Nope not insecure what so ever. I just don't see how topic about DOGS has anything to do with females. Other then female dogs of course. And when it comes to dogs the females are usually smaller (just the facts I could care less). As for the homophobia now were getting out of hand. I can assure you I'm perfectly comfortable with gay men. Everyone but two of my friends are gay. I go out to San Diego to celebrate pride with them every year. And trust me if you have ever met any amount of gay men you'd know 90% of them are more masculine then most straight men. I'm just not a fan of creating bridges when were talking about dogs and emotions. I'm focused on dogs and their emotions. That's the topic, the topic isn't "well if you show emotion that's weak so obviously this is sexism" no, I'm just simply seeing that if you show too much affection or emotion the dog may tend to walk all over you. That's all. No more, no less.

I mean I can assure you the dog doesn't view it that way so why should we? They aren't going to sit there and think "my owner doesn't show emotion because they think it's weak. They must be on sexist mofo!" In a way, I think just to make the connection is just fueling the "sexism" fire. If you don't make the connection then and bring it up then no one would ever think any of it.

From what I have seen of his training i find it sometimes dangerous and stupid, mind you this does not mean i am an expert, yes his training may work on some dogs, but like humans all dogs are different. I have tried harsher discipline with Lucifer and this made him not want to listen as much and made me get over aggressive because i was being "Challenged" in reality my poor dog was saying "I'm sorry wtf do you want woman D8". I use a mix of discipline and gentle positive training, I actually laugh and use a light gentle voice in training him and i make sure to make myself unpredictable so he HAS to focus on me, now he's happier and willing to listen, still has that husky stubbornness, as he always will but I have come leaps and bounds in training. The basic thing is find a method that works for YOUR DOG. My Nieces Border Collie needs no discipline just a throw of a ball or Frisbee as a reward when she does something right, i helped my niece train her not to pull and basic obedience, so in reality Milan may not work for your dog and may work for others, I personally do not like his methods but if that works in training your animal than go for it, if no i suggest keep trying til you find a method that does. =3

Quote :

Regardless of any truth to this, there are social consequences for continuing to describe affection/emotions in this way.

I agree with this. Karli requires affection ALL THE TIME. She loves it, she thrives on it, I have the best behaved dog when she's had her morning kisses and pets. I realize that its not as important as say, feeding her would be, but to her, its the best part of her day. And continuing to describe emotions/affections as a sign of weakness is only going to hurt us. Having emotions is not weak, it takes a lot to let people in and tell them how you feel. I realize that's different than dealing with dogs, but for my dog in particular, affection is part of her daily life. She'd wither away without it.

As an entertainer, i think he's great... i use to love watching the show and he kept me hooked every week. however i dont find his whole alpha, "shht", and people first business to work for me personally. I tryed them with blu and my gsd kiki when she was alive... and have never worked. Heck whenever i tryed the "shht" thing all he did was howl lol.

Anyway i just put him and his teaching's in the catagory of "different strokes for different folks".

Addressing the "showing too much emotion makes the dog walk all over you."

That varies GREATLY. There are some people who are way too dramatic about their dogs. They allow them to do things that are inappropriate and sometimes even unsafe because its cute or because they are their "children." I love my dogs, I call them my kids when I'm talking with dog people, and I get on the floor with them, love on them, invite them on the couch... Ect ect. I show emotion and a lot of affection. There is a clear and significant distinction between emotional and affectionate and inability to see when you're humanizing your dog and not setting appropriate boundaries. They are not the same.

Since I show them so much affection, they don't respect me any less, but they do value me more. I am exciting, fun, and rewarding to them while at the same time inplementing silly rules which make learning fun and part of a game and THAT is what counts. Because if all you do is corrc t and only show a reserved amount of attention (in efforts to ensure the dog doesn't think he's boss or take over) you become less rewarding and less interesting. That isn't something I want, especially if I need them to do things when I ask.

MattnSparty311 wrote:

And trust me if you have ever met any amount of gay men you'd know 90% of them are more masculine then most straight men.

The irony here made me chuckle a bit. I'm not making light of any of this discussion, but you may want to know the man you are debating with is a gay man. It's too early for me to write a coherent response on this topic, I will take a crack later...

wpskier222 wrote:

MattnSparty311 wrote:

And trust me if you have ever met any amount of gay men you'd know 90% of them are more masculine then most straight men.

