Of Doors and Dominance......

sillysally

But how do you get a dog down from that kind of excitement? 

I can answer that for me. It takes a lot of time and waiting to get the message across. I have them sit. If everyone isn't sitting, I stand erect and look away. Only when everyone is sitting and calm do they get their collars and "tack" on. Only then, does the door get opened. If we're just going in the yard, I say OK and release them. But if they are leashed, I go through the door first because I'm leading and I know where we're going.

But in the beginning, it took 25 minutes to get through the door. I would have them sit and one or 2 wouldn't settle, so I would walk away, leaving them standing there wondering WTH?. And come back in a couple minutes when they were dispersed and start over again. MANY times, I've seen the "good" dog (the one sitting patiently) jump on the "bad" dog (the one who wouldn't settle) as if to say "Calm Down! Don't you know she won't open the door till we're all sitting calmly"?!?!!? But eventually, they got it.

It's not about who goes through the door first, it's about an orderly exit through a small portal.  

FourIsCompany

It's not about who goes through the door first, it's about an orderly exit through a small portal.  

I agree. Much of our energy spent with our dogs involves teaching them impulse control. Circumstances like leaving the house, greeting, meal time, and leash walking are consistent hot buttons precisely because there is lots of excitement being expressed. Having the dog wait till you go out is as much for the human's benefit as the dog's: human remembers to be consistent (every time!), dog learns impulse control/patience.

And sure, asking for particular behaviors (yes, NILIF, too) is an act of dominance. It's an act of asserting your will over your animals. But, so is making your kids do homework before bed, or making your new employee do entry level grunt work. The motivations for dominance should be questioned, but to think you can manage others' behaviors without asserting your will is simply denial.

If your dog neither relieves himself in your house nor steals food from your plate, then you've been exercising your will over him, and teaching him impulse control! And we all thank you for it!

Ixas_girl

And sure, asking for particular behaviors (yes, NILIF, too) is an act of dominance. It's an act of asserting your will over your animals.

So if dominance is asserting your will by hook or crook, what is it called when the dog complies without assertion.  To me a human assertion of will over a dog is a bluff.  In a test of wills the dogs wins because it is the dog's decision to comply. 

It's just as valid to think that NILIF is dogs asserting their will over the humans.  If my dog wants attention, he's learned he can get attention by performing a cute trick. Some people foolishly teach their dogs that barking loudly or chewing on shoes is the way to manipulate people into giving them attention.  It's all the same to the dog.

He wants to go outside; he's learned he can MAKE YOU open the door by sitting. He's asserting his will over you.

He wants to eat; he's learned he can MAKE YOU put the food dish down by lying quietly at his feeding station.

Thinking about "asserting your will" over any being is a dangerous mind-set to have. It leads to the use of force. It puts the dog in a position of "YOU MUST BECAUSE I SAID SO". It poisons your relationship with the dog.

I prefer to think in terms of requests. My dog knows he can REQUEST that I open the door by performing certain behaviors; I know I can REQUEST my dog to perform certain behaviors by offering to open the door. Mutual respect, mutual communication.

 I don't think NILF/controlling resources ALWAYS  = dominance over the dog.  At least the way I see it, dominance has to have some amount of intent (one being wants to DOMINATE the other, the intent is to dominate, not to get food, go outside, play a game, etc).  If I see one dog go up to another dog and start pushing it around, picking a fight, etc, I think that dog is being dominant b/c he's doing what he's doing to dominate (there's no food or toy or something to even be fighting over).  If I ask Kenya to sit while I open the door and she complies, that's not b/c I am dominating her or she is dominating me (I do not believe that she feels "dominated" and I do not believe that it's her intent to "dominate" me by offering this behavior), it's b/c she wants to go outside, plain and simple.  If I were to dominate her, I wouldn't say "sit", I'd get in her face and push her back physically until she calmed down.  If she wanted to dominate me, she would simply ignore me and push right out the door (she can push both doors open herself).

Ixas_girl

The motivations for dominance should be questioned

And that, I believe is the crux of the whole issue over this word, "dominance". Many people, upon hearing the word, picture an ANGRY person, who is a control freak, somehow fulfilling their own selfish need to be in power over their defenseless dog. That's ABUSE. Not dominance.

Hi! 

mudpuppy

It's just as valid to think that NILIF is dogs asserting their will over the humans. 
...
I prefer to think in terms of requests. My dog knows he can REQUEST that I open the door by performing certain behaviors; I know I can REQUEST my dog to perform certain behaviors by offering to open the door.

If it matters to you "how you think of it", that's cool. But we're talking about the same thing. This is a semantics game. Whether you think of it as "asserting your will over the dog" or you and the dog "requesting"  behaviors from each other it doesn't matter! It's the SAME THING.

Thinking about "asserting your will" over any being is a dangerous mind-set to have. It leads to the use of force. It puts the dog in a position of "YOU MUST BECAUSE I SAID SO". It poisons your relationship with the dog.

It does NOT. It doesn't automatically lead to "force" and it definitely doesn't poison anything! It's not about "you must, because I said so." It's "if you want to go outside, you'll sit because that's the rule of the house. And I'm the rule-maker. Until you do what I want, you don't get what you want. Now. Let's make a deal, whaddya say"?

You don't seem to allow for different people's context.

Let me ask you, what if you make a "request" of your dog and he doesn't comply?

