"of course dominance doesn't equal aggressive.  "

Thank you, elijah;  it is heartening to know that at least we agree on one thing :)

Moonmaiden,

The remark about delivery and yawn was absolutely NOT aimed at you.

I don't eat first, go through doors first, disallow my dogs on the couch or any of that pack reduction ritual either. I just won't have my dogs knocking me over while they're going through a door. I won't have my dogs grabbing food out of my hand. If I ask my dog to scoot down to the end of the couch and make room for me, he'll do so obligingly. There is no struggle what so ever. They already know who paid for this house and who buys their food, who bought the car that takes them to cool places 7 days a week for hikes in the mountains. LOL. They just know.

Yes, it's amazing isn't it Havoc that an interesting topic has to be ended because of rude, disrespectful, condenscending, pompous posts. How can anyone have such an ongoing slew of disrespect and contempt for their fellow man and be any good to their dogs? It makes ya wonder.

Carrie

"The Doberman is classified as a dominant breed, meaning they are aggressive."

{I am sure that those well versed and respected and experience in the breed over a period of many years such as Christine would take great exception to this sweeping statement!}
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember that I said, if you read my whole post that aggressive doesn't necessarily mean hostile. It means pushy or forward moving, bold, confident. He's right out there in the front lines.

Here's something if you're interested on Doberman temperament. Until you've lived with one, working with, visiting with....nothing compares. This is a fantastic breed, so smart and trainable. But like I said, aggressive. (not in a vicious way, just in your face. He makes himself known. LOL. ) I love my boy. I know him. We are developing a very close bond.

http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/doberman.htm

I am familiar with Dobermanns Carrie and thankfully I have not met an aggressive one yet here in the UK. 

<<aggressive doesn't necessarily mean hostile.>>

OED: Aggressive. 1. Marked by aggression; offensive; 1845. 2. Disposed to attack others; 1840.

Aggression. 1. An unprovoked attack; the first attack in a quarrel; an assault. 2. The practice of making such attacks; 1704.

I'm not getting involved in the debate, I just think Carrie needs some help in clarifying!  Having said that, I think she's explained herself very well, but I'm a great lover of the English language.

I'm taking it you meant aggressive as in "assertive, bold, and energetic"  (Chambers English dictionary)

I understood what you meant :)

Extracted from an article by Melissa Alexander

The original alpha/dominance model evolved out of short-term studies of wolf packs done in the 1940s. These were the first studies of their kind. These were a good start, but later research has essentially disproved most of the findings. There were three major flaws in these studies:
1.  The researchers concentrated on the most obvious, overt parts of wolf life, such as hunting. The studies are therefore unrepresentative -- drawing conclusions about "wolf behaviour" based on about 1% of wolf life.
2.  The studies observed what are now known to be ritualistic displays and misinterpreted them. Unfortunately, this is where the bulk of the "dominance model" comes from, and though the information has been soundly disproved, it still thrives in the dog training ethos.

For example, alpha rolls. The early researchers saw this behaviour and concluded that the higher-ranking wolf was forcibly rolling the subordinate to exert his dominance. Well, not exactly. This is actually an "appeasement ritual" instigated by the SUBORDINATE wolf. The subordinate offers his muzzle, and when the higher-ranking wolf "pins" it, the lower-ranking wolf voluntarily rolls and presents his belly. There is NO force. It is all entirely voluntary.

A wolf would flip another wolf against his will ONLY if he were planning to kill it. Can you imagine what a forced alpha roll does to the psyche of our dogs?
.
3.  Finally, after the studies, the researchers made cavalier extrapolations from wolf-dog, dog-dog, and dog-human based on their "findings." Unfortunately, this nonsense still abounds.

The truth is dogs aren't wolves. When you take into account the number of generations past, saying "I want to learn how to interact with my dog so I'll learn from the wolves" makes about as much sense as saying, "I want to improve my parenting -- let's see how the chimps do it!"

In an article in the Association of Pet Dog Trainers (APDT) newsletter, Dr. Ray Coppinger -- a biology professor at Hampshire College, co-founder of the Livestock Guarding Dog Project, author of several books including Dogs : A Startling New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behaviour, and Evolution; and an extremely well-respected member of the dog training community -- says in regards to the dominance model (and alpha rolling)...

"I cannot think of many learning situations where I want my learning dogs responding with fear and lack of motion. I never want my animals to be thinking social hierarchy. Once they do, they will be spending their time trying to figure out how to move up in the hierarchy."

I'm certainly no expert on wolves, but I can pretty much guarantee that the level of control a trainer has over a well trained dog, is way above that which any alpha-wolf could ever achieve!

There seem to be so many theories and studies when it comes to dog training. I'm sure I could spend all my free time studying how to do it. Instead I prefer to be out in a field having a go myself!

When I first got my dog (over two years ago now) I read about dominance and how I had to make sure we all ate/went through doors first, and not to allow dogs on couch/bed and so on, and to be honest I was so worried about doing it all right, I didn't enjoy my dog as I should.