The irony here made me chuckle a bit. I'm not making light of any of this discussion, but you may want to know the man you are debating with is a gay man. It's too early for me to write a coherent response on this topic, I will take a crack later...

Haha, yep, I would be one of those masculine gay men. I have more tattoos than blank space on my skin and I live in Carharts's and boots I was speaking from very personal experience.

My whole point just involved the possible repercussions of a man like Cesar having such a massive influence over public culture continuing to perpetuate an idea that adversely affects women and gay men and supports masculine privilege. That's all. This part has nothing to do with the dogs. Like any public figure with mass exposure, regardless of intentions or actuality, your messages have social consequences that on some level should be taken into account when they are delivered week after week after week.

At the very least, we can criticize them because they are celebrities and we are public receiving their propaganda.

Well said Kristina and Roxy, good points.  The weakness rhetoric in his whole package...also a bit overzealous me thinks too.

Okay, after some coffee, lunch, vitamins and tea, I'm a little more coherent than I was this morning.

I think that the reason that Caesar characterizes affection is weakness is because of a specific behavior in canines, muzzle licking. I could be wrong in that judgement, but he puts a lot of stock in wolves and assumes that 1. All dogs act like wolves, and 2. All dogs interact with humans as if they are also dogs/wolves. Wolves and dogs will lick each others muzzles as a sign of submission or affection, I think that Cesar extrapolates this behavior into: muzzle licking = showing affection = submission = weakness. Which again, might make sense if you accept the two premises I stated above. Also, I don't actually agree that submission = weakness, although it may seem that way, it might actually be the best social move at the moment. I know we've all seen our dogs try to be dominant over others in some situations, and not in other situations (I'm talking dog to dog situations) but that behavior is based on the situation and adapts moment to moment. Going to the dog park is very interesting to me, because I get to watch the social dynamics and how they change based on which dogs are there.

On the other note, I get the impression from watching the show, that although Cesar tries to come across as macho, he is a really emotional guy. He hugs everybody, tears up all the time, and would do anything for his animals. So even though I don't really agree with his methods, he seems like a decent human being.

MattnSparty311 wrote:

I mean I can assure you the dog doesn't view it that way so why should we?  They aren't going to sit there and think "my owner doesn't show emotion because they think it's weak. They must be on sexist mofo!" In a way, I think just to make the connection is just fueling the "sexism" fire. If you don't make the connection then and bring it up then no one would ever think any of it.

First of all, this is not what Jeff was saying at all. From my understanding, he was addressing the idea of affection as weakness from an intellectual perspective and the greater social impact. Back to the dog: at the same token your dog doesn't think "my owner doesn't show emotion because they are a strong sob and I better respect them." I love my dogs to death and have always, and will always show them affection whenever I damn well please. I've never had a dog that didn't respect me or follow my rules, or do their best to curb their impulses, provided I taught them in a way they could understand, huskies included. In my experience affection strengthens the bond and actually increases the likelihood your husky will respond and listen when you need them to. There are no guarantees in life or huskies.

He is notably a big softie in interviews and such and he undoubtedly loves his and all dogs in a big gooey way.

He just feels in relations of power emotions are weak and submissive and if you are going to control somebody you need to not be emotional. He would also suggest that since dogs don't have emotions like we do there is a translation issue getting in the way when we approach our dogs with emotions.

It's part of his humanizing dogs angle: we corrupt them and create imbalance in them with our affection/emotions.

I'm a dog corrupter...  

Softie.

Me too, I cry sometimes.

I just read your Link dog park story and the park about Korra licking your tears make me tear up a bit...

Korra rocks my world again and again, and Rhia was a trooper. Such great friends they are.

Softies.

wpskier222 wrote:

muzzle licking = showing affection = submission = weakness.

its funny with that being said. rikku and i were walking down a trail yesterday and we came across another dog. and go through the normal routine of what kind of dog is that it, must be a mix cause she is an all white scenario. anyways so while we were talking and the dogs were sniffing, my dog of course being very submissive as she usually is sits and lets the other dog come up to her and sniff her. well the guy made a comment about my dog being weak due to the submissive and i just laughed it off. then their lab tried to snip at rikku and apparently that is when the submissive ends and she went back after the lab and brought him down to the ground. then just walked away from the lab and was like "whos the weak submissive dog" ...lol.. moral of the story i agree and think that submissive is no weakness at all.

side note i was pleased to see rikku not allow a bigger dog try to bully her and was even more proud that when she made the other dog coward she just walked away with her head high. we also had her at the end of leash just barley able to get to each other since rikku is still young i dont let her get to close to other dogs just enough to sniff each other.

