|
|
Post by mandal on Jan 2, 2011 18:58:34 GMT 1
It goes both ways. I mean I don't disturb my horse at his grub, or (as his past owners did) pull him around by his tail in the box, I make much of him on our return from all rides. When he's at rest in the field, I don't barge into his space. Respect for me, is a step back when I come into the box, it's not quite a salute, but just my 1% in the relationship that I like of 49:51. I think the lack of respect is often an 'ask'... right who are you? Are you in charge? You are... great... phew. Actually Kanga this post has made me wonder if 'respect' is a willingness to do what is asked really as well as a mutual understanding and empathy. That's opposed to something we should expect and therefore can force on horses?  I don't know, it's all so difficult when a slight difference in meaning can make us think our beliefs are oceans away from each other. I'm also not known for my clarity of thought. lol |
|
|
|
Post by june on Jan 2, 2011 19:26:14 GMT 1
I'm with Francis on the leadership and dominance issue. I think leadership creates willing followers whereas dominance creates followers who follow because they don't have the choice. That's what those words mean to me, but words mean different things to different people.
I don't think horses are ever disrespectful. I don't think that is in their vocab. I do think they test the boundaries continuously and anyone who is used to dealing with horses answers those questions without even thinking about it. That's why one person can lead a horse in from the field and it doesn't dive to the grass and another can't. They've asked the question of the first person and that person has said no, whereas the second person hasn't even noticed the question so hasn't answered it and the horse has assumed that is then a yes.
I watch that sort of thing happen with the polo ponies at the arena gate. I can see the point at which a horse has asked a novice rider if they can go out of the open gate, and its usually way before they get to the gate. The rider hasn't said no, so the horse assumes that's a yes and as they get to the gate they make the attempt to leave. An experienced rider would have answered the question when it was asked and the horse wouldn't have made the attempt to leave. Thinking about it, it isn't even as clear cut as novice and experienced riders but more about riders that tune into the horse and notice detail.
I remember Mark Rashid answering a question from the audience about a horse being disrespectful. The horse was rubbing its head on the owner and someone from the audience said to Mark that the horse was being disrespectful and what did he think the owner should do about it. Mark turned to the owner and asked if she minded what the horse was doing and she said she didn't, so he turned back to the person in the audience and said no, the horse wasn't being disrespectful. The owner was happy with the behaviour and so hadn't taught the horse not to do it. Even if the owner had taught the horse not to do it, it still wouldn't have been disrespectful if the horse had tried to do it and the owner hadn't reminded the horse not to do it when the horse initially asked the question. That was one of those lightbulb moments for me for whatever reason. Guess I was at the point where I was ready to hear the message!
|
|
|
|
Post by narkymare on Jan 2, 2011 19:42:38 GMT 1
i was the op for the kisisng thread and i just want to say i never ever forced or tried ot cajole my horse into kisisng me, i accepted he wasnt a "cuddly loving affectionate showing horse" - didnt matter, i adored him anyway
Waht happened christmad day was i put him to bed, watched him eat, i was leant over his stable door just watching him enjoy him dinner and he came ot me - blew on my face, nuzzled me and for once - i felt sage enough to let him
When he has dgone near my face before, i have moved away because he can be nippy - i just trusted him and it was a lovely couple of minutes -
|
|
|
|
Post by mandal on Jan 2, 2011 19:48:49 GMT 1
Nothing you wrote was a prompt for this thread narkymare. What I and others had written just got me thinking about what we might mean when we say 'respect' or 'disrespect' from horses.  I totally understood what you were expalining and never thought for one moment you have forced or cajoled him. Sorry for giving you a worry by mentioning your thread.  |
|
|
|
Post by narkymare on Jan 2, 2011 20:08:17 GMT 1
