It's Me or the Dog

What I heard was, she did have a dog training school, or worked in one, and approached the TV peeps over here because she thought there was a gap in the market.... you know, like a Supernanny for dogs.  Someone who comes in, tells them they are doing it all wrong, shakes the places up a bit and, er, tells it like it is, presumably.  Anyhoo, last I heard she doesn't have her own dog (that explains the car then). 

I do think she is abominably rude to some people, BUT on the other hand, I can't help feeling like some of them deserve it.  Honestly - she is dealing with people who in many cases have no idea just how awful their dog is being, people who are clueless when it comes to dogs and approached her AS MUCH because it would "get them on the telly" as because they needed her help. 

I can't watch her OR "the other one" without getting frustrated or rolling my eyes.... at the owners AND the trainers.  So I usually avoid and have therefore mostly only seen early episodes (in both cases)....

I also think she is rude, also i cant have cameras, microphones and speakers in my house to yell at my dog to "leave it" when i'm not there, so i do something different instead.

She does not only talks down to the people she helps but also to methods that are different than hers. It's like having a sports narrator that is clearly on one of the teams sides, the people ruling for the other team would not be happy with those comments. The narrator should be at least in front of the TV, impartial, and let the people decide who they want to rule for. Something that other similar TV shows take care of.

I've also read an email reply from VS addressing the row between her and another person on the Greatest American Dog Show. She was answering a question before the end of it. So, her reply of "yes" to "Do you think you are the God of dog training?" was out of context. As well as the fact that the other person, Wendy, was actually trying to reference CM and bring it into a "celebrity death match," as it were. She regrets the emotion of the exchange and the whole affair was edited so it is difficult to get the whole gist.

I also noticed that she lacks credentials. I have often pointed out that CM lacks creds, so it's only fair to note the same of her. She is also an actress, which may or may not help her in her endeavors. The dominatrix outift is not specifically her idea. Some silly producer came up with that. As for creds, I would ordinarily nominate Ian Dunbar but I feel he was irrepsonsible in his endorsement for the Gentle Leader. I'm sure some dogs benefit most from wearing corrective gear, I just don't think one should say that further training is not necessary.

When it comes down to it, the only consistent trainer with creds that I know can be believed each and every time, with an easy approach to humans is Spiritdogs. So what say we prototype a pilot episode and shop it around. I'll be Ron the Electrician stringing cords and lights around. Every show has an electrician, sometimes called a gaffer or best boy. I can even loan out my poncho, if necessary. Sorry, I was referencing another thread and couldn't resist a poke at myself.

Just as the DW has responded, I think, to some market pressure, so will IMOTD. We may see in the future, a different way for her to approach humans.

As for lack of creds, that's not a hindrance to success, obviously. For hers and other shows. In fact, in our society, it seems more important to be entertaining then accredited. A plus on her side is that she does keep up with the current thinking and methodologies. Education, even self-directed education, is a good thing.

ETA:

I just watched a video on youtube about the argument I mentioned. VS, in her typical fashion of "take charge", denounces domination-based training, based on her knowledge from the leading sources of dog behavior and training. Wendy Diamond, who is not a dog trainer but is a "dog lifestyle expert" disagreed with her and it got out of hand from there. VS drew first blood, so to speak. Then, again, drama makes for "good tv."

Chuffy

  Anyhoo, last I heard she doesn't have her own dog (that explains the car then). 

I just read on her site that she has a chocolate lab named Sadie.

Condescending behavior rarely gets anyone very far with others.

it's a tv show. I suspect much of her behavior and appearance were suggested by the writers/producers. People would not watch a tv show that actually showed real dog training by real experts because it's completely devoid of any conflicts, violence, or chance to feel superior over other people, and is also usually devoid of anyone even remotely physically attractive or well-dressed. She's a bit um, over the top, but her solutions to common doggy misbehaviors work. And I really like how she makes the owners do the real work. And admits it's work, not some quick "choke and drag and poke and roll" and now the dog is fixed forever.

ron2

The dominatrix outift is not specifically her idea.

It's interesting none of the dogs she's worked with have been bothered by it yet.  Willow would go nuts if she came to our door like that. 

mudpuppy

People would not watch a tv show that actually showed real dog training by real experts because it's completely devoid of any conflicts, violence,

Good point, there. There is another show called Good Dog U. It was noticably lacking in "dramatic moments." It was the mundane work of lowering a dog's reactivity to other dogs by rewarding calm behavior at closer and closer ranges until the dog could be in the midst of other dogs and not be keyed up. Essentially reconditioning the dog's reponse by means of reward. Effective, just not flashy. It took time and didn't happen in 20 minutes. Since they didn't have dogs being tripped and pinned, or the OMG response look of one human to another, I've noticed it's not on, anymore. At least I haven't noticed in the last season. It was also heavy on the OC process. No magical sound effect, no flashy clothes. Just leading the dog to a different response to a stimulus or stimuli. In fact, the entire walk consisted of making it to the end of the entry walk to the house. Later, whenever that would be, make it down to the street corner. Baby steps. Kind of like how I got Shadow to "drop it." First cueing and rewarding. Then, later, when he offered it on his own, rewarding that, too. We have generalized from just the kong to kong and tug toy. Nothing exciting. An outsider might not even understand what's going on. "What? He gives a treat for dropping that slobbery toy on his lap?" You betcha. No wrestling or sound. Sometimes, not even the clicker, believe it or not. A wise person once said that you get what you reinforce.

I'm sure producers pay attention to the photogenic qualities of their stars. VS is pretty and CM is handsome. I might have a short career in tv. I'm not photogenic.