To clarify, that is not what I think, that is my take on Cesar's philosophy...

An accurate take too.

no sorry i meant to leave more in there where you said you didnt think submissive was weak... i was agreeing with you along with a small story lol...

No worries.

I tried to keep my Boudreaux from walking ahead of me. He is 22 months old. I never could do it consistently. we use a retractable leash about 15 ft long. we have a harness that is similar but not exactly like the love my pet front lead. it works pretty well to redirect him when he wanders in the wrong direction. we usually walk him on a boulevard around the corner from my house and walk on the side facing traffic. he stays on the edge of grass for most part but will also stay on the edge of the street. he knows the "leave it" command really well. we make him stop and sit when cars approach instead of wandering aimlessly where he wants. the idea was to keep him from jumping in front of cars. it has worked a little bit. but is slowly getting better. he knows to stop and sit at the "car" command, but for some reason will not do it without being told, which is what I wanted. have tried with treats etc. anyways to get back to what I was initially talking about, since he is a working (pulling) dog, I don't have a problem with him leading me as long as he stays out of the street, doesn't pull, and obeys commands. he also is commanded to stop and sit when crossing a street and will wait until I tell him to cross or "ok", even if I walk out ahead of him 10 or 12 feet. he his also getting better with age and not pulling (Cept the squirrels tease him and he tries to bolt at them) as much. cesar Milan has some points , but I don't agree with everything he says

Hi grumpy,

I'm sorry did you have questions regarding your dog pulling?

Or were you trying to say how you've implemented some of Cesar's methods with your dog?

Which aspects of his methods do you agree with and not agree with?

I would love to get him to quit jumping up on people, have tried a few things to no avail. basicly I was just saying that Milan has some good points, but he makes it look so easy on TV, that I think people get the wrong idea. training a dog (especially a high energy Siberian) takes lots of time and effort. each one has his own personality, and acceptance to training level. you have to find what works for you. I do not agree that a dog should not walk in front of you. especially Siberians, since they are a pulling dog. I am definitely not a professional trainer, but have done pretty good so far. I think Boudreaux respects me and for the most parts considers me and Vicky the leaders of the pack. He is definitely not food aggressive and ALWAYS waits to be told to eat before he eats his special food. we keep dry food out for him all the time and once a day he gets a half can of food, or some dry mixed with raw egg and cheese. we have taught him that is not allowed to beg at the table and when we eat he is to go lay down or go outside. we also NEVER feed him any treats from the table.
the 2 things I wish we had been more successful at is the jumping and the crate training. he does have a hiding "safe" place behind a big chair in the croner and he sleeps there when in the house most of the time. we let him come and go inside his doggy door during the day and evening and at nite or when we leave we put him outside and close the door. (he did chew up some expensive things) and we haven't yet decided to trust him inside alone. all in all we are pleased in our training efforts and used some of Milan's methods. he minds almost all commands (after he checks his itinerary to see if it is what he wants to do) with out too much fuss.

so what other ways can you teach him not to jump on people when meeting or visitors come over

OH BTW we are looking at a second home in the country along a river with 10 acres and will need to find some way to keep him from running off outside. I cannot afford to fence the entire property. may do a 1/2 acre or so. are there any good results with boundry wire, radio deterents noted .

Bae is a Husky mix who lives mostly on the electric fence. Its safe but I'm ALWAYS outside with him and sometimes, I'll take him out on leash we don't play to chase game when its time for me to go to work/school. He has run the fence once and that was when the collar wasn't touching his skin properly so he didn't get corrected for crossing the boundary.

Other Huskies... the prey drive is a lot to overcome with just a little shock. I'd advise that you fence in as much as you can then use a long line when you want to be outside the fence. E-fences don't always keep a Husky in when the Husky wants out.


Sorry for being off topic. Cesar Milan = not the kind of training I want to associate with. All that dominance stuff has been properly debunked by science, anyhow.

Rbaenen, is it only the dominance based aspect of his system that you object to? That part is only the theory behind his system, it answers *why* dogs do what they do.

Take that out complete, is there nothing left that you agree with? The rest is mostly very practical ideas about how to do what's best for your dog and make them balanced, fulfilled, and happy. Do none of those aspects of his system sit well with you?