[SptsNaz]

Well, I used to give my cat a nice little smack every now and then everytime he used to dig his claws into my leg or bite me when he's playing around. I haven't had to do it anymore though since he learned his lesson. I wish I didn't have to do it but with a cat there isn't really any other way.

 

[iGig]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif how disturbing, more ppl would hit their children before hitting their pets (from the headfi pulls)... very very disturbing. IMO your kids has more rights as human than your dog/cats, which are just animal. Animal has no rights, and its only in this country that 'whether animal has rights' is even an issue. All thanks to the lobbyists.

I noticed that too, very disturbing and ironic. Political correctness has society all confused, nothing makes sense anymore.

I think people think one thing and say another in an effort to "appear" proper and righteous. LOLOL

I'm not voting on this poll because I have no pets.

 

[Vicomte]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif how disturbing, more ppl would hit their children before hitting their pets (from the headfi pulls)... very very disturbing. IMO your kids has more rights as human than your dog/cats, which are just animal. Animal has no rights, and its only in this country that 'whether animal has rights' is even an issue. All thanks to the lobbyists.

I think the general consensus is that animals don't possess the understanding and higher brain function that human children do, and so hitting them for discipline is nothing but cruel. A child can understand why he is being disciplined, often an animal cannot. It's much the same as hitting a mentally dumb person to discipline them; I doubt anyone here would advocate that.

Don't bother to call me liberal or politically correct, I clearly used the term mentally dumb.

 

[The Monkey]

An interesting book on this subject (equally applicable to humans) is Don't Shoot the Dog.

 

[AlanY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicomte /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think the general consensus is that animals don't possess the understanding and higher brain function that human children do, and so hitting them for discipline is nothing but cruel. A child can understand why he is being disciplined, often an animal cannot.

I'm not sure it's so clear cut. There is a split in the child spanking thread between those who believe in early spanking (generally also continuing until the child is older) and those who believe in spanking only after the child reaches a certain age. In that thread, the Supreme Court decision Genetic linked to cited research that children could not appreciate the link between spanking and what they had done before about age two, so I'd consider the cognitive levels of both adult dogs and pre-two year olds somewhat equivalent in that single sense.

My own personal beef with spanking is related to this issue. I'm sure my father thought that I could understand rationally the connection between what I had done and why I was being spanked -- and it was true, I could -- but I also took away emotionally a very different message that destroyed my trust in him. For that reason, it was irrelevant whether or not I could rationally appreciate the purpose of the spanking. The damage was emotional, not rational.

 

[aphex944]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hitting is almost never an effective tool with dogs. The goal of any correction that's administered to a dog as part of training is to make the dog submissive and obedient, not fearful or defensive. Hitting tends to accomplish the latter, not the former, and can cause more behavioral issues than it solves.

Absolutely 100% agree with your post.

I follow the same basic principles with my dog. A quick tug on his leash to break his attention, followed up with a verbal sound, done deal. I believe this mixed with positive reinforcement to achieve certain behaviors will create the most balanced dog.

Hitting a dog will generally not create or reinforce trust and respect. I remember growing up being taught to hit our miniature schnauzer with a rolled up newspaper to correct unwanted behavior. This created a bad association; reaching for a newspaper, even just to read it, instantly created a cowering and fearful response. With very aggressive dogs, inflicting pain or hitting them will only intensify the situation and make things worse.

When the correction originates from you either through a stern gaze, sound, or motion it will reinforce that you the owner are not only to be respected and obeyed, but trusted as well.

 

[MrJoshua]

The only time I ever get or have got physical with animals is in the following situations:

1. German Shepherd guard dog attacked me when I was 12. I was walking past a hotel (doing nothing wrong I might add) and the guard dog that was loose started running after me and bit my bum and wouldn't let go.
It ended up with a broken nose, lots of blood and its tail between its legs. I was very upset about this, but it messed my bum cheek up and ripped my trousers, so I thought it was fair enough after I'd calmed down. My Mum called the police but chose not to have it destroyed as she was a bit of a pacifist hippy at the time

.

2. If my cats start biting and scratching me too hard (ie drawing blood) when we're playing, they get a verbal warning and if they don't stop, they get a tap on the back of the head. I'm careful not to do it anywhere near hard, but it's enough to make them stop.

That's it.

I believe there's better ways to teach domestic animals manners than regularly using physical force. There are times however when there isn't much choice.

 

[gsansite]

Interesting thread. Personally I think keeping any animal as a pet is abusive, however I hold nothing against those who do.

There are many studies that show animals can learn from pain (including humans), however I know of no studies that show a dog (or the like) will learn from being given a well reasoned explanation of what it's doing wrong.

 

[mbriant]

I tend to agree with this take on things. It makes absolute perfect sense to use similar techniques as the animal's parent would use. A mother pit bull doesn't read Dr. Spock.

http://www.dogflu.ca/01132006/18/dogs_and_training

 

[Vicomte]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlanY /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm not sure it's so clear cut. There is a split in the child spanking thread between those who believe in early spanking (generally also continuing until the child is older) and those who believe in spanking only after the child reaches a certain age. In that thread, the Supreme Court decision Genetic linked to cited research that children could not appreciate the link between spanking and what they had done before about age two, so I'd consider the cognitive levels of both adult dogs and pre-two year olds somewhat equivalent in that single sense. My own personal beef with spanking is related to this issue. I'm sure my father thought that I could understand rationally the connection between what I had done and why I was being spanked -- and it was true, I could -- but I also took away emotionally a very different message that destroyed my trust in him. For that reason, it was irrelevant whether or not I could rationally appreciate the purpose of the spanking. The damage was emotional, not rational.