ty mandal - all i was tryigh ot get across that me and arhtur can now trust each other, i didnt mean any offence at all - tbh i never thought of if he does it to someone else - i now see that could be dangerous for him - all i can say in my defence is that only me and my husband and daughter sees to him, hes on full diy and i do intend to keep him for life xxx
|
|
|
|
Post by Yann on Jan 2, 2011 21:22:13 GMT 1
I have to say that any time I hear a trainer mention the 'r' word alarm bells and sirens tend to go off  It's always worth looking back at the dictionary definitions of words when we start discussing them To me these definitions have a more benign meaning than is often given to the term in the horse world, where it often means the same thing as unquestioning obedience. I read something the other day by a Parelli trainer who said that the 'snappiness of a departure' was the direct measure of a horse's respect for you. We do need a horse to respect us (in the best sense of the word), but that's also a two way street. |
|
|
|
Post by Mellymoo on Jan 2, 2011 21:38:17 GMT 1
Wow this is a really thought provoking thread! I don't even know if what I am about to add is relevant or not, but anyway   I have been thinking about my relationship with Jos, and comparing it to what I had with Hamish. I think that Jos and I have the 49:51 that Kanga and Flynn have, which is ace. We respect eachother - I don't pester him to do stuff all the time, I don't fuss over him (not much anyway! ) and in return he will do what I ask him (most of the time   if I ask him for something. We rub along nicely together, finding security and comfort with eachother. With Hamish, he was very much the one who called the shots. I didn't see it at the time, but now I do . He decided what happened, and I had to go along with it. I see now that I should have been stronger. But anyway, he taught me how I should be around horses - i.e. how NOT to behave  The lessons he taught me have stood me in good stead for dealing with Jos, who has a totally different personality. So now I think I can safely say that neurotic horses and me get on well - horses being like their owners and all that ;D In conclusion, in my eyes respect should be mutual, and if I respect Jos he respects me. And apologies if that is not even what this thread is about ;D |
|
|
|
Post by mandal on Jan 2, 2011 21:48:07 GMT 1
In conclusion, in my eyes respect should be mutual, and if I respect Jos he respects me. And apologies if that is not even what this thread is about ;D Oh don't apologise Mel. This thread is about what each of us think and understnd by respect in relation to horses and it's interesting how Hamish has taught you and even though they are different the lessons have stood you in good stead with Jos. I have to say that any time I hear a trainer mention the 'r' word alarm bells and sirens tend to go off It's always worth looking back at the dictionary definitions of words when we start discussing them To me these definitions have a more benign meaning than is often given to the term in the horse world, where it often means the same thing as unquestioning obedience. I read something the other day by a Parelli trainer who said that the 'snappiness of a departure' was the direct measure of a horse's respect for you. We do need a horse to respect us (in the best sense of the word), but that's also a two way street. Lol Yann, I feel that way about lots of words that when used in horsemanship seem to have all sorts of 'other' meanings and associations. After reading that definition you've put up I'm beginning to think expecting any horse to respect me is a notion I should forget altogether and concentrate on just respecting them and see what comes back. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Mellymoo on Jan 2, 2011 21:52:13 GMT 1
That's interesting mandal - all I have done with Jos, really, is respect him as a person (is that right ;D) and accommodate his personality. It really seems to have paid off for us both.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverrocn on Jan 3, 2011 0:58:16 GMT 1
Perhaps we should forget about the notion of respect and think about being good leaders?
WE should respect how our horse is feeling about what we are asking of him. Is he nervous about what he is facing, anxious because his field buddy is singing out and he isn't feeling that OK about being away from him? I think it is fair to say that almost all bad/disrespectful/naughty behavior can be attributed to how the horse is feeling right then and there.
My old pony would only ever put his mouth on me if he was anxious about something, if I didn't help him to feel OK about what was worrying him he would start nipping. Was he disrespectful/cheeky/naughty?
