Nonlinear Dogs
 |  |
Part 1: Myths About the Dog's Origin and Nature
From: The 100 Most Silly Things That Have Ever Been Said About Dogs
Copyright 2007 by Alexandra Semyonova -- All Rights Reserved
From: The 100 Most Silly Things That Have Ever Been Said About Dogs
Copyright 2007 by Alexandra Semyonova -- All Rights Reserved
Myth 13: When two male dogs meet, the first thing they want
to do is establish their relative ranks with each other.
Copyright 2007 by Alexandra Semyonova -- All Rights Reserved
We have all seen male dogs facing off in what looks to us like a threat match. The popular story, and
even the scientific dogma, is that they are trying to establish who is dominant, i.e., who has the higher
rank here. But we have seen that dogs don’t live in dominance hierarchies. They live in flexible self-
organizing systems, which are sometimes very fleeting. We know that the dog SOS seeks equilibrium
by juggling a multitude of variables, and that the only way to find a hierarchy is by projecting human
values onto the choices dogs are making (see Myth 11). So what is this canine face-off really all
about?
When two dogs don’t want to have anything to do with each other, they have a quite simple way of
achieving this: keep your distance and don’t bother to make contact with the other guy. When dogs
do make contact, this is a choice. (This is assuming you haven’t shut them up together in the
bathroom.) It means they are interested in each other and want to establish some kind of
relationship. They are voluntarily entering each other’s personal zone.
They both know this may be dangerous. Dogs are always armed. Not all dogs follow the social
rules. So the bluffing dogs are, in fact, testing the three following rules.
1) We will respect each other’s personal zone, and not enter it without permission. This is the first
rule that comes into play when dogs meet each other. Socially skilled dogs do not enter the other
dog’s personal zone without permission. (The grand exceptions to this are the aggressive breeds,
the insufficiently socialized dog, and the adolescent dog.) You might not have noticed it, but our two
males were already conversing long before they ended up facing off opposite each other. From the
moment they saw each other, in fact. Before they were anywhere near each other, both males had
already signaled that they weren’t going to attack immediately. Each dog has also already signaled
that he feels unsure of the other. This is what the whole slow approach on stiff, high legs means,
including any growling and baring of teeth. Nevertheless, by approaching each other, they are both
indicating that they do want contact. So, long before they are in the actual face-off, they have given
each other permission to enter the personal zone, to see if they can establish a relationship.
As they stand there growling and other ado, they are learning about each other’s inner state. The
fact that both of them just stand there growling is proof that both are still refraining from attacking. At
some point, the most socially confident dog will decide he’s had enough proof that he’s fairly safe in
the other’s presence. This more confident dog will be the first to give off a calming signal, perhaps
dropping his tail a little and relaxing his stiffened legs somewhat, or turning his ears outward. These
are reactions to the returning equilibrium in his own inner state (for example, that his adrenaline level
has begun to drop as he starts to feel safer). This helps the other dog’s inner state calm down a
little, so this second dog’s bristling hairs might smooth out, or he reciprocates by dropping his tail and
turning his ears. His legs relax some, so both dogs’ elevated attitude is now gone. The dogs
progress to sniffing each other’s body parts (usually anus and genitalia). They may walk a few steps
away from each other. They may deposit urine somewhere for each other to smell. You won’t always
be seeing these signals, because they can be quite subtle. Sometimes it looks to you like the dogs
just suddenly stopped facing off and started playing with each other, and you think you’re lucky. You’
re not lucky. The dogs have simply, but skillfully, used their signals to establish a minimal level of
trust.
But sometimes it’s not so simple. Sometimes dogs feel a need to test the most basic of all dog
rules.
2) We will not use aggression in social interactions, but will limit ourselves to signals and avoid
damaging each other. This is the main rule, upon which all social traffic among dogs depends. To
understand how this works, we first have to distinguish between real aggression and so-called “ritual
aggression”. Aggression is aimed at inflicting maximal damage on the other, perhaps at killing him.
Aggression is when a dog sinks his teeth in, uses the full power of his jaws, rips, shears, tears, and is
trying to cause serious wounds. “Ritual aggression” is, in fact, not aggression at all. It is symbolic.
