question about Cesar Milan

I read Cesar's Way and he makes it clear that exercise, discipline and affection should be practiced in that order on a daily basis.    I completely understand the value of discipline (yay, NILIF!), but his standards of discipline are primarily set for a status-seeking dog.   Most dogs are not status-seeking.    I could go through the hassle of making my dog sit before we go outside and awkwardly twist to lock the door every day, but it would just be a useless hassle.   My dog likes to go first because she's excited to pee or play or sniff things, not because it's one step closer to becoming supreme ruler of our family.   Everyone knows the cat already occupies that position anyway.

This is the biggest shortcoming of his philosophy to me; it lacks nuance and complexity.   It does not acknowledge the great diversity of temperaments, desire and social arrangements, nor the limits of dominance theory, which is especially surprising because he talks at length about and recommends The Other End of the Leash.  

ORIGINAL: Stacita


Oh it wasn't a paid consult, it was a clip for a news show. So yes indeed, it is likely they had a happy life. Sorry I didn't make that too clear in the original post.

 
Oh ok i get it, the news woman was doing a note for her TV show and she used her own dog to do an example, well yes maybe they have a happy relationship, i think Cesar was just working with what he had at that moment (not too much since the dog is behaved anyways) so i think he was just trying to help the lady to make her note for the news, of course if the dog behaves you dont need to apply as much discipline as with other dogs
 
However I agree the dog should not go out the door first, not too much because it is a lot of structure for an already behaved dog but for what it really means in the dogs world, there is a reason for that, is not only because "it looks" better or because those are "bad manners", in the dogs world the one going out first thru the door is the one "controlling" the walk, so as you see even when the dog is behaved you are telling him that if he goes outside first he will be in "control"

ORIGINAL: inne

I read Cesar's Way and he makes it clear that exercise, discipline and affection should be practiced in that order on a daily basis.    I completely understand the value of discipline (yay, NILIF!), but his standards of discipline are primarily set for a status-seeking dog.   Most dogs are not status-seeking.   

 
Any dog (whether they are of a more dominant nature or not) can end up in the "dominant" (vs the "subordinant") or leadership position through owner default. I've seen many naturally "easy going" dogs who display various dominant (however minor) behaviors including not listening to their owners, simply because the owner has inadvertantly communicated to the dog that they (the owner) are not in the leadership position. Not the dog's fault.
 
NILIF can be helpful, but Cesar gives a more complete picture through his philosophies and understanding of how we are being "read" by the dog and how to establish leadership through our own actions, attitude, and behavior.
 

Original: inne

This is the biggest shortcoming of his philosophy to me; it lacks nuance and complexity.   It does not acknowledge the great diversity of temperaments, desire and social arrangements, nor the limits of dominance theory, which is especially surprising because he talks at length about and recommends The Other End of the Leash.  

 
Not if you really study and understand what he is saying and doing, and how he is using the word "dominance".
 
Dominant and subordinant behaviors are an actual canine launguage which describe the relationship, who is the leader, and who is the follower.
 
The problem with "dominance", is how this word is used, understood, and applied.
 
Too many people only think of "it" as a "show 'em who's boss" aggressive behavior towards the dog. In actuality, the word is often distorted and blown out of proportion and a lot of emotional (kitten-with-a-whip) baggage attached to it.
 
If your dog is excited and you let them out the door ahead of you, yet you have no problems in your relationship with your dog. Great! Do what works.
 
But this is one of the "exercises" Cesar uses to help people with out of contol, bossy, over-excited dogs.
 

ORIGINAL: inne

I read Cesar's Way and he makes it clear that exercise, discipline and affection should be practiced in that order on a daily basis.    I completely understand the value of discipline (yay, NILIF!), but his standards of discipline are primarily set for a status-seeking dog.   Most dogs are not status-seeking.    I could go through the hassle of making my dog sit before we go outside and awkwardly twist to lock the door every day, but it would just be a useless hassle.   My dog likes to go first because she's excited to pee or play or sniff things, not because it's one step closer to becoming supreme ruler of our family.   Everyone knows the cat already occupies that position anyway.

 
You are right about most dogs are not status-seeking since they would rather to follow instead of lead which actually takes you to his standards of discipline primarily to set a status
 
Cesar is the one looking to set status, why?, most of the dogs do not look for that BUT that does not mean they dont need it, most of the dogs dont want to lead BUT they need someone to do it, in your case your cat is the one in charge which means you are not, not because you open the door and decide when to feed the animals they see you as the one in charge inside that "pack", Cesar uses techniques to set status and make the dog realize that you are the one they have to follow, obey or whoever you want to call it, your dog see the cat as the one in charge in that house, therefor he wont wait for you and will go out first, of course that means he respects the cat more than he respects you, that does not mean he does not listen to you but if the cat could have opposable thumbs he would listen the cat more []

The comment about the cat was a joke.  

Angelique, I just have a different opinion.   I respect your position and know that you're a big supporter of Milan.   I am wondering, though, how you feel about what  McConnell writes about dominance and how it applies to Milan's philosophies.

Espencer, there is plenty of scholarship that shows that the 'leader' animal does in fact not always physically lead a group, so I'm wondering why exactly someone would get hung up on this very literal interpretation of leadership in an isolated scenario with a happy, well-behaved dog without behaviour issues.   I think we can find countless examples on this board of people who let their dogs go through doors first while absolutely knowing it does not mean they (the dogs) are in control.  What scholarship are you basing your opinion on?  

