Why does dominance = force?
The most dominant dogs I know very rarely if ever exert force....they just don't have to.

Excellent post!

But I don't wield power over my dog.
Yes, I have to get her food out of the cupboard, but thats because she cannot physically open the cupboard, get a cup of food out etc etc.

I don't tell her to do things.
She goes to the toilet when she wants, she sleeps when/where she wants. She walks where she wants when we go out.

I just keep her safe/healthy.

Because the entire concept is built in a power struggle. (Even look at the definition rune posted -- power or control over another.)

The only creatures really concerned with power and control are human beings. Dogs simply aren't. They do not form strict hierarchies. Getting up on the bed so they're "higher" than you is not an attempt to dominate. Neither is walking ahead of you, pulling at the leash, or humping. The whole thing is just CRAZY. My gosh, I've heard people say a dog is dominant over air or light by its actions. Silliness.

Dogs are not out to control the world.

Power..OR control....it is not always power struggle...it is being in control....Look at the definition....

I think you will find a lot of animals are very concerned with control....it is a very important part of life...especially for wild animals. Control over resources can be the difference between life and death....

I agree....light and air...dogs are just not...and (going back OT) if you read what I posted....you will see - I do not think Oscar is attempting dominance in any way (from what Rips was describing).

Interesting debate. The problem is of course that the word is used in different ways.
I like the use of `control` though.
Daisy had learned to control her space through aggression. I expect some CM fans would consider that a sign of dominance, but it wasn`t - she was extremely stressed and trying to avoid confrontation, not create it.
It`s difficult when people try to interpret dog behaviour in human terms - a human forcing their sexual intentions on someone is usually about power, but dogs don`t have that sort of agenda. The sofa cushion will do.

Gnasher, sounds like you are doing good work socalising Ben and helping him over his bad start in life
He sounds v like Mia - she only now lets me brush her tail

But your post before implied to me that if you were a good enough leader then he wouldnt have any of these problems because he would just look to you

Wheras how I see it is he has these problems because of his past and you are working with him to give him the time and positive experience for HIM to be able to be relaxed and happy in these situations because he has been socalised to them
Thats what I want for Mia - not to be having to relying on me to tell her some alternative behaviour - or looking to me at all
But to just be confident in herself in the situation


and Dawn, that post was out of line!

I don't like to use the D word in relation to dog/animal behaviour ~ not because I think it is always inappropriate, but simply because it is a word/concept that has been so misused & abused in relation to dog behaviour. At one time dominance was used to explain just about all canine behaviours ~ peel away the layers & lurking beneath was a dog that humped/growled/snarled/wee'd/grabbed toys/rough-housed with another dog/sat on the sofa/barged through a door etc etc etc & all anyone could say was that the dog was being dominant. Dogs should be credited with a bit more of a complex social structure than just some linear hierarchy where their sole aim in life was to be top dog!!

But I can appreciate that certain behaviours can be interpreted as "dominant" in the sense that one dog may guard something precious from other dogs or people, i.e. that dog has "power" over that resource because it possesses a particular valuable resource. So does that mean that a dog that challenges the other dog for a resource is also being "dominant"? Is this a struggle for dominance? If this is a contest does it mean the winner is the dominant dog?

And this is where I think the D word has become so misused. It is also why I so much prefer the term "resource-holding" or resource-guarding" ~ it conveys the fact that a particularly valued resource may provoke conflict between dogs (not a power struggle to be pack leader, just a squabble over who has the most comfy bed, the tastiest bone, the owner's attention etc.).

As for being the ones to control our dogs, show them their place, get them to obey commands, control resources etc ~ surely all dog lovers do this out of the best interests for their dogs' welfare? Don't we all, as responsible dog owners, want to teach our dogs how to fit in to today's human society? The commands we teach our dogs are for the dog's safety, or to enrich their lives if they enjoy the learning process, or so that they can fit in with what is acceptable to us? That doesn't mean that we are dominant or that we are pack leaders, or that our dogs even perceive us as parent/top dog etc. All it means is that humans have far greater cognitive powers & that the world is completely "dominated" by the human race ~ so for domestic dogs to survive, they have to learn to live by the rules that owners teach them ~ hopefully in a kind & rewarding way.

Try reading Lynns posts then, about how people are kidding themseloves and implying they dont know anything.

Yeah, I believe you. You ADVERTISE, otherwise why would anyone contact you? They wouldnt know would they?

In your opinion, I responded only at this time in the thread, despite reading it frequently, when Lynn persisted in telling people they were wrong!