Bullying?

[Francis Burton]

This is my first post to this forum - hello everyone! :)

I was going to post to the thread "Parelli - So how does it work?" but it was closed. Actually, this question isn't about Parelli specifically, but was prompted by something I read there:

chev wrote:
"anyone who's been faced with a horse that really isn't co-operating has two choices, whatever method of training they use. First is let the horse walk all over them. Second is bully them."

chev - My initial reaction to your statement was for my jaw to drop. I really couldn't believe you said that. Are those the only choices? It seems like the old "dominate or be dominated" dictum. And then I read your signature line, which expresses very nicely one of the possible other alternatives in dealing with an uncooperative (and perhaps aggressive) horse:

"One should avoid resistances, instead of trying to conquer them. (Aubert)"

Maybe I have misunderstood your original statement. (Or have I misunderstood Aubert??)

It seems that the answer might lie in the definition of "bullying" - hence the thread title.

When I'm faced with an unhandled colt who is bent on not backing down, the last thing I want is confront his challenge with a counter-challenge. If you did this with an aggressive stallion, you could get yourself seriously hurt (or killed). I have worked and continue to work with stallions - young and old, aggressive and docile - so have some experience. Anyway, one rather favourable way out of this "bind" is to allow the horse to see that he doesn't need to out-aggress or dominate you, because you are not a threat to him and you are not competing for anything. The priority is to de-escalate any aggression, not to add your own in the hope that you will "win out" eventually. Of course, it is also about rewarding good behaviour, and avoiding/not rewarding/punishing bad behaviour - though I would avoid any punishers that would evoke an aggressive response. Calm horses learn a lot faster than angry ones; and calm handlers get better (and quicker) results than angry ones. Setting limits is fine, but I don't like imposing arbitrary ones just for the sake of making some point about dominance. Out-bullying a "difficult" horse is liable to lose a lot of trust very quickly, it can be dangerous, and it is completely unnecessary in my opinion (because I know the alternative outlined above does actually work).

So where does that leave us with bullying? Do we need to find a suitable definition which allows a distinction between beneficial bullying and detrimental bullying - because surely it can't all be beneficial??

[horsemadmandy]

Hi
Anyone who bullies a horse should be ashamed and infact shot! They may think it works for the short term but that is all it does for them. If I could get my hands on the Female wearing a puffer jacket that has ruined my horses emotional stability then I would have a few words to say. I would like to find her and show her what she has done to this horse and what this horse still carries with him years later. We have not been told his fear it has just shown itself time after time and become the main focus on his rehabilitation long term.

[chev]

Absolutely agree that bullying can be terribly detrimental. It really does come down to definition.

Define how join-up works. It's bullying; ok, so it's bullying using the horse's own language, but it's still bullying. It's simple; horse doesn't co-operate, so you send it out on it's own until it re-thinks the situation and agrees to let you take control. That's bullying.

Yes, I've bullied my horses into doing things at times; I had an unhandled colt come at me on his hind legs with teeth bared because he didn't want me near his bucket. And yes, I chased him rigth back off, and kept him away until he gave in. Allowing him to see I wasn't a threat simply wasn't an option at the time; there were two choices - get out of his way and set up further problems, or stand up to him. He's now a very happy, well-adjusted colt who still tries it on at times but is receptive and willing. And I've never had to challenge him like that since.

Each situation has to be dealt with as it happens. I've also worked with stallions, and remedial horses, for a long time. I don't use brutal methods at all - I'm actually a very quiet person around horses generally (ask Monty - she's seen me working through problems with a horse) but there's a big difference between brutality and what I would call bullying.

Will have to come back and clarify this later; have to get kids to school and son to hospital now!

[Big Ears]

well if i didn't stand up to Rosie and impose boundaries on her behaviour she would walk all over me - literally.

she is currently a nice placid happy easy to handle horse, but that's because she learnt - by NH bullying/aggressive techniques - that she is not top horse and she is happier not being so. she is in charge of Molly horse but not me.

we had a choice with her too - let her continue to be unpleasant and be returned - for the fourth time - from a loan home, or persevere with her and turn her into a nice cooperative girl who has a purpose in life and that people enjoy being around. she still has her moments but i never have needed to confront her, or really take her head on, but we are firm with what we expect from her and she knows what she has to do.

with rosie meeting her head to head would be counter productive, but if she refuses to lead properly, she is circled and made to do it = if necessary i will do a quick 5 minute session with the pressure halter just to remind her that we can go back to that every day if she wants, one quick go with that and she remembers it immediately.