Again, I appreciate that VS follows the understanding of OC in all of it's quadrants regardless of whether or not she gets along well with other humans. She is also not afraid to call it like it is. When the Siberian Husky needed to be neutered, the client's BF was protesting for the classical male reason. VS overrode that. I don't know but maybe I can handle her attitude because my mother could be quite stern. It can be off-putting but I know where it comes from. If it helps to understand how I grew up, think of VS as a mellower version of my mother. Not that my mother was always shrieking or producing histrionics. Neither is VS. But it was my mother who had the phrase, "some guys need a 2 X 4 up side the head."

I also appreciate that the mods have let us mention other dog "people." I think it would be nigh unto impossible to discuss one person without references to others. Comparative reasoning is a human thing.

I remember one episode of IMOTD where a couple were literally dragged around by their dogs. A) what were they doing with such large dogs B) why so many large dogs C) why try to walk them all at once if it's a problem? I could understand VS's exasperation. The look was "can people really be this stupid?" My reply, calmly, with a nod of the affirmative, is "yes, oh, yes."

In another thread, it was mentioned, when trying to educate people, honey attracts more than vinegar. But do you ever wonder why smellin salts or ammonia are used to wake some up? It's because the jarring assault on the olfactory senses gets one's attention.

JackieG

spiritdogs

And, speaking of theatrics, how many trainers do you know who wear trench coats and high boots???  (Runs to find trench coat.)

 LOL and what about that very practical car she drives? Great for hauling dogs around, don't you agree?

Yeah, practical, but she probably gets better fuel mileage than I get in the oh-so-practical Yukon that holds all the dog crates LOL.

I'm sure producers pay attention to the photogenic qualities of their stars. VS is pretty and CM is handsome. I might have a short career in tv. I'm not photogenic.

But, Ron, you can, at least, sing and play guitar.  You could be the troubador trainer... 

I've only watched a few episodes (whatever is put on the Net since I do not have cable) but from what I've seen I find lots of what she explains ringing a bell with me. She trains the people more than she trains the dogs herself and she has a knack of putting her fingers on the lack of consistency that precludes progress. This resonates a lot with me since DH and I do not always see things the same way as far as dog handling/training is concerned. I also like that, still from the little I've seen, she does not use a lot of jargon but keeps things understandable for the people she adresses. Nothing I've seen her advise can put either the dog or the owner in danger, which is good.

Yes, it is entertainment and made for TV but there is still a lot that can be learned. Not everyone is going to read books about dog training or attend classes but a 30 minutes program with 4 or 5 main ideas can reach a lot of people.

As far as her people's skills and appearance, she seems to have toned both down for her US episodes, probably a cultural adjustment for both her "clients" and the audience.

mudpuppy

And admits it's work, not some quick "choke and drag and poke and roll" and now the dog is fixed forever.

I dont think any TV show out there promotes quick fixes. In VS show you can see results right away but she or any other similar behaviorists always give the owner homework to do. All of them admit that if the owner is not consistent the dog will go back to where he was. All of them admit that dogs are not home appliances where you can just go, fix and leave.

ron2

in her typical fashion of "take charge", denounces domination-based training,

When another dog is "pushing" another dog she calls it "a dog taking control over the other", thats pure dominance psychology, however, she despites someone that uses dominance-submissions theories; which of course does not make sense

mudpuppy

Condescending behavior rarely gets anyone very far with others.

it's a tv show. I suspect much of her behavior and appearance were suggested by the writers/producers. People would not watch a tv show that actually showed real dog training by real experts because it's completely devoid of any conflicts, violence, or chance to feel superior over other people, and is also usually devoid of anyone even remotely physically attractive or well-dressed. She's a bit um, over the top, but her solutions to common doggy misbehaviors work. And I really like how she makes the owners do the real work. And admits it's work, not some quick "choke and drag and poke and roll" and now the dog is fixed forever.

Of course she's over the top - it's not only about dog training, it's entertainment.  I repeat, we do not wear high boots, leather, or vests.  We wear jeans and grubby sneaks (to walk on the floors that the puppies pee on and not worry about our tennies stinking like pee when we are at Aunt Tillie's or at the mall ).  And, most trainers don't drive convertibles, they drive SUV's or Honda Elements, or mini-vans.  Things that have room for gear, crates, and more than one dog. 

Personally, I've heard CM make some pretty chauvinistic remarks, too, and if he did that at my house, he would be tossed as far out the door as some of you guys would toss VS.  But, neither of them are trying to win our support - they are aiming at the lowest common denominator - people with dogs who know nothing about training but wish the dog were more like Lassie, and less like Marley.

When another dog is "pushing" another dog she calls it "a dog taking control over the other", thats pure dominance psychology, however, she despites someone that uses dominance-submissions theories; which of course does not make sense

Actually, her statement is closer to what really happens between dogs.  "Dominance" is often contextual, so you may have one dog that may care very much who goes up the stairs first, but may willingly defer to his other housemates on other issues.  So, to describe it as taking control in a given situation is just a description of behavior, and, thus, not a position on any theory.  

 A lot of doggy people I know actually watch many different dog training shows. There certainly is not a scarcity. I don't consider them to be :

spiritdogs

they are aiming at the lowest common denominator - people with dogs who know nothing about training but wish the dog were more like Lassie, and less like Marley.

They are actually very proactive about training and having well behaved and socialized dogs. They watch these shows for entertainment, their general interest in dogs and also for education and ideas they can apply to their own pet.
 

denise m

They are actually very proactive about training and having well behaved and socialized dogs. They watch these shows for entertainment, their general interest in dogs and also for education and ideas they can apply to their own pet.

That's me you're describing!  None of these shows have to be taken so seriously  that it would cause arguments among like minded people.