Rudeness In Dogs (why Your Da Dog, May Not Actually Be Da)

[tigerlily46514]

Anneke writes:
//Of course there are o lot of dogs out there that ARE truely dog-agressive//

^a point not mentioned even once by this author, who insists that "most" dog-aggressive dogs are just owned by ppl who are "ignorant".

 

[Anneke]

//

​

and I get Cream off the dog immediately (and "correct" her - laying her down, holding her muzzle, shaking her a bit, saying "NO!" very sternly, etc.//​

facepalm. Many many normal dogs dislike puppies. Even Tx_cowgirls' lovely Mudflap tends to dislike most puppies. THAT is not dog-aggression. (oddly, my DA dog tends to give puppies a "pass", he barks at them, sometimes overly loudly, and then, Buddy turns his own self AWAY from puppies)​

​

Disliking puppies is not uncommon. It is NOT dog-aggression.​

The owners "treatment" of the issue has caused this normal dog to make terrible associations to puppies or hyper dogs.​

this email is NOT what living with a true DA dog is like, or about. sorry, Sara, but owners of true DA dogs, know they do have a true DA dog. DA dogs do exist, like shy dogs exist. Taking an email from a stupid owner,​

and suggesting THAT is what dog-aggression is about, ​

is both a form of denying DA dogs exist,​

and is misinformed.​

Cream is MOST OBVIOUSLY not a DA dog, and lumping this story of a dog who played nicely with all other dogs, but disliked puppies----------in an article titled ​

''why Your Da Dog, May Not Actually Be Da)"

is so so misinformed, imo.

​

​

You are quoting from the letter written to the author, in which the owner discribes Cream's behaviour. The author does state she does NOT think Cream is dog-agressive.
The OWNER and her trainers think she is dog-agressive. The author thinks it is a very normal reaction to a rude dog.
Her is where she states this:

Unfortunately for Cream, her appropriate response to rudeness was misread as aggression, and she was punished. I cannot even begin to fully comprehend the confusion that must flood a dog who has acted appropriately but is punished nonetheless.​

​

 

[Anneke]

Anneke writes:
//Of course there are o lot of dogs out there that ARE truely dog-agressive//

^a point not mentioned even once by this author, who insists that "most" dog-aggressive dogs are just owned by ppl who are "ignorant".

Yes, true, but the article is NOT about agressive dogs, but about misreading dogbehaviour and the ignorance of a lot of dogowners, who's dogs are triggering the other dog to growl/lunge. And the fact that the dogs displaying the growling/lunging immidiately get "blamed" and noone even looks at the other dog.

 

[tigerlily46514]

Yes, yes, i agree, with the author, that Cream is NOT a da dog. I said that.

I am in agreement, and yes, i AM quoting the email she posted,
yes, i am, i knew that, and yes, i agree, the owner's reaction is wrong, and like i said, the owners reaction IS excaberating the situation.

??

//You are quoting from the letter written to the author//

yes, that is WHY i say in next line "this EMAIL" and so on.
but, the author suggesting that "most" cases of DA dogs are similar to this email, is ignorant.

 

[Dogster]

Tigerlily, I don't mind if you write a lot. Don't have Twitter, LOL I love to read, I don't mind, not at all. I actually enjoy it.

On topic now..... confusing article....

 

[tigerlily46514]

//Yes, true, but the article is NOT about agressive dogs,//

I AGREE!! But this author, continuously suggests that "most" DA dogs are simply owned by ignorant, rude, punishing type of "fools" who just don't understand about dogs, etc etc.

which i insist, IS doing a disservice, to not even once mention, dogs who are persistently aggressive to most unknown dogs, for their entire lives, DO have true dog-aggression, INSTEAD, this author lumps DA dogs in with other dogs, who are most obviously NOT da dogs, and puts forth, that is the case "most" of the time if someone says their dog is a DA dog.