[Naturally]

Well, you might call join up bullying, but I wouldn't call Parelli Liberty (or any PNH) bullying by any stretch of the imagination.

A bully is someone who picks on another because they feel they are superior and do so with the intention of making the victim feel inferior.

PNH relies on asserting yourself as a leader. My definition of that:
A leader is someone who can assert themselves as the head of a group (herd) and provide direction, confidence, comfort and safety or any other qualities that the group requires to maintain harmony.

Horses are herd animals and all herd animals have/require/rely upon a leader. That's why they live in a herd. ;)

[raggydoll]

although my knowledge of working with difficult horses is limited, well ok none existent! I think that like has already been said horses are herd animals and need to have a leader. We establish ourselves as leaders by mimicking the way a horse would do that in the herd and perhaps in human terms that constitutes bullying but in horse terms it is simply communicating to them there and our position in the herd. Backing down would simply lead to them believing that they are in charge and lead to far greater problems in the future. From what i have read the majority of horses are happy to step down and be lead instead of the leader provided they have faith in your abilities as herd leader which may only come once they have challenged that. Due to the nature of horses this may require a pretty extreme reaction from us sometimes. Obviously avoiding the situation in the first place would be ideal but that is not always possible/practical or in fact for the best.

I think it is only bullying in the sense meant here when such behaviour is unnecessary or unnecessarily excessive. I take the bullying that Chev was talking about to mean showing it who is boss rather than bullying in any malicious sence of the word.

[Yann]

to hurt or frighten someone who is smaller or less powerful than you, often forcing them to do something they do not want to do:

This is one dictionary definition of bullying, obviously with a horse the smaller and less powerful bit applies mentally rather than physically in most cases.

For me the key words would be 'hurt or frighten'. Using physical or mental pressure on a horse to assert leadership isn't necessarily the same thing as bullying in my book unless it's done to excess and results in a nervous or cowed horse. For example the properly executed join ups I've watched didn't result in either, rather a relaxed one.

Nice to see you here Francis, I always read your posts with interest elsewhere :)

[chev]

To give the whole quote from my post on the Parelli thread...

"It's not confined to NH either - anyone who's been faced with a horse that really isn't co-operating has two choices, whatever method of training they use. First is let the horse walk all over them. Second is bully them. Bullying takes many many forms - it's not just about clouting a horse with the end of a clip while backing him up (I have to say though, that even working with Gelfy, I've never managed to do that - it's not a pre-requisite of the yo-yo game). It can be mental bullying, bullying through choice of tack, all sorts.

Ok, so in an ideal world, we wouldn't need to bully horses into anything. If foals were sympathetically handled from the start, if horses all lived near-natural lives and were happy to co-operate every time we interacted with them, if we all managed to start off with a great working relationship from the start, there'd be no need. But the world is far from ideal, and when I'm faced with an unhandled colt who is bent on not backing down just yet because he doesn't feel I've really stood up to his challenge yet.... then yes, I'll bully him into backing down. I can't afford not to, for both our sakes."

Might clarify what I was saying a little more.

I think the problem is the term 'bully' - if using it to describe someone who deliberately belittles another for nothing more than petty personal gain... then no, it has no place in training or working with horses at all.

But if using it more in the sense that I was; to use coersion, or a degree of force (and I do not mean hit the horse either), to meet a challenge that if ignored would result in undesirable or dangerous behaviour, then yes, I still believe that at times it's warranted.

Mehitabel has an old gelding called Copper, who can be a bit of a bully himself. He has in the past chased someone up a tree. Treating him gently and sidestepping his respect issues doesn't work; standing up to him and making him back down does. He's happy knowing his boundaries, his handlers are happy knowing they have a pony that won't try cornering them.

I had a cob with similar characteristics; he also bullied people and other horses if left to his own devices. I never physically harmed him in any way, I never lost my temper with him; but I did (according to my definitions at least) bully him into treating me with respect.