I don't think we should dominate, we should lead and we should always work towards the horse feeling calm and able to follow not because he HAS to but because he knows we will keep him safe. A horse is just trying to survive every minute of every day and when we get in the way of his need to survive and don't provide a better place then he is probably going to do what he can to get the heck out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yann on Jan 3, 2011 8:22:23 GMT 1
Isn't there always going to be an element of 'has to' in our relationship with them though? Even if we keep them as pets there are many circumstances where we need to override their wishes and you can't always cater for every eventuality.
|
|
|
|
Post by wabuska on Jan 3, 2011 9:13:52 GMT 1
I agree Yann. We can't undermine the joy with guilt.
|
|
|
|
Post by mandal on Jan 3, 2011 10:45:20 GMT 1
Isn't there always going to be an element of 'has to' in our relationship with them though? Even if we keep them as pets there are many circumstances where we need to override their wishes and you can't always cater for every eventuality. I agree Yann and in fact it could be argued that denying this is not realistic. Having an aim/goal/model is great but it has to be able to incorporate 'real life'. I still have a problem seeing dominance as only an un empathic force to 'control' others, and until I can find a word to replace what I believe atm and see, I'm stuck with the problems this understanding poses for me in these discussions. The word 'natural' is also becoming something to shy away from it seems. Here, I will have a huge problem trying to live denying 'natural'. Yes Kanga, it can become very easy to drive yourself to distraction with guilt if you are not happy with insisting if/when it may be necessary. That is no fun. Enjoy the moment. |
|
|
|
Post by Francis Burton on Jan 3, 2011 22:06:02 GMT 1
I still have a problem seeing dominance as only an un empathic force to 'control' others, and until I can find a word to replace what I believe atm and see, I'm stuck with the problems this understanding poses for me in these discussions. The word 'natural' is also becoming something to shy away from it seems. Here, I will have a huge problem trying to live denying 'natural'. So many words to shy away from, so little time... (referring to the way that multiple meanings of words in this area complicate communication) Dominance - I don't think it's an unempathic force to 'control', because (the way I see it) it is rather limited in achieving any kind of control of horses! Control of resources, yes, but not of what other horses do. All the dominant can make a subordinate do is go away or get out of the way. That's all! Useful in some situations - though I would argue that you can teach or make horses do that without being dominant (e.g. pretend to be a predator). But to get a horse to follow you into a trailer, say - could a dominant horse ever do that?! And if displaying dominance doesn't inspire liking or trust or obedience - which I don't see any evidence for it doing - what is it good for apart from making sure you get and keep the hay or feed, or get first drink at the waterhole? (Admittedly those are important when food/water/breeding rights are scarce!) Given that horses can be 'leaders' without also being dominant (sorry but I have to put the word in inverted commas because it really isn't the same for horses and humans), then what purpose does dominance serve in addition to the above? Maybe it doesn't with my definition, but does with yours - in which case I need to try and understand what you mean by dominance a bit better! |
|
|
|
Post by ghostrider on Jan 3, 2011 22:58:24 GMT 1
Dominance - I don't think it's an unempathic force to 'control', because (the way I see it) it is rather limited in achieving any kind of control of horses! Control of resources, yes, but not of what other horses do. All the dominant can make a subordinate do is go away or get out of the way. That's all! Useful in some situations - though I would argue that you can teach or make horses do that without being dominant (e.g. pretend to be a predator). But to get a horse to follow you into a trailer, say - could a dominant horse ever do that?!
And if displaying dominance doesn't inspire liking or trust or obedience - which I don't see any evidence for it doing - what is it good for apart from making sure you get and keep the hay or feed, or get first drink at the waterhole? (Admittedly those are important when food/water/breeding rights are scarce!)
Given that horses can be 'leaders' without also being dominant (sorry but I have to put the word in inverted commas because it really isn't the same for horses and humans), then what purpose does dominance serve in addition to the above?
OK, I am very sorry to sound like a script writer from 'When Harry Met Sally ' but ... yes, yes, and YES!!!
|
|
if I ask him for something. We rub along nicely together, finding security and comfort with eachother.
The lessons he taught me have stood me in good stead for dealing with Jos, who has a totally different personality. So now I think I can safely say that neurotic horses and me get on well - horses being like their owners and all that ;D