Which i strongly disagree with.


so so many of this author's assertions, i strongly disagree with.

 

[Anneke]

Another thing... I would not dream of taking my dog on to a propperty with a pack of dogs.
Not even when my dog has met each dog separately. As long as my dog has not been with the pack on their territory under supervision, my dog does NOT come with me.
Dogs DO respond differently when the have the strength of a pack, no matter how well behaved they are. No matter how well behaved my dog is.

The lady, who wondered on to her friends propperty with her dog, was NOT thinking straight.
You simply DON'T take a dog into a pack without the owner of the pack present.

My friend has 5 dogs, three goldens, one aussie and one mutt. All very social and well behaved dogs. The only reason I bring my dog to her house, is because I know her dogs VERY well. Most of her dogs I have known since she got them(the aussie is a rescue) and I know these dogs separately as well as in their pack. And I know how they react to my dog.
But I would not take a strange dog there, without my friend being there to controle her dogs.

 

[Anneke]

//Yes, true, but the article is NOT about agressive dogs,//

I AGREE!! But this author, continuously suggests that "most" DA dogs are simply owned by ignorant, rude, punishing type of "fools" who just don't understand about dogs, etc etc.

which i insist, IS doing a disservice, to not even once mention, dogs who are persistently aggressive to most unknown dogs, for their entire lives, DO have true dog-aggression, INSTEAD, this author lumps DA dogs in with other dogs, who are most obviously NOT da dogs, and puts forth, that is the case "most" of the time if someone says their dog is a DA dog.



Which i strongly disagree with.


so so many of this author's assertions, i strongly disagree with.

I do see your point there

 

[southerngirl]

Very interesting article, long read though. I agree with a lot of points the author makes.Dogs just like people want there space respected, though some dogs are more tolerant of rude dogs.

 

[tigerlily46514]

//The lady, who wondered on to her friends propperty with her dog.....//
no, the author stated the lady and her dog were visitors, and had greeted all the dogs together inside her home, that they had all been visiting INSIDE HER HOME.


And then, this author, put her dogs outdoors, and allowed her friend, with a LEASHED dog, to go into her back yard.


It does not sound like a case of trespassing.

I'm assuming, the author/homeowner, was aware of how her own pack behaves,
and i am assuming this author, watching this, allowed it,
and that this author was unable to detect, her dogs were not relaxed to bring in this "retiring, older" dog, and yet, this author allowed it all to happen.

and then, the same author, and bangs on about how ppl should be tuned in to their dogs, and learn to read their dog's signals, and learn how to prevent unpleasant socializations, etc etc. rofl.
while her own dogs just attacked a visitor dog, while she watched it all happening.
??
After describing her own dogs attacking a visitor dog, while she stood by, she then complains about ppl who don't control their dogs, don't understand their dogs, "fools" who don't prevent fights, don't keep their dogs all under control, "ignorant owners" who are unable to detect early signs of aggression, etc etc.

*almost* funny, that....almost.

The authors dogs rushed the visitor dog, demanded the dog lie down and submit (per the author's perception) and the visitor dog, being excited and onleash, ended up having his feet off the ground, (leashes do mess up some dogs ability to successfully interact)
which like i said in previous post, is not uncommon in leashed dogs who are excited,
and the author then suggests that the visitor dog objects to her pack's demands the visitor dog lie down is wrong behavior.
I'm not as certain the visitor dog was disagreeing, so much as being inhibited by a leash, so his feet came off ground, but, i wasn't there.

and like i said, i'm not as convinced as this author, that HER dogs were not "rude" dogs here, but, i wasn't there.

 

[Anneke]

//The lady, who wondered on to her friends propperty with her dog.....//
no, the author stated the lady and her dog were visitors, and had greeted all the dogs together inside her home, that they had all been visiting INSIDE HER HOME.


And then, this author, put her dogs outdoors, and allowed her friend, with a LEASHED dog, to go into her back yard.