I assumed that people wouldn't be spanking children under age 2 in the first place, if at all. Of course a young child is just as helpless and devoid of understanding as an animal.

 

[plainsong]

Then this moron doesn't deserve a dachshund, and if the breeder reads it, they should reclaim the dog, or report his @ss to the humane society. I'm not kidding. If you think you're good enough to achieve results through abuse, then you're good enough to achieve results without it. All he taught his dog is fear, which is shameful.

As you can tell, as a dachshund owner and fan of the breed, this makes my blood boil.

Dogs and horses are something I know a little bit about, and I would never condone abuse as a legitimate training method. It is abuse. They learn nothing from it, except to fear you. I'm proud to say that I never had to so much as bop a nose, while at the same time expecting good manners.

If you think this is acceptable, then please call the SPCA to have them come get your pet. You're not ready to handle the responsiblity.

You, meaning anyone who truly thinks this is ok, not just some forum trolls who say things they don't in reality mean. This is a serious matter, and if you have a pet and think otherwise, then you shouldn't be having a pet. You isn't referring to the OP, though I quoted his post to get the bit about the poor doxy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlanY /img/forum/go_quote.gif In response to an issue raised by a few posters in the spanking thread, I thought I'd post a poll about your attitude towards using physical discipline techniques with dogs and other trainable pets. Would you/do you hit your dog as a form of discipline? Do you feel it is appropriate? This is a legitimate question in which I'm interested in various answers, btw, not an attempt at making some kind of point. I know some of the child spanking books, like James Dobson's The Strong-Willed Child also advocate hitting pets -- Dobson describes how he takes a belt to the family dog (a dachshund) when it won't willingly go into its sleeping enclosure, explaining that "I had seen this defiant mood before, and knew there was only one way to deal with it. The ONLY way to make Siggie obey is to threaten him with destruction. Nothing else works. I turned and went to my closet and got a small belt to help me 'reason' with Mr. Freud." My own parents didn't own that particular book, though they did own Dobson's prior book Dare to Discipline.

I also don't believe by any stretch in total animal liberation. For instance, with domesticated pets like dogs and cats, our fates are hopelessly linked now. We have interferred with the genepool too much for them to go out and survive on their own. No, they need us, and we need them. Now to say, domesticate a Tiger, or breed some wild hybrid, that is abuse. But as for the work of zoos, without them, the very animals you're trying to save would be exctinct, so the PETA stance of total liberation just doesn't work, like much of PETA really, who kill more animals than most kill-shelters anyway.

 

[cantsleep]

depends how hard you are hitting. just hit/spank em(lightly) so that the dog knows what's to do and what's not. hit em too often and too hard may turn him into some angry dog and that's no good.

 

[iGig]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbriant /img/forum/go_quote.gif I tend to agree with this take on things. It makes absolute perfect sense to use similar techniques as the animal's parent would use. A mother pit bull doesn't read Dr. Spock. http://www.dogflu.ca/01132006/18/dogs_and_training

Small quote from this article: Quote:

It is eye contact coupled with growls, snaps, body position, and the tensing of muscles that formulate much of canine discipline. Females use it to correct nursing puppies and aggressive males who flirt a little too much. Pack leaders use it, e.g. eye contact, a snap or growl, and some subtle body movements to keep subordinate males in line.

I don't mind taking lessons from a female dog, I bet these techniques work well with dogs, kids and husbands.

 

[gsansite]

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong /img/forum/go_quote.gif I also don't believe by any stretch in total animal liberation. For instance, with domesticated pets like dogs and cats, our fates are hopelessly linked now. We have interferred with the genepool too much for them to go out and survive on their own. No, they need us, and we need them. Now to say, domesticate a Tiger, or breed some wild hybrid, that is abuse. But as for the work of zoos, without them, the very animals you're trying to save would be exctinct, so the PETA stance of total liberation just doesn't work, like much of PETA really, who kill more animals than most kill-shelters anyway.

I presume this was aimed at me. Like I said, I hold nothing against people who keep pets (for this exact reason), however my personal feelings on the matter mean that I would never keep a pet. You're not the only person entitled to an opinion.

 

[plainsong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsansite /img/forum/go_quote.gif I presume this was aimed at me. Like I said, I hold nothing against people who keep pets (for this exact reason), however my personal feelings on the matter mean that I would never keep a pet. You're not the only person entitled to an opinion.

I was just disagreeing with you and demonstrating why it doesn't work, and why it would lead to the exintiction of endangered species that we're trying to save. I can reply to the opinion, can't I? I never said you weren't entitled to the opinion.

I wasn't attacking you, calling you names, saying you smell, nothing like that. I was just stating my own opinion. You can counter it if you like, or not. No pushing or shoving going on over here.

But people who think "just a little smack" doesn't instill anything other than fear in the pet they claim to love, those are the ones that need more help than a headphone forum can give. Those are the ones whose pets deserve to be in loving homes. It's not about some stupid forum war. It's a very serious matter, and for those who think it's ok, that you get help somehow, such as working with reputable dog trainers, or just finding a better home for your pet.