The dog keeps his jaws open and waves his teeth around. He might grab a fold of the other dog’s
skin and pull on it a little – but he does this without causing wounds. He’s not biting, he’s pinching. It’
s inaccurate to call waving the teeth around and delivering pinches “aggression”. These actions are
nothing more than signals the dog are exchanging. These signals look awful to us, but in fact they
are delivering a very important message: “even now, as upset as I am, I am being careful about how I
use my teeth on you.” We are petrified, but after the whole thing is over we can’t find a single
wound.
Even ritual fights are very rare among dogs, but we need to understand what is going on when it
does reaches this point between (usually) two males. Usually dogs manage to build trust with milder
signals. As they began the face-off, the two males showed each other they wouldn’t attack
immediately simply by not doing so. But the fact that the one of the two still isn’t relaxing may mean
he’s socially unskilled. He’s not showing the usual readiness to indicate non-threat as quickly as
possible. This is abnormal behavior in a dog. His continuing tenseness means he still may go so out
of balance that he lashes out at some point. At the same time, he’s not choosing to just leave the
shared physical space. This can be very upsetting to socially skilled dogs. The socially skilled dog is
confronted with another dog who is obviously insecure and touchy, but who also wants to stay. If the
tense dog stays, touchy as he is, who knows what he might do later? The socially skilled dog is not
willing to make the trade-off of leaving himself. The joy of playing with all the others on the field is too
great, so leaving is not one of the approximately equal well-being options he can choose from. The
touchy dog also wants to stay, apparently not feeling so threatened by the other dogs who are
present. He’s chosen the dog he feels most insecure about to have the face-off with. This might be
the biggest other male around, but it might be some smaller dog who happens to look a little like the
terrier who attacked him three weeks ago.
It may also be that both the dogs are just generally so socially insecure, that they don’t dare just trust
the No Aggression Rule. It can be that both dogs have had a bad experience with another dog who
looked like the one they are facing off with. At the same time, they are choosing not to walk off and
just go on their lonely ways. Both dogs still have hope (based on past experience) that a balance
can be found and that this will be rewarding in the end. If they didn’t have this hope, or if they
thought a confrontation would lead to disaster, they’d have avoided each other in the first place.
In both cases a situation arises where the dogs each feel a need to test the other – to see the other
either leave or give off a non-threat signal, showing he’s finally relaxed enough that he won’t be
dangerous. A dog can’t just wait and see. The dogs’ inner states are so far from equilibrium (so full
of adrenaline and other stress hormones) that some kind of inner balance has to be restored before
they can do anything else. The social system (even if it consists of only these two dogs) is also too
far out of equilibrium. There are two dogs present whose well-being is suffering quite a dip. All this
loss of equilibrium feels dangerous to dogs, who just simply can’t share a physical space with another
whom they feel very worried about. After all, how can you just go off and play while there’s a
constant fear the other will suddenly attack while you’re not looking or really bite you because you
whiz by too close? Both the inner states and the social system have to be in balance, this is just how
the dog system works. If the balance can’t be found with both present, then it’ll have to be restored
by one of the dogs leaving the shared physical space. So two dogs feel unsure of each other, but
both want to stay. It will be the more insecure dog whose inner state goes so off balance that he
loses it and lashes out at the other dog, and there they go.
Now we have what us humans call “a fight”. But it isn’t a fight, it’s communication. The dogs make a
lot of noise, wave their teeth around, bat at each other’s faces, maybe grab hold of the loose skin
around the neck and shoulders, tug a little, let go, wave their teeth around some more, grab hold
again. This all yields important information. For example, each dog shows the other that he has
learned bite inhibition in his youth (see Myth 6). They also prove to each other that they will actually
use this bite inhibition even in a tense and heated moment. By mutually proving this to each other –
and sometimes the proof can only be found in the pudding – the two dogs can, ultimately, start to feel
safe in each other’s presence. In the “fight”, they give the ultimate proof that they will be careful with
their teeth no matter what. What usually happens is that one of the dogs decides he’s had enough
proof, so he gives off a signal that he’s done testing. The other dog also knows he hasn’t really been
bitten during all this, so he responds to the signal by cutting it out, too – thus showing he does know
these calming signals and what they mean. Suddenly the “fight” stops. The dogs now have enough
information about each other to feel sure that sharing a playing field together will not result in a
dangerous situation.