To me, the whole letting your dog out the door first or not, has to do with safety and manners.  I don't really think of it as a dominace thing, but to me, it doesn't really matter.  I simply don't want my dog bolting out the door and I want him to be relativley calm before his walk.  Teaching my dog to sit patiently before I open the door and let him out has resulted in a better behaved, balanced dog.

ORIGINAL: inne

the 'leader' animal does in fact not always physically lead a group

 
The leader does not always lead, mmmmm that does not sounds right, of course you can see CM outside walking with his dogs and some of them are ahead of him but at the moment of going out the door he is the first one that goes thru that door, the "scholarship" that tells you that is a lady named "mother nature" but i will appreciate if you give me links where i can read the ones you are talking about [] 

"The pack is led by the two individuals that sit atop the social hierarchy: the alpha male and the alpha female. The alpha pair (of whom only one may be the "top" alpha) has the greatest amount of social freedom compared to the rest of the pack, but they are not "leaders" in the human sense of the term. The alphas do not give the other wolves orders; rather, they simply have the most freedom in choosing where to go, what to do, and when to do it. Possessing strong instincts for fellowship, the rest of the pack usually follows."

source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_Wolf

it states the pack "usually" follows the alpha pair. this infers that the other dogs may not always follow the alpha pair.

i contend that the alpha need not be "in front" of the pack to determine the direction the pack travels. our dogs are allowed to go through the door first. more of a convenience issue for me. however, while we are walking (no matter who is in front) i determine the path we take and the duration of the walk.

also, i dont remember the name of the documentary, but i have seen a documentary on the discovery channel about wolves and their behavior. while hunting the wolves may not travel as a group once they have selected an animal to stalk. the dogs will "fan out" and move independently of one another in an attempt to surround the prey. once the prey is surrounded and in a compromising position, the dogs will attack it. the alphas do not necessarily attack first, nor do they signal for the other dogs to attack it.

i think many times people are too worried about being the alpha or being dominant over their dog. i think if you allow your dogs some freedoms they will always defer to you (assuming you have made a good enough bond with your dog and invested time in training).

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

i contend that the alpha need not be "in front" of the pack to determine the direction the pack travels. our dogs are allowed to go through the door first. more of a convenience issue for me. however, while we are walking (no matter who is in front) i determine the path we take and the duration of the walk.

 
Yeap thats exactly what i said
 

ORIGINAL: espencer


of course you can see CM outside walking with his dogs and some of them are ahead of him but at the moment of going out the door he is the first one that goes thru that door
 

 
 

i think you need to re-read my post. you and i arent saying the same thing. unless you are letting your dogs walk through the door first?[]

Exercise...Discipline...Affection
in that order

 
I agree with CM's order here....
 
1. Exercise - no dog is going to behave if they are starving for exercise and stimulation. You can't ask your dog for obedience or manners when you clam it's energy up in the house all day. 
 
2. Discipline - by which I believe he means setting clear boundaries, sticking to them, and being consistent. Even a heart-breaking rescued abused dog needs boundaries and consistency to gain confidence.
 
3. Affection - It is third because, all the affection in the world will not help a dog settle into it's environment in an acceptable way if you do not clearly show it what is expected of it. Dogs gain confidence and trust by knowing what is expected of them.
 
Faramir - I think in your examples you're saying, why all the discipline, I like my dog to have some independent nature. That's completely OK and still fits into this Exercise-Disc-Aff model. Because the Discipline part of it is based on YOUR expectations, YOUR boundaries, etc. If you allow your dog to sneak up and lay with you, and it doesn't cause obedience problems in other facets of your relationship, then that's the boundary you have set. It would only be unfair if you suddenly one day yelled at the dog "you know you're not supposed to be on here" and threw a fit. But I don't think that's the case!![]

I discipline my dogs like I disciplined my BF's kids.
I say what I mean.
I mean what I say.
I am not mean.
[]

I think we can find countless examples on this board of people who let their dogs go through doors first while absolutely knowing it does not mean they (the dogs) are in control.

 
Shadow has a sled dog ancestry. I walk him in harness and leash with mushing commands. Because of the way the doors are on the front, it's not exactly practical for me to walk out first. But I am the leader. We have several routes that he likes. If necessary, I will change direction on a route. Other than that, he may have to motivation to check out scents in a particular area. It may look like give and take but, ultimately, I decide where we go. A good example, the other day, we were on a route and I saw, ahead, those danged pekinese were out again. No panic. Immediate "About" (reversal of direction) and we headed off toward another regular route. So, he gets to do what he likes to do, my way in our direction.
 
So, no, Shadow doesn't follow me out the door.
 
 

I'm not in the "dog has to follow" camp.  However, I do think that if the human suddenly decides that the dog should follow, then Fido ought to be able to sit and wait until given permission to go.  It isn't about having a rigid rule that says you are only the leader if your dog always follows.  In  my world, it's about having control over the dog's behavior when you need it, and being able to allow the dog to just be a dog when you don't.

it's about having control over the dog's behavior when you need it, and being able to allow the dog to just be a dog when you don't

 
Exactly. I believe in letting the dog do what he or she does best, say herding sheep, or swimming and retrieving balls, etc. And that the aim is to have the control of obedience. I think some dogs may show better obedience by waiting to go out, but some dogs may not need that particular lesson.