, by providing boundaries, and by setting the dog up to succeed, and then praising it for it. 

And some go even farther down this path, and instead of molding the dog into the critter they want, they take the critter they have and play to its strengths, and embrace its ability to use its mind, use its instinct, and make good decisions. They partner with the dog, they know the dog inside and out, its strengths and weaknesses. They trust the dog, and the dog trusts them. Through experience and fairness and meeting out the right amount of encouragement, they build a bond of respect. 

Dogs aren't stupid. They do tend to respect the people that are taking care of them. And for some dogs it takes serious neglect/insanity for them to not respect the human. They still have to learn what the human wants. I think even abusive treatment can be respected moreso than unpredictability, instability that humans often use when they have a dog and don't know what they are doing. Sometimes they talk with baby talk to try to get the dog to do something, and sometimes they get mad and shout at the dog. They expect the dog to do things the dog is not trained to do, punish unfairly, and inconsistently. They let things go and go and go and then blow up at the dog. They take things personally, and act accordingly.


----------



## atravis (Sep 24, 2008)

Blanketback said:


> I mentioned my dog following me, but not to indicate that he respects me - just that he wants to do what I'm doing, at all times. Rest? OK. Chores? OK! Play? OK!!! I brought it up to say that he willingly accepts me guiding the path to our day-to-day existence. To me, that's what leadership is, it's a 'git 'er done' attitude that we share.


And not all dogs are like that, so...?

Perhaps the concept of "dominance" is to the dog as religion is to people: some subscribe and some do not?


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

atravis said:


> And not all dogs are like that, so...?


So...I believe that it's the human that completes this equation. Not all humans have leadership qualities, obviously.


----------

