How do you build respect?

houndlove

We were just joking about it earlier up thread, how our various spouses tend to use a bunch of random command words on the dogs and then get confused when they don't respond to them, because they haven't been taught. Now imagine a house hold in which neither person knew how to handle and teach dogs effectively. Two people who just say random things to the dogs and expect them to understand because they say them with an authoritative tone of voice.  How many dogs do you think wind up in shelters because of this?  

 I agree that many people abandon their dogs, make horrible mistakes with their dogs and expect their dogs to just understand things without any training. In my mind these people do not do this because of words like "respect", "dominance”, and "leadership". They do this because of lack of education, lack of commitment, and lack of desire. We all know that thousands of people go out and get a dog because they want a companion, a protector or because they saw a cute puppy and wanted to cuddle it forever. After time passes they lose interest. It is not as easy as they thought or they assume they got a "bad seed" and they commit the dog to the shelter, death or pass it on to someone else and cycle continues.

 Now some of these people may watch an episode of DW and then come to a class and say, “my dog does not respect me, or my dog does not see me as a leader” because of the short bits of one or two shows they might watch. These people are not in the state that they are in because of CM or his show; they were there before he ever came into the picture. The problem is not CM, it is not any trainer, the problem is lack of education and even more so, lack of willingness to commit to a training program even when they recognize and know that this is what they, and their dog needs.

 It is and always will be a problem, and it does not matter whose show is on TV. You could put Karen Pryor on TV and we would still have an enormous population that will not listen, or they will listen partially, we will have those who will pick up the clicker, like Karen suggests and then get angry and frustrated because “the clicker does not work”. It won’t be Karen’s fault, it won’t be the clickers fault and it won’t be the dogs fault, it will be the stupid person who just is not willing and does not care enough to get in touch with his/her dog and form a relationship.

 Why can’t we stop arguing about words, words that are (the last time I looked) still in the dictionary and still used on a daily basis, and start educating people about the joy and delight of having a well behaved dog. I for one am tired of being in threads where I or someone else might make a suggestion only to have the entire thread turn into and argument on whether leadership is valid, is dominance a dog or is dominance a behavior or is dominance a crock of BS.

 I will end by saying that I have often told my DH that the reason the dogs do not listen to him is because they do not respect him. I have told him this for over 20 years. Not one time has he ever assumed or suggested that because the dogs do not respect him he should beat them, or hit them. I even asked him this question last night. "Since the dogs do not respect you as much as they do me have you ever considered teaching them to respect you?" He answered "yes". I then asked him "How would you go about teaching them to respect you?”

 His answer was " I should start feeding them like you do, I should ask them to sit and wait and tell them when they can eat, I should stop giving them treats for no reason and should ask them to sit, or shake or roll over before giving them one". I should take them for walks without you and make sure they behave like you make them behave."

glenmar

And without a clear agreement as to the definition of the words involved, I'm not sure how any group can have a conversation that doesn't become at least a bit hostile.

We COULD trust the other people here. We could trust that when we say "respect" we don't mean hitting the dog.

We COULD ask instead of assuming. We could ASK, "What do you mean by "respect"? Instead of assuming it has something to do with physical violence.

We COULD allow that when people say they are willing to use +P when necessary that they probably try other methods before resorting to punishment of some kind. We could assume that we all adore our dogs.

We COULD stop assuming that people Reach for a Sledge Hammer to do a Caliper's Job.

Just a few ideas...

FourIsCompany

Does your wife believe you to be the main "alpha"? Does she acknowledge that you know how to deal with the dogs?  

Yes, she does acknowledge that I am the "alpha."  Whenever she has a problem she calls me to address it.  Whenever we're out with Dixie and someone comments on his good behavior, she is quick to say that it's my training and not hers.  I've always believed that she's wanted a toy/cuddler and not a dog.  