The dogs have not established respective ranks. They have done some trust building. Hopefully,
you have allowed them to do this without “saving” them from each other. When you do “rescue” them
from their conversation, they will just resume the conversation the next time they meet, because the
thing still needs to be said before they can feel okay about sharing space.
I have to give one warning here, though. This chapter is about normal, socialized dogs. Not all dogs
are normal or socialized. You should be extremely careful about exposing your dog to breeds that
have been specifically bred for aggressive behavior. These dogs are unable to engage in ritual
conflict resolution because humans have bred a brain abnormality into them that makes them literally
unable to control their fighting behavior (see Myths 38-40). This may not be their fault, but they will
kill your dog all the same. And there are other dogs, not specifically bred for aggressive behavior,
who have simply never learned to inhibit their bite or to seek social compromises. These dogs are
just as dangerous as the aggressive breeds. When you think your dog is in real trouble, e.g., if you
see the other dog making a shearing or tearing movement with that piece of skin he’s grabbed, or if
your dog begins to scream, then you should rush over to help him. The best thing to do is to grab
the attacking dog’s hind legs (not your own dog’s!) and lift them into the air. Most attackers will react
as if you hit the “off” switch. Ask the owner of this dog to leash his dog, and do not let go of those
legs until he has done so.
That said, we can get back to normal, socialized dogs. There is a third rule these dogs test, usually
in play after the first acquaintance has been made.
3) We will be considerate of each other’s preferences once we have learned about them.
Sometimes two dogs will have a threat match about a ball or a stick that is lying around and that they
both spotted at the same moment. This occurs very occasionally between two dogs who already
know each other, but usually it is dogs who have just recently met for the first time. Both dogs want
the tennis ball. To understand what happens next, we have to refrain from reverting to labels and
analyze what is in fact going on.
A dog’s desire to have or to keep an object is a result of past learning experiences – e.g., he has
learned that the tennis ball can be a source of pleasure. But not all dogs know this about tennis balls
(or sticks, or whatever). One dog is on a diet, the other just ate. One dog’s owner is always making
a point of taking things away from him, the other’s doesn’t do this. And so on. Each dog will have his
own particular valuation of all the objects that are lying around, and his own particular touchiness
about it. At the same time, we have to remember that the preservation of relationships and social
peace is, to dogs, a great good. As they look at an object the other dog also wants, it’s not just
about the object. They also have to make a decision about disturbing the peace or damaging (or
even losing) the relationship with the other dog, whose company they were just enjoying so much.
Each dog will have his own valuation of these social resources, just like with physical objects, and this
will be dependent on the dog’s personal history, just like with the physical objects.
If we remember this, then the way we describe behavior changes. The dog who decides to walk away
and surrender the physical object has not forfeited rank nor “submitted.” He has simply weighed all
the various factors and all his various preferences, and decided that some other combination was
worth more to him than the combination that included the tennis ball. He has maximized his inner well-
being according to his own values, values we can’t judge for him. We can’t decide for him that he
has “lost,” because in his own eyes the real losing move would’ve been to lose the trust and
friendship of the other dog. By seeking a compromise – both with each other and between all the
various factors that affect their own well-being – dogs shift their respective well-being positions, so
that both dogs are satisfied with the outcome. The more often two new acquaintances have sought
these compromises with each other, the more they know about each other’s preferences, and the
more easy and pleasant interactions will be.
The face-offs and symbolic “fights” (which are really just exchanges of signals) between two male
dogs are not about rank and dominance. They function to generate predictability and trust in various
crucial areas of interaction. These matches also serve to learn each other’s preferences and
boundaries, so these can be taken into account in future interactions.
Read more:
Semyonova, A, The social organization of the domestic dog; a longitudinal study of domestic canine
behavior and the ontogeny of domestic canine social systems, Carriage House Foundation, The
Hague, The Netherlands, 2003.
Myth 16: But my dog is competitive, because he always wants
what the other dog has.