That kind of approach does not suit all horses. I've had plenty of aggressive horses whose problems arose from fear and insecurity, rather than a tendency to be bolshy. Those horses do respond much better to a gentle, quiet, non-confrontational approach; trying to assert my 'dominance' over them would just feed their fear and result in worse problems.

Perhaps my mistake is in using that particular term. Hopefully that's clarified things a little.

[Mehitabel]

Mehitabel has an old gelding called Copper, who can be a bit of a bully himself. He has in the past chased someone up a tree. Treating him gently and sidestepping his respect issues doesn't work; standing up to him and making him back down does. He's happy knowing his boundaries, his handlers are happy knowing they have a pony that won't try cornering them.

I had a cob with similar characteristics; he also bullied people and other horses if left to his own devices. I never physically harmed him in any way, I never lost my temper with him; but I did (according to my definitions at least) bully him into treating me with respect.




yep. i have often bullied my old git, chased him round the field turning the air blue and flinging the headcollar at his backside at intervals. since i got tough with him and insisted that i was the boss, he has been much happier, he has put weight on, stopped fretting, become less tense, become much less aggresive to other horses, and his human aggression has all but stopped. when we were being 'nice' to him - food to come in, not bringing him in only to work, etc, he got worse and worse, and more and more defensive and miserable. he was not a happy person, he dropped weight, he defended his mares from us catching them. as soon as i stepped up and made him back down, he handed over responsibility to me with a sigh of relief.

i have both lost my temper with copper and belted him on occasion. to this day, if he is having a moment, if you're nice to him and offer food, he will run at you and mean it - if you square up, yell 'just try it and see what happens you monster!' and stomp up to him looking as big and intimidating as you can, he is fine. i can stomp up to him waving my arms and flailing the headcollar and yelling, and he sticks his nose in my pocket. if you walk up quietly and tentatively, you get a pair of heels in your face. the bullying i've done has not scared him, it has given him respect.

i wasn't doing it for fun. i don't enjoy yelling at or thumping the horse who is the love of my life. but i will not have him attacking people, and if i have to do it to get a well behaved horse, then so be it. any horse is big enough to injure a person, whatever their intentions, so they must be mannerly. if i need to bully them in the first instance, then i will do so without hesitation. whewn they treat me with respect, they get it back - but it has to be earned on both sides. i'd rather not earn respect by coercion, but sometimes it has to be done.

[Yann]

It might have been 'bullying' from the point of view of a casual human observer, but if the end result was a secure contented horse then it wasn't bullying from the horses point of view as far as I can see. There isn't a trainer born however low key (that I've ever come across) that would let a horse barge over them or invade their personal space without reacting in kind and correcting it.

[chev]

That's exactly it Yann - if what you're doing results in an unhappy, cowering, frightened horse, then it's wrong. It might be nothing more terrible than shouting that does it either.

But if the horse is not distressed and it results in a happy relationship where both parties know where they are; I don't see how that can be considered detrimental.

Horses for courses. I've known and worked with enough horses now to know that feeling that absolutely everything can be achieved through gentle sidestepping is not realistic. But bullying does not, in my book at least, have to mean abuse. Horses bully each other all the time; but they don't usually abuse each other.

[smaggi]

I was at a Parelli clinic and he talked about a student of his that had a horse that would not yield to the porcupine game, but would just push back harder. His answer was that in his hand he had a screwdriver. He started by applying light pressure with his finger gradually increasing pressure. When the horse wouldn't yield to the most pressure he could apply, he added the point of the screwdriver. A lot of people would think that using a screwdriver is bullying, but eventually the horse learned to yield to light pressure.

I think the main objective should be to use as light of pressure as possible, BUT get as strong as necessary.

[Yann]

This is where it becomes a grey area for me. It sounds to me like the horse just didn't understand what was being asked of it. Whilst using a screwdriver (pain?) might well have got a result, I'd have looked for a different way to get through to it that didn't involve using a sharp hand tool. How you approach things rolls up in the long term.