Then I was lucky enough to get a copy of Barry Eatons book Dominace: fact or fiction (which Tohme gave a link to) and I began to question things.  My aunt has had a dog for nearly seven years - it sleeps on her bed, goes on the couch, 'tells' my aunt when and WHERE she wants to walk, is fed bits of food from my aunts plate, but is an extremely well behaved dog.  My aunt treats the dog like a child almost, but the dog shows no sign of dominance (in the trying to gain control meaning).  If my aunt doesn't take her out when she asks (and I don't mean for the toilet), she doesn't have a tantrum - she is obviously just a very happy dog who is loved very much.

My dog is what you would call 'bad mannered' which is down to, I admit, a lack of training on my part.  She does push through doors first - if she thinks I am going out in the garden, she pushes through first - but this is because she is excited to go out there. She does the same when it is time for a walk.  If I open the door and she knows she isn't going for a walk, she doesn't attempt to go out then - surely if she was dominant she would.  She also 'hump' fluffy toys - what is that dominance?

She does push her nose (or tries to) between me and the kitchen counter if I am preparing food (I do stop her), but I believe that is simply in the hope of getting nearer to something nice (she could easily reach food off my counter if she wished as she is big, but doesn't attempt to).  Alot of what Saffy does, I used to think was dominance, but without any dominance reduction, she has adapted to our way of life and usually obliges us if we make a request of her.

I guess what I am trying to say is that I don't accept all dogs of any breed are naturally dominant, I think there are dominant types in all breeds, maybe more in some breeds than others, but as has been said, if there is no leader, maybe more are forced into that role than would naturally.

One final thing, the standing over a person mentioned in the first post - my dog does that to my children (I do stop it), and if I laid on the floor she may well try to do it to me.  She has on the odd occasion got on my settee and done it to me when she has been particularly excited and maybe I have been laughing.  While I do think this is a dominant action in the first instance, I am puzzled why she does it in the second case.

Fiona

WEBSTERS:

Main Entry: ag·gres·sive
Pronunciation: &-'gre-siv
Function: adjective
Date: 1824
1 a : tending toward or exhibiting aggression <aggressive behavior> b : marked by combative readiness <an aggressive fighter>
2 a : marked by obtrusive energy b : marked by driving forceful energy or initiative : ENTERPRISING <an aggressive salesman>
3 : strong or emphatic in effect or intent <aggressive colors> <aggressive flavors>
4 : more severe, intensive, or comprehensive than usual especially in dosage or extent <aggressive chemotherapy>
- ag·gres·sive·ly adverb
- ag·gres·sive·ness noun
- ag·gres·siv·i·ty /"a-"gre-'si-v&-tE/ noun
synonyms AGGRESSIVE, MILITANT, ASSERTIVE, SELF-ASSERTIVE mean obtrusively energetic especially in pursuing particular goals. AGGRESSIVE implies a disposition to dominate often in disregard of others' rights or in determined and energetic pursuit of one's ends <was taught to be aggressive in his business dealings>. MILITANT also implies a fighting disposition but suggests not self-seeking but devotion to a cause, movement, or principle <militant protesters held a rally against racism>. ASSERTIVE suggests bold self-confidence in expression of opinion <the more assertive speakers dominated the forum>. SELF-ASSERTIVE connotes forwardness or brash self-confidence <a self-assertive young executive climbing the corporate ladder>.

Pronunciation Key

© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated
Merriam-Webster Privacy Policy

WHO SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THEIR DOGS RESPONDING WITH FEAR?

Here's another interesting site.

http://www.mentalhealth.com/dis1/p21-pe07.html

Have fun.

This could boil down to a difference in meaning between UK English and American English, Carrie! In UK English, aggressive means hostile, warlike, destructive, offensive - none of which is desirable in any domestic dog!

It is also important to distinguish between a dog displaying 'dominant behaviour' and a dominant dog. True dominance is a state of mind, not a set of behaviours. Any dog can be trained not to display unwanted/dominant behaviour, but that doesn't mean it is no longer a dominant dog. It still has the same chemical mindset.

See what you mean JG I think of dominant as trying their luck being pushy but aggressive as getting what they want by violent means. Bit like attitude I've twice been told my boy has attitude which I took as a compliment but a couple of friends were very annoyed as they took it as meaning he had a bad attitude.

I got a 6 month old rescue Beardie and at first he was not allowed up on knees furniture once he stopped trying to get up he was then allowed up because he gets of when told to. If he ever argued about getting off he wouldn't be allowed up.

IMO my humble opinion I think dogs and kids will push their luck and boundaries to se what they can get away with.
                                                                
                                  

...quite right Cava14..and in my experience both dogs (and children in particular) are happy when boundries are set ...they know what will or will not be tolerated so can get on with life safe in that knowledge. A word on Beardies.. I have a very soft spot for them, to me they look like big hairy untrimmed Schnauzer cousins. I used to work with a girl who had worked at and owned a Bothkenner? (picture used to be on vetzyme tin) Beardie called Bobbysox, he was a delightful dog with a permanant 'grin'and very inteligent. :-D

So your a person of taste then reddoor ;) My oldest Beardies are from old established lines and look very similar to a lot of the  Bothkennar dogs, which is why I don't show a lot :D  My two boys grin all the time.