Copyright 2007 by Alexandra Semyonova -- All Rights Reserved
The wish and the ability to search for social equilibrium are not innate qualities. These are things a
dog learns in the course of his life. All newborn mammals are egotistical and impulsive. The neonate
just does whatever occurs to him to do. He learns by experience. He does something and finds out –
to his utter amazement – that his behavior he causes a change in, or elicits a response from, his
surroundings. He tries out all kinds of behavior and learns by trial and error what the environmental
change or response will be to different things he does. As he goes along, he learns to take this into
account before acting. As he plays with siblings at the nesting site, he learns that egotistical
behavior can lead to conflict, and that conflict does not always end well for him. He may lose the
thing he wanted, or something painful happens, or something scary. He discovers that his
contentious behavior leads others to avoid him. He loses the pleasure of their company – the
chance to sleep all comfy and warm in the pile of puppies, to play with the others, and so on. In
adolescence, his hormones start raging through his body and he loses much of the control he’d
gained over his immediate impulses. He goes through a repetition of the learning process,
experiencing yet again what happens if he causes instability in the social system. Others decline to
play with him, and – if he continues too long with his obnoxious behavior – the adult dogs chase him
out of the group. They don’t feel like dealing with constant disruption, want only peace and stability
in the social landscape, and there he is all by himself again. By the time he reaches adulthood, the
dog has learned that compromise is the way to go. Compromise yields him the most benefit. His life
is safer (greater chance that meetings with new dogs will go smoothly and peacefully; less chance of
being wounded in an argument with a dog who turns out to be psycho, or who also hasn’t learned to
compromise; less pointless energy expenditure in general), his inner state is more stable (less
anxiety and/or pain), and his well-being is increased (welcomed by other dogs). He is now ready to
participate in the domestic canine social system as a mature member. He is a finished and
functioning system part.
Not all dogs get the necessary learning experiences.
There are dogs who are taken from their mothers and siblings at the age of seven weeks, and then
kept from other dogs. The anxious owners pick up their puppies every time an adult dog
approaches. These owners make sure their sweet darling always gets his toy back when some other
dog has somehow fairly taken it. They protect the puppy when some other dog growls at him, and
discipline all adult dogs who try to interfere with the puppy’s behavior. These puppies never learn
what happens if they don’t learn to control their impulsive behavior. Once they are grown up, they
still just dive at anything they want, thinking they have a right to take it, even if it is in the personal
zone of another dog. They often end up in conflicts about possession.
“Gee,” says the owner, “he certainly is a greedy dog,” meantime yet again taking the toy away from
the other dog to give it back to her little, greedy darling. These dogs aren’t competitive. They are
impulsive, and they never got a chance to learn the rules.
Then there dogs who live with humans who believe in the dominance hierarchy, and who think that
they must constantly be dominating their dogs. As they grow up, these dogs learn that the other will
never be willing to compromise. Their parent figure is always taking things away from them, chasing
them from resting spots, insisting on being the only one to decide about beginning or ending play,
about the route to walk, about everything in life. The dog learns that even hinting at a wish of his
own makes the other engage in all kinds of threat behavior or punishing behavior. These dominating
humans punish their dogs for protecting their personal zone during play with other dogs, because the
human sees dominance in everything the dog does. He believes that allowing his dog to protect his
personal zone from another dog will make his dog think he can dominate the human, too. By his own
behavior, the human teaches his dog that others are competitors and oppressors. He generates
great anxiety in the dog about the security of life, and about what will be taken away from the dog
next.
By the time this dog is grown up, he can be touchy if another dog approaches, in particular if he
happens to have a favorite toy in his personal zone. After all, the dog’s owner has taught him that he
will never be left in peace with his modest “enough” (see Myth 14),and that loss is always imminent.
But he will not only be touchy about possessions within his personal zone. Because things are
constantly taken away from him, and because he is never allowed to express a longing, the dog has
too little satisfaction in life. He lives in a state of eternal emotional famine. This is similar to the
laboratory situation – the human has artificially heightened the dog’s motivation to possess a thing.
This artificially heightened motivation can make it difficult for him to resist the impulse to invade
another dog’s personal zone to get a thing he desperately wants but gets too little of in life.
“Gee,” says the owner, “he certainly is greedy.” But in the meantime, this owner will punish the dog
again, at the very least by taking the longed-for object away from him, thus preventing his dog from
finding out that the other dog would have been willing to compromise. These dogs are not
competitive, they are oppressed, and they suffer a kind of sensory deprivation on the emotional level.
If you skipped to this Myth, then you apparently have a problem with your dog. In that case,
someone has either taught your dog that he doesn’t have to seek compromise and equilibrium, or
else someone has taught him that the other won’t. A dog, including your dog, will not be competitive
unless humans teach him to be.
to do is establish their relative ranks with each other.