[chev]

Very grey. For me that's not so much an issue of defining whether using a screwdriver is bullying or not so much as whether or not the horse is likely to be injured before he works out what is being asked. The potential for damage using a screwdriver makes that completely unacceptable in my view.

Bullying (depending on definition) has its place, sad though it might seem. Using something that is likely to harm a horse does not. A horse leaning into pressure like that is not really one that is challenging the handler; more, as Yann says, one that simply doesn't understand what is being asked.

Bullying (for me anyway) is a specific response to specific behaviours; not something that should be used in place of 'explaining' things to the horse. Like my cob, or Mehit's Copper; neither needed it explaining what was required especially; but both needed someone to stand up to them so they could feel safe. I know of several horses (well - usually ponies, to be honest) who need that same response to their challenges in order to feel happy about letting people take charge.

It should never be used as a shortcut or in place of basic sympathetic training. For example, bullying a horse that's awkward to lead because of anxiety will result in an even more anxious horse. Bullying a horse that won't lead because it's last three owners have all been scared of it and let it heave them around is not neccessarily detrimental at all. I had a half Shire filly who learnt very quickly that she could use her size against the woman I sold her to. Woman ended up with a filly that was walking all over her (literally). She had a habit of barging straight past anyone stood in a gateway to get in to her bucket; when they asked me if I could help sort her out she was already pretty dangerous, and getting worse. She was also very big and very heavy; and once a horse that size has learnt to use their size against you it can be difficult to persuade them nicely not to. So I stood in the gateway, and every time she headed down to shove me out the way, I yelled, and waved my arms, and chased her off again. If she kept coming then yes, I belted her across the chest with the end of a rope. She did get a bit of a shock, but she wasn't damaged mentally or physically by any of it. Once she backed down and started to respect my space a bit more, I walked up to her and haltered her with that same rope. No problem. I would still call what I did bullying - but in no way would I call it abuse.

[Yann]

You keep using the term bullying, but I don't think it's strictly correct in the context personally :)

[chev]

Maybe not. Maybe that's the problem. So perhaps the answer to the original question is simply that what I'm on about wasn't bullying in the first place.... :p

Any idea for alternative terms? :D

[Naturally]

Well I guess you are "making" the horse, which would at least sound better.

With the negative reinforcement process of Parelli, our aim is for the horse to "want" to do something, the same as they want to do it for the leader in a herd environment.

BTW, I agree the screwdriver thing sounds harsh, but to put it in context, it was an instructor, who I am sure would have enough savvy to stop at discomfort for the horse and not physically harm it. Yes, I agree that the horse did not understand, but if the horse did not understand phase 3 from a herd leader it would probably get a double barrel or a bite. And for the record the only way I have ever seen the porcupine game demonstrated using an impliment is that it pinches the skin, similar effect, but not as harsh as a bite. It is not driven into the flesh of the horse as it sounds above.

[angelfben]

I think you can learn a lot from watching horses natural behaviour. For example, Alpi is very definitely dominant over Rusty - he will 'bully' him in that he chases him around the field, won't let him near the hay, chases him off when he doesn't want him near him etc. And yet he is also amazingly tolerant of him, Rusty will stick his head in Alpi's feed bucket and Alpi just pushes his head out the way, if he's feeling generous he even lets him carry on eating it. He will share his hay with Rusty eventually and he is always looking out for Rusty, going off and fetching him if he thinks there might be any danger around etc. And in return Rusty is not at all afraid of Alpi, they will lie down together, play together, groom each other and Rusty will still try and steal Alpi's food and see how long he gets away with it. ;)

Personally, I think it's a matter of finding that fine like between maintaining respect whilst also earning trust. I don't want my horse to do as I ask because he fears the consequences otherwise, but because he respects my decisions and trusts that I will not let any harm come to him.

[smaggi]

BTW, I agree the screwdriver thing sounds harsh, but to put it in context, it was an instructor, who I am sure would have enough savvy to stop at discomfort for the horse and not physically harm it.

For the record he was not talking about an instructor. He was talking about himself (Parelli) that used the screwdriver on a very pushy and disrespectful horse. It was my first Parelli clinic and I was very surprised when he used that example.