It does not sound like a case of trespassing.

I'm assuming, the author/homeowner, was aware of how her own pack behaves,
and i am assuming this author, watching this, allowed it,
and that this author was unable to detect, her dogs were not relaxed to bring in this "retiring, older" dog, and yet, this author allowed it all to happen.


The authors dogs rushed the visitor dog, demanded the dog lie down and submit (per the author's perception) and the visitor dog, being excited and onleash, ended up having his feet off the ground, (leashes do mess up some dogs ability to successfully interact)
which like i said in previous post, is not uncommon in leashed dogs who are excited,
and the author then suggests that the visitor dog objects to her pack's demands the visitor dog lie down is wrong behavior.
I'm not as certain the visitor dog was disagreeing, so much as being inhibited by a leash, so his feet came off ground, but, i wasn't there.

and like i said, i'm not as convinced as this author, that HER dogs were not "rude" dogs here, but, i wasn't there.

Maybe I understood her explanation of this event diffently from you. I thought she was not aware of the fact her friend and her dog were coming onto her propperty and she was not with the dogs at that moment. I was asuming, that, had she been there, she would have put her dogs away, or asked her friend to wait.

 

[tigerlily46514]

Not impossible, that i am misunderstanding this woman, and her dog, were visitors to the home. You may be right, Anneke, you may be right!! By the time i got that far in this article, i was annoyed in general by several remarks which i disagreed with, you may be right that this woman was a trespasser.

The author also gives impression, she herself observed the meeting in the yard, and, i'd think, as homeowner, she would have, or should have, been charge of deciding if/when her dog meet the visitor dog.

//My dogs, very revved up since they'd been in the house for hours and now playing hard, were surprised to see her and her dog come up from the direction of the barn - they'd last seen her and her dog in the house.//​

But not impossible, the author means her GSDs had last seen the sheltie in her house yesterday....Or perhaps, the author had thought this woman had gone home, and did not realize this woman went into the barn.
who knows.

The author suggests she herself was previously aware, the visitor dog did not get along with german shepherds, yet, allowed this dog to get near her GSD pack:​

​

// Yet repeatedly, this dog triggered impressive displays from other dogs, usually those of the German persuasion, when he wandered into their space. //​

​

​

but, later the author says this:​

//han playing in the yard without my supervision.//​

although the author describes the event as if she witnessed it herself, perhaps she did not witness it.​

If i had a visitor with a dog in my home,​

~and a pack of GSDs who tend to rush, and force submission of visitor dogs, and bite them to the point of requiring stitches if the visitor dog does NOT lay down for them,​

~coupled with a visitor dog i knew had trouble with GSDs,​

and​

~a visitor i felt did not know much about dogs,​

i'd probably clearly warn the visitor to keep her dog away from my dogs when they are all pent up from lack of exercise that day. I know i would have done that, but, that's just me. I don't see dog fights as "mostly posturing" the way she does, either, though.


I would have warned the woman to stay away from my pack, in that situation. NO doubt i would have done that, especially, since author seems to imply, that the author was aware that this visitor woman was not too smart about dogs.

​

​

 

[sara]

I wasn't intending this article to be a debate on whether or not a DA dog is born or made. this is an article on rude dog behaviour and mistaking correcting rudeness vs. DA.

Tigerlily, no where in the article did she say DA is always made. and she is a very top trainer/behaviourist, whom alot of people on here follow advice from. I thought it did a fantastic job of explaining that "perceived" DA is not always the case. Cream is not DA, but was perceived to be by alot of people, even her owner.

 

[tigerlily46514]

//Tigerlily, no where in the article did she say DA is always made.//
true, she just repeats,
probably about 10 times or more,
that in her opinion, stupid owners making mistakes to cause the aggression,
or
improperly understanding dog behavior,
are "most" of cases of dog aggression. To which, i strongly disagree.

but, Sara, this article you posted, did stop short of the author blatantly claiming it is "ALL" CASES, indeed, she did not quite say that outright, but merely implies it instead, and insists it is "almost all"
and
"most"
etc etc etc.