Copyright 2007 by Alexandra Semyonova -- All Rights Reserved
We have all seen male dogs facing off in what looks to us like a threat match. The popular story, and
even the scientific dogma, is that they are trying to establish who is dominant, i.e., who has the higher
rank here. But we have seen that dogs don’t live in dominance hierarchies. They live in flexible self-
organizing systems, which are sometimes very fleeting. We know that the dog SOS seeks equilibrium
by juggling a multitude of variables, and that the only way to find a hierarchy is by projecting human
values onto the choices dogs are making (see Myth 11). So what is this canine face-off really all
about?
When two dogs don’t want to have anything to do with each other, they have a quite simple way of
achieving this: keep your distance and don’t bother to make contact with the other guy. When dogs
do make contact, this is a choice. (This is assuming you haven’t shut them up together in the
bathroom.) It means they are interested in each other and want to establish some kind of
relationship. They are voluntarily entering each other’s personal zone.
They both know this may be dangerous. Dogs are always armed. Not all dogs follow the social
rules. So the bluffing dogs are, in fact, testing the three following rules.
1) We will respect each other’s personal zone, and not enter it without permission. This is the first
rule that comes into play when dogs meet each other. Socially skilled dogs do not enter the other
dog’s personal zone without permission. (The grand exceptions to this are the aggressive breeds,
the insufficiently socialized dog, and the adolescent dog.) You might not have noticed it, but our two
males were already conversing long before they ended up facing off opposite each other. From the
moment they saw each other, in fact. Before they were anywhere near each other, both males had
already signaled that they weren’t going to attack immediately. Each dog has also already signaled
that he feels unsure of the other. This is what the whole slow approach on stiff, high legs means,
including any growling and baring of teeth. Nevertheless, by approaching each other, they are both
indicating that they do want contact. So, long before they are in the actual face-off, they have given
each other permission to enter the personal zone, to see if they can establish a relationship.
As they stand there growling and other ado, they are learning about each other’s inner state. The
fact that both of them just stand there growling is proof that both are still refraining from attacking. At
some point, the most socially confident dog will decide he’s had enough proof that he’s fairly safe in
the other’s presence. This more confident dog will be the first to give off a calming signal, perhaps
dropping his tail a little and relaxing his stiffened legs somewhat, or turning his ears outward. These
are reactions to the returning equilibrium in his own inner state (for example, that his adrenaline level
has begun to drop as he starts to feel safer). This helps the other dog’s inner state calm down a
little, so this second dog’s bristling hairs might smooth out, or he reciprocates by dropping his tail and
turning his ears. His legs relax some, so both dogs’ elevated attitude is now gone. The dogs
progress to sniffing each other’s body parts (usually anus and genitalia). They may walk a few steps
away from each other. They may deposit urine somewhere for each other to smell. You won’t always
be seeing these signals, because they can be quite subtle. Sometimes it looks to you like the dogs
just suddenly stopped facing off and started playing with each other, and you think you’re lucky. You’
re not lucky. The dogs have simply, but skillfully, used their signals to establish a minimal level of
trust.
But sometimes it’s not so simple. Sometimes dogs feel a need to test the most basic of all dog
rules.
2) We will not use aggression in social interactions, but will limit ourselves to signals and avoid
damaging each other. This is the main rule, upon which all social traffic among dogs depends. To
understand how this works, we first have to distinguish between real aggression and so-called “ritual
aggression”. Aggression is aimed at inflicting maximal damage on the other, perhaps at killing him.
Aggression is when a dog sinks his teeth in, uses the full power of his jaws, rips, shears, tears, and is
trying to cause serious wounds. “Ritual aggression” is, in fact, not aggression at all. It is symbolic.
The dog keeps his jaws open and waves his teeth around. He might grab a fold of the other dog’s
skin and pull on it a little – but he does this without causing wounds. He’s not biting, he’s pinching. It’
s inaccurate to call waving the teeth around and delivering pinches “aggression”. These actions are
nothing more than signals the dog are exchanging. These signals look awful to us, but in fact they
are delivering a very important message: “even now, as upset as I am, I am being careful about how I
use my teeth on you.” We are petrified, but after the whole thing is over we can’t find a single
wound.