 I find the post about not speaking fluent English funny.  I use "No" for unwanted behavior but my fiance keeps say "Stop it" hoping it will have the same effect as "No."  I find it funny too with how we deal with Dixie.  We're both teachers, I'm regular ed, she's special ed.  She is very calm and under control when dealing with troubling kids, but at home she raises her voice to Dixie.  I'm the opposite, very calm with the dog, but have a tendency to raise my voice with kids.  Working with the dog though has helped me dealing with tough kids.  Go figure.
 

houndlove

Are you seriously trying to say that people reading here expect dogs to know to obey commands that they've never been taught? I just don't think people are that stupid. 

People reading this particular thread? No. People in general? It's entirely possible.  

I agree. So, why are we hung up on the words here? This thread was about building respect with our dogs and then it got hijacked to be about words again. If we are ever going to really communicate, we need to stop getting hung up in the words. 

Like Glenda said, she doesn't housebreak her dogs, she house trains them. Okay. That's fine that she chooses that expression for it, but is it necessary that we ALL use 'house train" or can we just KNOW that when I say house break, I mean exactly the same thing as she does when she says "house train" (not that I somehow "break" something about my dog)? Or must we get hung up on the term and go on for pages about what the word means until we're no longer discussing stopping the dog from crapping in the living room, we're discussing the meaning of words. That doesn't help the dogs. That doesn't help each other and it builds the wall between us even higher.

(Sorry, Glenda, I didn't mean to pick on your word, I just picked one out of the blue. I could have used leader, alpha, respect, trust, dominance, submission, pack, +R or a dozen others that I've seen discussions about here.) My point is that the thread about an issue too many times gets hijacked to be about the word and that's fairly useless UNLESS we're meant to be talking about the word itself, which some threads have also attempted to do.

But, the whole point is that unless we AGREE on what the darned words mean, then there is going to be confusion and often conflict.

You (generic you) seem to assume that WE (generic we) assume certain things about certain words and for myself at least (and that would be a singular myself) that just isn't the case.

glenmar

But, the whole point is that unless we AGREE on what the darned words mean, then there is going to be confusion and often conflict.

We CANNOT all agree on the specific meaning of every word, but we can use what's in the dictionary. There will only be confusion and conflict if we try to argue about what the meaning of the word "is" is.

Respect - Look it up.

Respect: 3 a: high or special regard : esteem

Nothing about "fear, punishment or intimidation" or being a "yank and spank trainer". Those are all subjective and have nothing to do with the word respect NOR the original post! But "clicker trainers never use the word", of course... (And I beg to differ).

Hence, if you don't use a clicker, you're a "yank and spank trainer". Mudpuppy's post was totally off topic and launched the thread into a war of the words. Forget about answering the OP's request. There was the opportunity to lash out at the CM folks once again.

And you wonder why things get tense?  

Carla, I just have to ask if I can steal that picture....I love it.....lol

self edited comment not contructive to communication

Now that I look back on that post, I want to say that I mean no disrespect to clicker trainers with that picture. The idea that I'd like to put across is that the clicker is not the answer to all training and teaching issues or problems for everyone. That's all I mean by that. My sense of humor is brash and my personality is harsh and upfront and in-your-face, but I don't say things (or post pictures) to disrespect people.

I own 4 clickers myself. I have used them for years. They are very useful to me. And if anyone can get their dog to do everything they want it do to with the use of a clicker, then I think that's fine. If they want to do that and they're happy doing that, I couldn't argue with the way they do things. I will never say that using a clicker is wrong or less-effective. But I don't want to use it to do everything. I have certain strong beliefs about me and my dogs and one of them is that a clicker is the best tool for certain skills, but not for the entire well-being of the animal. It's not the be-all and end-all of life with dogs, in my opinion.

A clicker can't build respect.  

That's all I mean by that picture. No disrespect to anyone intended.  

Just for the record I own ZERO clickers.  I had a few, but they've all managed to go the way of the lost sock in the dryer.......

Never owned a clicker, but then isn't it all about having a marker noise work for ya, whatever that noise may be? I prefer snapping my fingers, and you would be amazed how happy the dogs are hearing that "Snap"......

