Before you read this Angelique, I want you to know that this doesn't mean that I don't like you or think you're good and kind to your dogs. I know better. I've seen you with them and I sooooo enjoyed your company. But I have difficulty wording things in a passive way when what I have to say isn't particularly passive. I am not very good at passive-aggressive when it's something that strikes me in a strong way. So, this is not targetted to be a personal thing, but more of a concept thing.
I will say this when it comes to beliefs...as someone who firmly believes there are too many dogs in the world, I am pro-adoption and would like to see less puppies brought into the world, purebred or not.
There was a time when I could have been seen on a soapbox, preaching "radical rescue-ism" and shedding an emotional tear everytime a breeder was popping a cork over their latest litter.
It seems the people on this and other forums who get on a soapbox, who "preach" and who are "radical" are the very ones who are doing the most work in rescues, shelters and indeed educating people....getting the word out. A lot of people don't mean to hurt dogs by breeding them wrong or too much. They don't know any better. They haven't heard. If everyone remains silent and only uses the form of example, adopting a dog themselves once in a while, how would that affect the odds of making a significant difference? I've learned a whole lot since reading and learning from those people who "preach." And yes, it does break my heart every time I read about some hapless, pathetic animal, such as these dogs living their lives in shelters because byb dogs are taking up the space in homes that could have been theirs. Yes, it is an emotional thing to me.
Our emotional make-up is directly connected to our rational thinking make-up. This is science. Without emotion, our decisions are missing a terrifically large and valuable part of the whole. There is nothing wrong with shedding an emotional tear. The brain pathways where emotion is centered send important information to the part of the brain where rational thoughts are created. Have you read
for the love of a dog? She talks about how the brain works and how important emotion is to our decision making and functioning.
But this did not help educate and it shut down the information exchange and knowledge. I can only do my part by starting with myself. By being an independant thinker in my own personal choices, and by leading through example.
I am not convinced that this is the single factor that did not help educate. There could have been many possibilities of variables which affected the effectiveness. It may have been purely a coincidence too. Taking one factor and attributing that to a cause or conclusion is unparsimonious.
I'm an independent thinker too. I do not blindly follow others, but if I do follow, it is with good reason. I examine lots of different factors and variables and see proof of a hypothesis before coming to a firm conclusion or at the very least, positive demonstration.
It is very self-rewarding to crusade for a cause we believe in. The metaphorical "bite" can be an intoxicating reward in the fight to be right.
The "fight to be right," in my case anyhow, isn't to be right for myself or for selfish reasons, if that is what you're inferring. It is to be right for the sake of dogs. I am a basically moral person and do know the difference between right and wrong. It would not be right for me to sit by passively and not speak out for dogs when they're being abused, just as it wouldn't be right for me to hide my head in the sand if I saw a child being abused, but go along raising my child nicely. As far as making a difference, I think I have, both by speaking out and by example as well. I've seen it with the people and dogs I've been working with over the past while since starting my own business. I've seen it on forums. I've seen it with my neighbors and family. I see and hear feed back in a positive and improving manner with these dogs. And that is what is rewarding to me. It is not for the self centered, self rewarding result you suggest.
I don't know where this comes from. Maybe because humans no longer stay isolated in small clans, fighting to preserve and pass on their genes and have instead organized themselves into belief systems.
There are some people and "clans" that defy Darwin's theory of natural selection...the survival of the fittest.
Whatever the reason one becomes religious about their "cause" of choice, I have made a personal choice to do my best not to take that path. Sometimes I fail as I am only human. But I really do try.
I don't know what this means. But if I understand it correctly, you've chosen not to actively stand up for a cause that you believe strongly in? I see you stand up vehemently for Cesar, for one example. Why wouldn't you stand up for dogs in shelters if its something you believe in?
Our love of dogs (all of us who participate in these debates) makes us passionate. All I can do is continue to discuss, explore, learn, grow, and share, while trying to stick to the sciences over the emotional.
And I don't know exactly what this means either. From past experience, I have seen you mock science, believing not what the scientists and behaviorists have to say about how dogs are, disregarding their studies, experiments, observations and demonstration, invalidating them....rallying for Cesar Milan in their place. Are you insinuating that people, like some of us here, myself included as well as more famous behaviorists... who believe in behaviorism where training/interacting and rehabilitating dogs are unscientific and neurotically emotional? If you were sticking to the sciences
over the emotional, as you say, you would explore, learn and grow. But instead, you appear to be sticking to Cesar Milan like glue and he is about the most unscientific as well as unemotional example I could ever come up with. He is not only leaving out enormous amounts of science, but he's leaving out common sense and empathy. That is a very important emotion to have in order to qualify as a normal human as well as to act intelligently and wisely. Empathy. That's a big one. Unless of course,.....he has empathy, but as I suspect, has it totally misplaced on account of not knowing anything remarkable about dogs other than they need leadership and exercise....oh, and a calm owner so they can be abnormally calm and subdued themselves, much easier dogs to deal with, huh. Pffffff. He totally misses the mark on reading body language and what's going on in the emotional lives of dogs....totally off target.
In addition, it is thought that humans and dogs share a convergent evolution. We've been with dogs for a long time. Why would we suddenly, on account of Cesar Milan's ideas and advice need to act totally unnatural (for a human) around dogs? Why would we have to be so uncommonly calm, subdued and unemotional? There's a happy medium. Of course, it doesn't do anyone any good to flail around and act crazy-hyper, especially with a dog who is mal-adjusted. But really now... must we take this to the extreme in general?
Again, it's about personal choice.
Yes indeed.....agreed.