Even ritual fights are very rare among dogs, but we need to understand what is going on when it
does reaches this point between (usually) two males. Usually dogs manage to build trust with milder
signals. As they began the face-off, the two males showed each other they wouldn’t attack
immediately simply by not doing so. But the fact that the one of the two still isn’t relaxing may mean
he’s socially unskilled. He’s not showing the usual readiness to indicate non-threat as quickly as
possible. This is abnormal behavior in a dog. His continuing tenseness means he still may go so out
of balance that he lashes out at some point. At the same time, he’s not choosing to just leave the
shared physical space. This can be very upsetting to socially skilled dogs. The socially skilled dog is
confronted with another dog who is obviously insecure and touchy, but who also wants to stay. If the
tense dog stays, touchy as he is, who knows what he might do later? The socially skilled dog is not
willing to make the trade-off of leaving himself. The joy of playing with all the others on the field is too
great, so leaving is not one of the approximately equal well-being options he can choose from. The
touchy dog also wants to stay, apparently not feeling so threatened by the other dogs who are
present. He’s chosen the dog he feels most insecure about to have the face-off with. This might be
the biggest other male around, but it might be some smaller dog who happens to look a little like the
terrier who attacked him three weeks ago.
It may also be that both the dogs are just generally so socially insecure, that they don’t dare just trust
the No Aggression Rule. It can be that both dogs have had a bad experience with another dog who
looked like the one they are facing off with. At the same time, they are choosing not to walk off and
just go on their lonely ways. Both dogs still have hope (based on past experience) that a balance
can be found and that this will be rewarding in the end. If they didn’t have this hope, or if they
thought a confrontation would lead to disaster, they’d have avoided each other in the first place.
In both cases a situation arises where the dogs each feel a need to test the other – to see the other
either leave or give off a non-threat signal, showing he’s finally relaxed enough that he won’t be
dangerous. A dog can’t just wait and see. The dogs’ inner states are so far from equilibrium (so full
of adrenaline and other stress hormones) that some kind of inner balance has to be restored before
they can do anything else. The social system (even if it consists of only these two dogs) is also too
far out of equilibrium. There are two dogs present whose well-being is suffering quite a dip. All this
loss of equilibrium feels dangerous to dogs, who just simply can’t share a physical space with another
whom they feel very worried about. After all, how can you just go off and play while there’s a
constant fear the other will suddenly attack while you’re not looking or really bite you because you
whiz by too close? Both the inner states and the social system have to be in balance, this is just how
the dog system works. If the balance can’t be found with both present, then it’ll have to be restored
by one of the dogs leaving the shared physical space. So two dogs feel unsure of each other, but
both want to stay. It will be the more insecure dog whose inner state goes so off balance that he
loses it and lashes out at the other dog, and there they go.
Now we have what us humans call “a fight”. But it isn’t a fight, it’s communication. The dogs make a
lot of noise, wave their teeth around, bat at each other’s faces, maybe grab hold of the loose skin
around the neck and shoulders, tug a little, let go, wave their teeth around some more, grab hold
again. This all yields important information. For example, each dog shows the other that he has
learned bite inhibition in his youth (see Myth 6). They also prove to each other that they will actually
use this bite inhibition even in a tense and heated moment. By mutually proving this to each other –
and sometimes the proof can only be found in the pudding – the two dogs can, ultimately, start to feel
safe in each other’s presence. In the “fight”, they give the ultimate proof that they will be careful with
their teeth no matter what. What usually happens is that one of the dogs decides he’s had enough
proof, so he gives off a signal that he’s done testing. The other dog also knows he hasn’t really been
bitten during all this, so he responds to the signal by cutting it out, too – thus showing he does know
these calming signals and what they mean. Suddenly the “fight” stops. The dogs now have enough
information about each other to feel sure that sharing a playing field together will not result in a
dangerous situation.
The dogs have not established respective ranks. They have done some trust building. Hopefully,
you have allowed them to do this without “saving” them from each other. When you do “rescue” them
from their conversation, they will just resume the conversation the next time they meet, because the
thing still needs to be said before they can feel okay about sharing space.
