Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2011 14:50:08 GMT 1
Rubbish title, but I couldn't think what to call it!
this carries on from Emma Louise's ulcer thread, where a few of us got sidetracked. Sorry Emma Louise! To make it easier, I've brought over most of the relevant posts from the other thread so we can continue here.
From specialized
Or the novice handler could be giving the 'wrong' signals and the horse decides he is in charge and 'messes' the handler around. I, like taklishim, have experienced the same horse take advantage of a 'weak' handler and be perfectly behaved with a firm handler - and it has nothing to do with trust or being worried, he is doing it because he can, and in that context I would call it deliberately being difficult - or perhaps taking charge.
from Mandal
From LizP
From specialized
To carry this on, then...
I think we have to be very careful of anthropomorphisms. It is very easy to see horses through our own eyes and attribute our own feelings and motivations. If you think about it, horses have evolved to interact with horses, not with humans. Their emotional and other needs are therefore determined by horse-horse interactions, not horse-human interactions. If we can make a case for emotions and reactions in that context, then it makes evolutionary sense. Otherwise it doesn't.
Horses are clearly individuals, with individual temperaments, likes, dislikes, etc. In a way that makes evolutionary sense as they're not all after exactly the same thing, which means resources can be spread further. Some are more confident, others more assertive, for example. There are also differences that have been developed by us through selective breeding. We liked a reactive thoroughbred but would not have wanted that same level of ping in a shire.
To that extent yes, the do have characters. I don't, though, see a case for a sense of humour. They may play (an activity that has a real value in a herd) but I have yet to see a group or even pair of horses just having a laugh, any more than I've seen cows, sheep, etc. having a good giggle.
I think what most people mean when they say their horse has a sense of humour is with relation to us. This doesn't stand up on (at least) two grounds. Firstly, if they don't have a sense of humour in a horse-horse environment, they are unlikely to have developed one as a result of being in a human environment. More importantly, though, is that this would mean that they would have to be able to see things through our eyes, in other words project themselves into human skin, to understand what would make us laugh. That's a heck of a lot to ask of a horse!
I know there are many, many examples that people can give of horses with a sense of humour. If you look at these, though, they are (at least nearly all) cases of horses doing things that we have reinforced somehow, or things that we think look funny. A horse who keeps tipping his bucket over (silly old thing) is the sort of example often quoted. Here, the horse may like the reaction he gets (attention, etc.). Or the horse who stands in his stable pulling faces - very often it's actually a stress reaction that we think looks funny.
I know we like to give them our own attributes - it's easy to do and helps us feel that they are relating to us on our terms. It is, though, misleading.
As a general rule, if a horse would do something in the wild or even out in a paddock, then we can say that it is natural horse behaviour. If they only do it in our human environment, then it is something that we have created, directly or indirectly.
By the way, I have no problem with people giving their horses light hearted attributes because it feels nice, as long as the underlying understanding of the fundamental horse is still there.
this carries on from Emma Louise's ulcer thread, where a few of us got sidetracked. Sorry Emma Louise! To make it easier, I've brought over most of the relevant posts from the other thread so we can continue here.
From specialized
Or the novice handler could be giving the 'wrong' signals and the horse decides he is in charge and 'messes' the handler around. I, like taklishim, have experienced the same horse take advantage of a 'weak' handler and be perfectly behaved with a firm handler - and it has nothing to do with trust or being worried, he is doing it because he can, and in that context I would call it deliberately being difficult - or perhaps taking charge.
from Mandal
When I read about owners having 'problems' with a new horse that apparently didn't display a behaviour or resistance in the past I'm often reminded of something along the lines of... 'horses are always asking questions, if you don't answer they take that as it's ok'. Where did I read that? Of course this doesn't cover every eventuality but can imo be a big factor with less experienced owners and lead to horses seemingly doing stuff to be awkward or 'take the micky' when they just need answers to their sometimes very subtle questions, which requires the handler to be on the ball, proactive, clear and consistent and remember to reward the right response often. I speak from personal experience here as well btw.
From LizP
Sorry to continue the off topic discussion but I believe this is important. I seriously cannot think of a single horse I've met personally or professionally who has been difficult deliberately, although it has often appeared that way to an owner before slowing things down and analysing exactly what is going on. Even horses who are assertive are generally compliant when being handled and ridden if we get it right. Really assertive horses are few and far between in my experience, and many people who think they have an assertive or "dominant" horse often find that's not the case when they look at things through horse eyes instead of human eyes.
Everything they and we do is for a reason - "simply because they can" doesn't make sense. Every time a horse does something which appears to be simply because he can, if you look at it from his point of view there will be a reason. It is only when we stop thinking in terms of horses being difficult for the sake of it, naughty, or a complete and utter *%^&*$! that we can start to really help the horse achieve what we want willingly and happily.