Sara, if i posted an article, stating "almost all" and "most" cases of shy dogs, or fear aggressive dogs, or "anxious" dogs, or whatever word is popular,
stating "almost all" of those dogs are just being improperly interpretted by "stupid', "rude" "ignorant" "fool" (etc) owners, i wonder if you would disagree??

and that if those "fools" who "claim" their dog is shy, had just simply known better, their dog would be "fine" not shy, i wonder if you would disagree, and say, "No, some dogs are shy dogs, it's not their owners can't understand the dog/ just improperly labelling it."

//and she is a very top trainer/behaviourist, whom alot of people on here follow advice from.//

"Yank and Kick"Dog Whisperer has an even larger following. Because an idea, or a person, is popular, does not mean they are correct.
Humans are easy to get to believe things, even fantastical things at times, wth zero evidence at all.

Many many ppl believing something is "true", does not always indicate the info is accurate, imo. Top scholars once had everyone convinced the earth was flat, too.
There are dog supplements out there, wildly popular, being sold, because some guy "got a good feeling" when he held his hand over that plant, and it's easy enough to find tons of ppl who swear by them, unaware of the powerful "placebo" effect.
Lots of humans saying something is true, is not the same thing as it being true.


Humans do not always use research and evidence to draw conclusions. Many of this author's remarks made it clear to me, she does not have a lot of insight into DA dogs, or maybe it is just she has has not had a lot of direct experience with dog-aggressive dogs, as she seems to deny they even exist.
Denying a problem exists just never helps, imo.
Not once, not once, in the entire article, does this author even mention DA dogs do exist, even while millions are put down yearly.

Besides this author's insistence that dog aggression is "almost always" just a case of "stupid" humans who can't properly interpret dog behavior nor respond to it well,
there are several other remarks she makes, which i also disagree with. I was not even impressed with her own managment/interpretation of her very own dogs and visitors, either, and found her a bit hypocritical in that part of the article.

LIke i said, i did agree with some of her remarks, but not most of them.

 

[tigerlily46514]

Sara, of all the members on DTA, many of whom (like me) "claim" their dog is dog-aggressive,
have you ever once, even suspected, the owner is improperly labelling the dog's behavior?
I don't see a lot of that here on DTA anyway.

I believe the other members here, many of whom post regularly, and i feel i sort of almost "know" their dogs by now,
and when these members say, "My dog IS dog-aggressive"------- i don't think they are "stupid" "ignorant" "fools", as this article suggests is "almost always" the case.

do you?

True, true, this CAN and DOES happen, yes, it can. I know that is true, that humans can point at a behavior, and mistakenly label the dog as "dog-aggressive",
when in fact, it is NOT a DA dog. No argument.


How often do you see that here on DTA? I tend to follow all threads on DA dogs pretty closely, as it is an interest of mine. "Almost all" of the time,
when the owner is claiming her dog is a DA dog, i "almost always" do read what she/he posts, and recognize, "Yes, i can see why she'd think so, i think so too."
MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, i find humans very very reluctant to label their dogs as DA dogs!!!

On the multiple forums i belong to, specifically for owners of aggressive dogs,
i can't recall many times reading about the dog's behavior, and thinking, "that dog is NOT aggressive, but instead, just being mishandled and misinterpretted."
(again, that CAN happen, but, this authors claim that "is ALMOST ALL of the cases", seems way way outa line, and far from reality)


Although there is no way to truly diagnose a dog via online, even this author puts forth written descriptions of dog behavior, suggesting we can learn what happened by reading what the dog is doing/the trigger involved/the response of the human, etc etc etc.




