The very concept of dominance has a very bad connotation in the dog world. I can understand why – the older meaning of the word in any case interprets that the human had no direct relationship with his dog and therefore had to use physical coercion when the dog did not listen and/or obey. Today, discussions go high and low about the so-called dominance of dogs, and I wanted to think out loud about this little thing.
My opinion on this is that if you have to dominate your dog, you have missed this part of communication.
But you think that meatballs and exercise are enough, they have also missed this part of communication.
And the communication you have your dog with you must meet the dog where it is. If you have a very calm and quiet dog, communication looks one way. Have a man like me, an extremely energetic and forward dog sees communication in a different way. In some cases, the communication must be as intense as the level the dog is at, and it is not at all unusual that in such cases you have to get physical with your dog.
Being physical with your dog does not mean that you neither hit, kicks or abuses it.
To communicate with your dog is to an enormous extent about being aware. Partly about the dog, but perhaps above all about himself. What image of yourself do you present to your dog? How does it perceive its owner?
Something I have been dealing with throughout Ella's and my life together is owning my space (basically the only place this doesn't work is when the doorbell rings). If Ella is lying on the sofa where I have intended to sit, it is so obvious to me that it is my place, that she can simply move on. She likes to lie next to me, but that particular place is mine.
She learned also already as a puppy that if I want her chew bone or toy, I'll take it. She has no say in that. All I do is expect what she has to be mine, and then I'll take it. Today, a clear throat or a look is usually enough for her to drop a bite and back off.
I have nothing against using the word dominance when it comes to dogs, but I think more people need to understand that the meaning is not the same as before, or for that matter, the same as when describing a dominant person. Above all, it is not what is considered dominant within, for example, a BDSM context.
The most important thing is to remember that nothing comes for free. It requires work on our part – and most of ourselves, actually. For example, it can take a very long time to demand its space so that the dog does not take liberties with your person without asking permission. It can also take time to see it as self-evident that you should be able to pick things from the dog without conflict.
It is required exercise. You have to do the same thing over and over again. You don't build a relationship in a day, and it may take both success and adversity to get somewhere. You have to engage in a lot of self-examination and then learn how to carry yourself to direct the intention towards the dog who reads and hopefully follows. If it is not followed, we are the ones who have missed something in the communication.
Another thing I also feel that it is very important in. No, I probably want to replace the word dominance with communication. I notice it, now that i think about it. In which case; another thing I also feel is very important in the communication with our dogs is to be responsive. Responsiveness and respect are super important for it to work. Now Ella happens to be excessively social and affectionate, but there are dogs who, for example, do not want to greet either dogs or people. If you have such a dog, you just have to like the situation and accept it, and not force social behavior.
How do you think about dominance and communication?