Good grief.  I have just read all three pages and I don't feel very educated about how I should get my dogs to respect me.

Respect can come from fear, so I can KINDA get the whole physical thing.... not sure exactly where that crept in or how it's relevant, but then I'll be the first to admit I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed.

I have been re-reading "Bones would rain from the sky" by Suzanne Clothier and in it she has some interesting ideas about respect and leadership.

1. Control of and access to any and all resources that matter
2. Control or direction of behaviouri
3. Proactive intervention on behalf of the dog (example: rude dog comes charging up to yours and you step forward in front of your dog to block the intruder)

She also includes several anecdotal examples of ways to win your dogs respect without ever resorting to physical force, pain, fear, etc.  She deems it essential to provide your dog with leadership, in order for him to be happy (she calls it keeping the covenant of the collar). 

I love her example of Opal, the Afghan.  Opal thought she owned the couch.  The method prescribed was to take her into the living room and play the "get comfy, get off" game.  If she is already on the couch and her owner challenged her and MADE her move, she would be challenging her status and creating a defensive, confrontational mood which is hardly conducive to a trusting relationship where learning and understanding take place.  The leadership issues were tackled holistically, mainly with a NILIF type protocol.  This is one example of a way to win a dog's respect which is loving, compassionate, effective and kind.

I don't think that respect is not relevant in dog owning and training.  I think you owe it to your dog to be deserving of his respect.  I think dogs with owners that they respect are happier.  There is less room for confusion or anxiety in their lives.  We can all get by and have well behaved dogs without thinking about this concept.  But, as I often say.... just because you can doesnt mean you should.

maybe we should ask WHY we need to get our dogs "to respect" us. Use the strict definitiion of "holds in high esteem". Why? why do we need our dogs to "hold us in high esteem"? 

Or we could ask the converse, do you seriously believe your dog, anyone's dog, DOESN'T hold their owners "in high esteem"?  we must seem like magical beings to them. I go away for a few hours and come back with bags of meat. They look at me adoringly "she's amazing! what a hunter! we've been hunting all week and haven't even caught a mouse! She can open doors! She can operate the can opener! She can make the truck MOVE! wow! "

mudpuppy

maybe we should ask WHY we need to get our dogs "to respect" us. Use the strict definitiion of "holds in high esteem". Why? why do we need our dogs to "hold us in high esteem"? 

Or we could ask the converse, do you seriously believe your dog, anyone's dog, DOESN'T hold their owners "in high esteem"?  we must seem like magical beings to them. I go away for a few hours and come back with bags of meat. They look at me adoringly "she's amazing! what a hunter! we've been hunting all week and haven't even caught a mouse! She can open doors! She can operate the can opener! She can make the truck MOVE! wow! "

I agree with you, Houndlove, in that it is inaccurate to assume that dogs think about respect in the same abstract terms that humans do. The follow who knows where the good things are. If that leader doesn't know, they will find out for themselves where the good things are. It's not so much human "respect" as it is survival.

I agree with Mudpuppy, too. What is often seen as a sign of "disrespect" is more a matter of confusion or wrong signals. The one receiving the disrespect did not present the cue in the proper format.

I agree with Dgriego. Blanket statements can be misleading. Such as the dog isn't respecting the human's position as leader. And, basically, you have to show the dog who is boss. In many cases, imho, it is actually a case of the dog doing something that has been rewarding and hasn't yet found a rewarding reason to not engage in that behavior or to engage in a behavior incompatible with that. Or, in the face of inconsistency, makes his/her own decisions. Not all dogs will do that. But some do. So, again, blanket statements can be misleading.

I think what I build with my dog is knowledge and I may be misusing that term. But knowledge that I know the way to good things. That I will take care of situations. Not faith, not guesswork. Knowledge that I know the way to get to that grilled fish in my pocket. That where we go is fun because of the treats, the chance to meet friendly dogs, the chance to track mouse scent. At first, it is active learning. After a while, it is a conditioned response, like writing with one hand more than the other hand.