Imo, most humans will use ANY word but the "A" word on their dogs---

"My dog is not aggressive he is _______" (choose one)

~territorial
~resource-guarder
~fearful
~protective
~lacks social skills/undersocialized
~is an "alpha"
~is "dominant" (in fact, my impression is, most true DA dogs are NOT dominant dogs at all, but instead, are "dominant-Wanna-Be's" )
it's an endless list of words ppl use to avoid using the "A" word. (and yes, yes, i've read how some ppl feel "aggressive" does not apply to canines, but, i use the word, as it is an easily, instantly understandable word)

so so so so so many owners of aggressive dogs, seem to do ANYTHING to avoid using the "A" word (aggressive) about their dog.

 

[tigerlily46514]

//. I thought it did a fantastic job of explaining that "perceived" DA is not always the case. //
I've agreed with this, almost from my first post after i read the article.

but, i object to her insistence that that it is "ALMOST ALWAYS" the case, (dog is not a DA dog/just mislabelled)


//Cream is not DA, but was perceived to be by alot of people, even her owner.//
Yes, Sara, not sure if you are a reader, but, i agreed there, entirely, a few times already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are preaching to the choir, i am in total agreement.
I do not disagree with THAT remark. I disagree with the author's conclusion, that since Cream is being improperly managed/mislabelled, that THAT is "ALMOST ALWAYS" THE CASE.

got it? THAT is one of many conclusions the author makes, which i disagree with.

 

[tigerlily46514]

//I wasn't intending this article to be a debate on whether or not a DA dog is born or made.//
WELL, you DID read my first post, then!! which i wrote about just the headline of the article.


I did not see "a debate" go by, i merely mentioned, denying the existance of inherently shy dogs (google it) and genetically neurobiologically abnormal dogs exist, is not helpful. These two types of dogs DO exist, they are BORN THAT WAY,
and are so misunderstood, even by the author of this article.

Yes, i am aware of your belief/feeling, that the research in those areas can't be trusted, and that human error is at fault in "almost all" cases of aggressive dogs, which, no doubt, explains why you liked this article. This mindset is super super common, the vast bulk of the dog world embraces that belief, as well.
I feel i do have a right to post my opinion, even if you disagree with it. There are both
inherently shy dogs,
and
dog-aggressive dogs,
and both are genetic disorders,
and both have neurobiological abnormalities, in every shy dog tested, and in every DA dog tested.
True, the multiple research teams all over the globe, have not tested EVERY aggressive or shy dog in the world!! But, in every one they HAVE tested,
the same exact neurobiological anomalies are found in these dog's brains and bloodstreams.

but yeah, in "ALMOST ALL" cases, when a human claims their dog is dog-aggressive,
it's just some human is stupid/rude/ignorant fool. Yeah, sure, THAT is the vast bulk of these dogs, and their owners,
riiiiiiiiiight.

 

[tigerlily46514]

Sara, even YOUR words, i disagreed with, hope you did read my earlier reply to THIS idea you put forth:
(emphasis my own)
//Alot of people feel their dog is DA, but might not actually be DA, just intolerant to rudeness!//

again, my "feeling" my dog is a DA dog, has nothing to do with other dogs being rude.
AT ALL.
And this is not the situation with 100s and 100s of other owners of DA dogs on the forums i belong to which are dedicated to dog with aggression.

but, if you want to think we are all just wrong minded in our assessments, or that "a lot" of us are, that's your right to believe whatever you want to believe, but, that does not make it "true".
I'd LOVE for you to meet my Buddy,
or Mewzard's dog,
or Anneke's dog,
or Tif's mother's Zara,
Tx_cowgirls's late Rusty,
or CharmedWolf's dog,
or any of the dozens of dogs right here on DTA who are DA dogs.......
DA dogs will and DO react to friendly dogs,
calm polite well-mannered dogs
sleeping dogs,
dogs far away
dogs calmly walking away,
well-liked, calm, friendly dogs who DO get on fine with EVERY dog but our dog,
etc etc.
SARA, IT'S NOT THE OTHER DOG!! it's OUR dog!!