Liesje

dominance has to have some amount of intent (one being wants to DOMINATE the other, the intent is to dominate, not to get food, go outside, play a game, etc)

Again, I think it's a difference in context. None of us here (I don't believe) want to be dominant for the sake of feeling the satisfaction of dominance! LOL That's ridiculous. We (ok, I'll just speak for myself) I want to be the dominant one in my household because I know it leads to order, peace, harmony and safety. It's the TOOL. Dominance is the means to an end. Not the reward. That's just funny.

JMHO, but if you teach your dogs a proper "wait" or "stay" command, and use it consistently, you can proceed out the door first, release them out the door first, or prop the door open for fifteen minutes and they should sit there in the "wait" until released, so basically go nowhere until you say the word.  By politely insisting that the dog wait until given permission to go out, you are controlling a resource (access to the outdoors) and the dog recognizes that leaders control resources.  End of dominance problem, since you have told the dog, in a way he can clearly understand, that you are the supreme being with the opposable thumbs.  Believe me, my dogs go out behind me, ahead of me, and with me - but I can control which.  It is not the simple act of getting out the door first that is the problem, it's that the dog thinks he is in charge of who goes first, not the human.
 

All this dominance at the door stuff is because humans are so ineffectual at putting the proper training in place right from the get go.  Yet, most of them will not attend a good class to learn how to do this, and when they do, many do not bother with actually doing the training homework to make it happen.

 http://www.clickertrainusa.com/stay.htm

FourIsCompany

Again, I think it's a difference in context. None of us here (I don't believe) want to be dominant for the sake of feeling the satisfaction of dominance! LOL That's ridiculous. We (ok, I'll just speak for myself) I want to be the dominant one in my household because I know it leads to order, peace, harmony and safety. It's the TOOL. Dominance is the means to an end. Not the reward. That's just funny.

But is dominance the ONLY way to a peaceful household?  I

I'm trying to look at it from the dog's context.  In my experience, some dogs DO dominate just for the sake of being dominant.  I've seen dogs pick fights with other dogs, not because there was a toy or food or some resource and not b/c the other dog instigated it.  Some dogs are just really rough and when given the opportunity, will constantly posture and position themselves in ways that exert dominance.  And I still maintain that when Kenya goes out the door first, it is ONLY because she wants to go outside.  The idea that she's going out first to prove to me that she is the dominant one is just silly.

Liesje

But is dominance the ONLY way to a peaceful household?

Well if, by dominance, you mean that I make the rules and see that they are followed, I say, Yes. I agree with you that the dog just wants to go outside. :) But I'll repeat here what I said on page 2:

There CAN be dominance issues with going through the door, but going through the door first or last doesn't necessarily mean it's an act of dominance. I don't think anyone is saying that going through the door somehow indicates dominance, but a dog with issues of dominance can very well display it by charging through the door in front of everyone else. And an owner can USE that behavior as a tool when dealing with a dog (like some of us have) that actually DOES try to assert his/her dominance in the household.

To me (and I believe to most others who use the term) the "dominant" one is just the one who makes and enforces the rules. A dominant dog (in terms of a household) tries to make his OWN rules and sometimes tries to enforce them.  

Why do you want the dog to sit before going out the door?

the "requester" doesn't want to get mowed down by a large dog, and wants the dog to learn self-control.

The "I am the rule maker" wants to make the dog comply with pointless commands in order to establish her status.

You don't think these different attitudes won't affect how you go about teaching the behavior, or that the dog won't pick up on your attitude and have it affect his behavior? Or affect how you will respond to failures to comply, or to a dog who is having trouble learning the behavior? of course it will. I used to be a "I am the rule maker and you will do what I say because I am the rule maker" so I know how this thinking affects your behavioral modification programs. It's much more effective to be "the requester".

mudpuppy

The "I am the rule maker" wants to make the dog comply with pointless commands in order to establish her status.

You haven't read my posts if you think that... on this very page. And I beg your pardon, but without reading my posts, you can hardly assess what I want or think. It's clear you have no clue of my motivation. I'll be happy to discuss this with you but not if you don't read my posts. It's a waste of my time.

mudpuppy

I know how this thinking affects your behavioral modification programs.

No. You don't. You may know something about yourself, and you may think you know something about me, but you don't know this about me. :)  

mudpuppy

It's much more effective to be "the requester".

Perhaps, that is your experience, but in my experience letting the dogs know I control the environment makes it easier to control multiple dogs, especially the ones that think they can bully.....you don't think I notice the intentional bumping into the other dogs, literally moving the less forceful dogs out of the way.....this is the type of behavior that I need to make sure stays under control in any situation.

spiritdogs

  Believe me, my dogs go out behind me, ahead of me, and with me - but I can control which.  It is not the simple act of getting out the door first that is the problem, it's that the dog thinks he is in charge of who goes first, not the human.

I very much agree with this.  My problem with Ivan was that he always thought going out first meant he was in charge , so he needed to wait.  He had a funny way of reasoning that we had to take into account.

Sasha will go out the door in any way I ask.  She respects the front door threshold, and I will frequently leave the door open when I go to my car for something.  Sasha will sit at the door, at not come out, because she knows that walking out the door requires an invitation. 

I could have never EVER done that with Ivan - he would bolt out the door any chance he got, and run run run. 

 I think if you install obedience into your dogs by training, by using NILIF and by being consistent that is enough, out of control dogs that have never had this approach used can be helped along by insisting that you exit first while they wait, and by insisting that they not pull or drag you on leash. If you have raised the dog (or taught) to be well mannered then the simple fact that you let them go through the door first most likely has little bearing on how they perceive you as a leader, if you allow them to run wild and do what they please when they please then perhaps it might.