Mandal's post is spot on, and one of the things that more experiences horsemen should have is a greater ability to hear the question and answer it. As you say, specialized, the novice owner can often give the wrong signals, or even miss the need for a signal. In which case, if the horse feels he has to decide for himself, is that being deliberately difficult or simply doing what he feels to be the right thing given the lack of clarity from the handler? And, importantly, should we not be listening to his behaviour at these times to tell us how he might feel about something that might otherwise go unnoticed under more expert leadership?
So please all, every time you are tempted to think "he's just being a git", think again and ask yourself "why". There will be another answer.
Everything they and we do is for a reason - "simply because they can" doesn't make sense. Every time a horse does something which appears to be simply because he can, if you look at it from his point of view there will be a reason. It is only when we stop thinking in terms of horses being difficult for the sake of it, naughty, or a complete and utter *%^&*$! that we can start to really help the horse achieve what we want willingly and happily.
Mandal's post is spot on, and one of the things that more experiences horsemen should have is a greater ability to hear the question and answer it. As you say, specialized, the novice owner can often give the wrong signals, or even miss the need for a signal. In which case, if the horse feels he has to decide for himself, is that being deliberately difficult or simply doing what he feels to be the right thing given the lack of clarity from the handler? And, importantly, should we not be listening to his behaviour at these times to tell us how he might feel about something that might otherwise go unnoticed under more expert leadership?
So please all, every time you are tempted to think "he's just being a git", think again and ask yourself "why". There will be another answer.
From specialized
Okay 'simply because he can' is perhaps the wrong way of expressing it, he is choosing an action or making a deliberate decision.
Would you also say that a horse cannot have a character or sense of humour - as both of these involve making a deliberate decision to get an effect which may differ with different handlers, depending on what he knows he can get away with.
Would you also say that a horse cannot have a character or sense of humour - as both of these involve making a deliberate decision to get an effect which may differ with different handlers, depending on what he knows he can get away with.
To carry this on, then...
I think we have to be very careful of anthropomorphisms. It is very easy to see horses through our own eyes and attribute our own feelings and motivations. If you think about it, horses have evolved to interact with horses, not with humans. Their emotional and other needs are therefore determined by horse-horse interactions, not horse-human interactions. If we can make a case for emotions and reactions in that context, then it makes evolutionary sense. Otherwise it doesn't.
Horses are clearly individuals, with individual temperaments, likes, dislikes, etc. In a way that makes evolutionary sense as they're not all after exactly the same thing, which means resources can be spread further. Some are more confident, others more assertive, for example. There are also differences that have been developed by us through selective breeding. We liked a reactive thoroughbred but would not have wanted that same level of ping in a shire.
To that extent yes, the do have characters. I don't, though, see a case for a sense of humour. They may play (an activity that has a real value in a herd) but I have yet to see a group or even pair of horses just having a laugh, any more than I've seen cows, sheep, etc. having a good giggle.
I think what most people mean when they say their horse has a sense of humour is with relation to us. This doesn't stand up on (at least) two grounds. Firstly, if they don't have a sense of humour in a horse-horse environment, they are unlikely to have developed one as a result of being in a human environment. More importantly, though, is that this would mean that they would have to be able to see things through our eyes, in other words project themselves into human skin, to understand what would make us laugh. That's a heck of a lot to ask of a horse!
I know there are many, many examples that people can give of horses with a sense of humour. If you look at these, though, they are (at least nearly all) cases of horses doing things that we have reinforced somehow, or things that we think look funny. A horse who keeps tipping his bucket over (silly old thing) is the sort of example often quoted. Here, the horse may like the reaction he gets (attention, etc.). Or the horse who stands in his stable pulling faces - very often it's actually a stress reaction that we think looks funny.
I know we like to give them our own attributes - it's easy to do and helps us feel that they are relating to us on our terms. It is, though, misleading.
As a general rule, if a horse would do something in the wild or even out in a paddock, then we can say that it is natural horse behaviour. If they only do it in our human environment, then it is something that we have created, directly or indirectly.
By the way, I have no problem with people giving their horses light hearted attributes because it feels nice, as long as the underlying understanding of the fundamental horse is still there.
Having spoken with many other fjord owners around the world, this is a common trait with fjords. You have to treat them with respect and not push them about, otherwise they react with violence. Hence why fjords are sometimes passed from owner to owner (this happens a lot in the states I have been told). Also, many trainers in the States cannot handle them - mule trainers are the best for them
but like all things you have to work at it.Certainly helped me with Malaga