Your suggestion, Sara, that "a lot" of us just mistakenly "feel" our dogs are DA dogs, are really just "a lot of us" not seeing it is really just the other dog's fault, cuz other dog is rude, would not hold up with any of us who DO know what it is like,
to love a dog-aggressive dog.<--which, like i said in earlier post on page one, a DA dog IS different than a shy dog who has developed generalized diffuse aggression spilling over now towards other dogs also.<----NOT the same thing as a DA DOG.

Sara, come down, stay a week with me and Buddy, and learn about DA dogs!! Open invitation!!!

 

[running_dog]

Part of the problem is that people want an animated stuffed toy not a living sensitive dog.

Zac is not dog aggressive but I know people who would label him as such because...
He does not like other dogs/puppies stealing the bone he is chewing.
He does not like dogs/puppies pestering him while he is trying to sleep
He does not like dogs/puppies invading his space.
He does not like other dogs/puppies trying to mount him.

As you can see it is not the dog he dislikes but the ACTION of the dog. He will get along with most dogs just fine once they respect his space. In return he does not do any of these things to them.
Nor does he feel any need to attack other dogs.
If a dog needs a lesson he will give clear warning and a measured response.
He does like to play rough chase games and this freaks out a lot of dogs (usually predictable by breed) so he is leashed with most other dogs when not in a confined space.

I ABHOR people who think that because their dog is "friendly" my dog should have to put up with it barging him and sniffing him while he is leashed - that is a rude owner though not necessarily a rude dog.

These people seem horrified when my dog warns their dog off but after being battered by "rude" dogs pestering my dog (while he is leashed out of politeness to them) I now generally let Zac deal with rude dogs his own way, I can't protect him (without hitting or kicking the other dog) nor can I expect him to put up with the level of battering that causes the kind of bruises that I have received while attempting to block the "friendly" dog from approaching.

SO in some ways I do see where this article is coming from. I DON'T label my dog as dog aggressive but I know that many people might.

 

[running_dog]

she just repeats,

probably about 10 times or more,
that in her opinion, stupid owners making mistakes to cause the aggression,
or
improperly understanding dog behavior,
are "most" of cases of dog aggression.

I wonder what she means by aggression in this context?

Perhaps she is including even the warning growl in this - not because she thinks it is DA (she obviously doesn't) but because many people perceive it as aggression and probably most cases of DA referred to her are no more than a human over-reaction to a well provoked warning growl.

If so I actually would agree that most incidents of perceived aggression are caused by humans not paying attention and putting their dogs in situations that they shouldn't be in - child pulling dogs tail, crowding a dog, threatening a dog, stressing a dog, perhaps even putting a shy dog in a roomful of people could be considered negligent on the part of the owner, we should know our individual dog's limits and not push them too far.

I wonder how many people read this article and no matter how fiercely they have been denying that their dog is aggressive to the world they heave a sigh of relief inside that someone out there agrees with them.

• Not so long ago there was some one on the forum in a panic because their dog corrected another dog for taking liberties at the dog park.
• I worry about other people branding my dog DA, I worried about Zac correcting Gus.
• Then there is that Aussie dog Rosie that has to be muzzled,
• I've never been totally convinced that Southerngirl's Missy is DA either,
• There is a dog on a rescue centre website I was looking at on Saturday - it growled at a child and was sent to the rescue centre because it was aggressive. It was noted on the rescue centre website that the former owners later admitted that the child had been trying to take a bone from the dog. (BTW Mewzard's dog is not DA or she wouldn't be able to foster rescue dogs).

... but anyway we are the small proportion of people who are prepared to confess to having concerns... So actually people do worry (and suffer) about their dog potentially being aggressive even when the dog is often only doing it's best to preserve it's own space.

The idea that any dog that dares issue a warning growl is dangerously "aggressive" is an idea that does need to be challenged and I think that is what this article is attempting.