I have to give one warning here, though. This chapter is about normal, socialized dogs. Not all dogs
are normal or socialized. You should be extremely careful about exposing your dog to breeds that
have been specifically bred for aggressive behavior. These dogs are unable to engage in ritual
conflict resolution because humans have bred a brain abnormality into them that makes them literally
unable to control their fighting behavior (see Myths 38-40). This may not be their fault, but they will
kill your dog all the same. And there are other dogs, not specifically bred for aggressive behavior,
who have simply never learned to inhibit their bite or to seek social compromises. These dogs are
just as dangerous as the aggressive breeds. When you think your dog is in real trouble, e.g., if you
see the other dog making a shearing or tearing movement with that piece of skin he’s grabbed, or if
your dog begins to scream, then you should rush over to help him. The best thing to do is to grab
the attacking dog’s hind legs (not your own dog’s!) and lift them into the air. Most attackers will react
as if you hit the “off” switch. Ask the owner of this dog to leash his dog, and do not let go of those
legs until he has done so.
That said, we can get back to normal, socialized dogs. There is a third rule these dogs test, usually
in play after the first acquaintance has been made.
3) We will be considerate of each other’s preferences once we have learned about them.
Sometimes two dogs will have a threat match about a ball or a stick that is lying around and that they
both spotted at the same moment. This occurs very occasionally between two dogs who already
know each other, but usually it is dogs who have just recently met for the first time. Both dogs want
the tennis ball. To understand what happens next, we have to refrain from reverting to labels and
analyze what is in fact going on.
A dog’s desire to have or to keep an object is a result of past learning experiences – e.g., he has
learned that the tennis ball can be a source of pleasure. But not all dogs know this about tennis balls
(or sticks, or whatever). One dog is on a diet, the other just ate. One dog’s owner is always making
a point of taking things away from him, the other’s doesn’t do this. And so on. Each dog will have his
own particular valuation of all the objects that are lying around, and his own particular touchiness
about it. At the same time, we have to remember that the preservation of relationships and social
peace is, to dogs, a great good. As they look at an object the other dog also wants, it’s not just
about the object. They also have to make a decision about disturbing the peace or damaging (or
even losing) the relationship with the other dog, whose company they were just enjoying so much.
Each dog will have his own valuation of these social resources, just like with physical objects, and this
will be dependent on the dog’s personal history, just like with the physical objects.
If we remember this, then the way we describe behavior changes. The dog who decides to walk away
and surrender the physical object has not forfeited rank nor “submitted.” He has simply weighed all
the various factors and all his various preferences, and decided that some other combination was
worth more to him than the combination that included the tennis ball. He has maximized his inner well-
being according to his own values, values we can’t judge for him. We can’t decide for him that he
has “lost,” because in his own eyes the real losing move would’ve been to lose the trust and
friendship of the other dog. By seeking a compromise – both with each other and between all the
various factors that affect their own well-being – dogs shift their respective well-being positions, so
that both dogs are satisfied with the outcome. The more often two new acquaintances have sought
these compromises with each other, the more they know about each other’s preferences, and the
more easy and pleasant interactions will be.
The face-offs and symbolic “fights” (which are really just exchanges of signals) between two male
dogs are not about rank and dominance. They function to generate predictability and trust in various
crucial areas of interaction. These matches also serve to learn each other’s preferences and
boundaries, so these can be taken into account in future interactions.
Read more:
Semyonova, A, The social organization of the domestic dog; a longitudinal study of domestic canine
behavior and the ontogeny of domestic canine social systems, Carriage House Foundation, The
Hague, The Netherlands, 2003.
Myth 16: But my dog is competitive, because he always wants
what the other dog has.
Copyright 2007 by Alexandra Semyonova -- All Rights Reserved
The wish and the ability to search for social equilibrium are not innate qualities. These are things a
dog learns in the course of his life. All newborn mammals are egotistical and impulsive. The neonate
just does whatever occurs to him to do. He learns by experience. He does something and finds out –
to his utter amazement – that his behavior he causes a change in, or elicits a response from, his
surroundings. He tries out all kinds of behavior and learns by trial and error what the environmental
change or response will be to different things he does. As he goes along, he learns to take this into
account before acting. As he plays with siblings at the nesting site, he learns that egotistical
behavior can lead to conflict, and that conflict does not always end well for him. He may lose the
thing he wanted, or something painful happens, or something scary. He discovers that his
contentious behavior leads others to avoid him. He loses the pleasure of their company – the
chance to sleep all comfy and warm in the pile of puppies, to play with the others, and so on. In
adolescence, his hormones start raging through his body and he loses much of the control he’d
gained over his immediate impulses. He goes through a repetition of the learning process,
experiencing yet again what happens if he causes instability in the social system. Others decline to
play with him, and – if he continues too long with his obnoxious behavior – the adult dogs chase him
out of the group. They don’t feel like dealing with constant disruption, want only peace and stability
in the social landscape, and there he is all by himself again. By the time he reaches adulthood, the
dog has learned that compromise is the way to go. Compromise yields him the most benefit. His life
is safer (greater chance that meetings with new dogs will go smoothly and peacefully; less chance of
being wounded in an argument with a dog who turns out to be psycho, or who also hasn’t learned to
compromise; less pointless energy expenditure in general), his inner state is more stable (less
anxiety and/or pain), and his well-being is increased (welcomed by other dogs). He is now ready to
participate in the domestic canine social system as a mature member. He is a finished and
functioning system part.
Not all dogs get the necessary learning experiences.
There are dogs who are taken from their mothers and siblings at the age of seven weeks, and then
kept from other dogs. The anxious owners pick up their puppies every time an adult dog
approaches. These owners make sure their sweet darling always gets his toy back when some other
dog has somehow fairly taken it. They protect the puppy when some other dog growls at him, and
discipline all adult dogs who try to interfere with the puppy’s behavior. These puppies never learn
what happens if they don’t learn to control their impulsive behavior. Once they are grown up, they
still just dive at anything they want, thinking they have a right to take it, even if it is in the personal
zone of another dog. They often end up in conflicts about possession.
“Gee,” says the owner, “he certainly is a greedy dog,” meantime yet again taking the toy away from
the other dog to give it back to her little, greedy darling. These dogs aren’t competitive. They are
impulsive, and they never got a chance to learn the rules.
Then there dogs who live with humans who believe in the dominance hierarchy, and who think that
they must constantly be dominating their dogs. As they grow up, these dogs learn that the other will
never be willing to compromise. Their parent figure is always taking things away from them, chasing
them from resting spots, insisting on being the only one to decide about beginning or ending play,
about the route to walk, about everything in life. The dog learns that even hinting at a wish of his
own makes the other engage in all kinds of threat behavior or punishing behavior. These dominating
humans punish their dogs for protecting their personal zone during play with other dogs, because the
human sees dominance in everything the dog does. He believes that allowing his dog to protect his
personal zone from another dog will make his dog think he can dominate the human, too. By his own
behavior, the human teaches his dog that others are competitors and oppressors. He generates
great anxiety in the dog about the security of life, and about what will be taken away from the dog
next.
By the time this dog is grown up, he can be touchy if another dog approaches, in particular if he
happens to have a favorite toy in his personal zone. After all, the dog’s owner has taught him that he
will never be left in peace with his modest “enough” (see Myth 14),and that loss is always imminent.
But he will not only be touchy about possessions within his personal zone. Because things are
constantly taken away from him, and because he is never allowed to express a longing, the dog has
too little satisfaction in life. He lives in a state of eternal emotional famine. This is similar to the
laboratory situation – the human has artificially heightened the dog’s motivation to possess a thing.
This artificially heightened motivation can make it difficult for him to resist the impulse to invade
another dog’s personal zone to get a thing he desperately wants but gets too little of in life.
“Gee,” says the owner, “he certainly is greedy.” But in the meantime, this owner will punish the dog
again, at the very least by taking the longed-for object away from him, thus preventing his dog from
finding out that the other dog would have been willing to compromise. These dogs are not
competitive, they are oppressed, and they suffer a kind of sensory deprivation on the emotional level.
If you skipped to this Myth, then you apparently have a problem with your dog. In that case,
someone has either taught your dog that he doesn’t have to seek compromise and equilibrium, or
else someone has taught him that the other won’t. A dog, including your dog, will not be competitive
unless humans teach him to be.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tip: What if you already have this problem with your dog?
This book is not a how-to book, but we can tell you where to go. Jean
Donaldson’s book, The Culture Clash, gives excellent advice on how
to retrain your dog so she won’t be so touchy about material
possessions.
This book is not a how-to book, but we can tell you where to go. Jean
Donaldson’s book, The Culture Clash, gives excellent advice on how
to retrain your dog so she won’t be so touchy about material
possessions.