The wasy that he described it, he did not thrust it into the horses side or anything. He used as light of pressure as possible, but it was a way to increase the pressure after the carrot stick was not enough. The pressure also was realeased immediately after a positive response. He was working with a different VERY pushy horse at the clinic and was trying to explain by bringing up that example that you should ask lightly first, but be willing to up the pressure to get a correct response.

I'm sure that the original horse did not feel as much from the screwdriver as when he gets a kick in the side from a herd leader.

[Naturally]

Sorry Smaggi, I thought you were referring to a Parelli Instructor, not the big guy himself. :) :p :)

I have no problem with the explanation, and I would use it or similar myself if and when required. I was just trying to give further explanation to the others whom I thought might have misunderstood.

[Yann]

if the horse did not understand phase 3 from a herd leader it would probably get a double barrel or a bite

It would also get the same thing from a herd bully higher in the pecking order. It's a fine line as angelfben says between having a happy horse willing to do things for you because it trusts and respects you and one that does because it knows the consequences of failing to cooperate.

I'm afraid the Parelli example amounts to 'I couldn't hit it hard enough with the stick so I poked it with a screwdriver instead'.

you should ask lightly first, but be willing to up the pressure to get a correct response.

Fair enough so long as the individual being asked understands the question. Otherwise it's no different to shouting louder and louder at a foreigner and then slapping them until they guess correctly :D

[smaggi]

No problem Naturally, I was just trying to clarify. I'm a big fan of NH myself, but I think that sometimes people who start it are often too soft with the horse. Parelli always talks about Love, Language, and Leadership in EQUAL doses.

I have a friend that went to a few Parelli clinics, bought a carrot stick, put a rope halter on her horse instead of a bit and tried to get all of her results with love. What she ended up with is a disrespectful, dangerous horse. She does not even demand basic manners from him. When we were visiting once, we were standing by her horse talking, and it started to mouth my sleeve. I bumped my arm into his nose and she was VERY upset with me. Believe me I did not hit the horse hard and the bump did not hurt the horse, but she lectured me on striking the horse.

[RazzleB]

I bought a horse in June, PBA x Saddlebred. Apparently, this type of cross are very intelligent....being too intelligent was his problem.

I had serious probs with him "bullying" myself and others. Kicking, biting pushing and running over!! Aslo only went into trailer when he felt like it :(
But deep down we knew he was a nice horse. It was down to fear of everything.

He is still with these people and i have been to watch a few times. What a different horse he is now, with total respect for everyone and everything. There was no bullying involved. It takes great patience to do this type of technique.

I would recommend it to anyone with problem horses.

[Naturally]

He is still with these people and i have been to watch a few times. What a different horse he is now, with total respect for everyone and everything. There was no bullying involved. It takes great patience to do this type of technique.
I would recommend it to anyone with problem horses.
What technique are you talking about RazzleB?


Smaggi
Gotcha, me too and have had similar problems with a friend of mine. Lots of love, poor language and no leadership. Not exactly equal and not fair on the poor horse she loves to the point of being unrideable.


Yann,

It would also get the same thing from a herd bully higher in the pecking order

Tragic that we must repeat the same old things all the time. I thought we had agreed that "bullying" probably wasn't the right term, or does that just apply to your friends?

.........that does because it knows the consequences of failing to cooperate

This is exactly herd leadership in the animal kingdom, its just the humans that have a problem with it. Why is this so hard to understand?

Picture two horses at a water trough. I'm coming in and I want a drink, (moves toward other horse) move or I might bite you (ears pinned) .... Ok, I'm cross now (ears flat and small lunge at other ) OK Whack (bites on bum).

So one of these horses is dominant, and the other either unkowning of the other horse in the pecking order, or on this day, deciding he might challenge the leadership.

It may also be that if the hrose that would move off decided he really did want leadership of the herd that he would kick horse A in the shoulder. Or, thw whole thing could have occured without incident because the first horse at the trough knows the consequences of not getting out of the way and so therefore moves off when asked.


Most of the worlds great horseman (if not all), not to mention Animal behaviourists, of the modern era agree that horses work on a leadership scenario in a herd and that the alpha horse is the dominant horse. There is nothing different.


Yann,
Fair enough so long as the individual being asked understands the question. Otherwise it's no different to shouting louder and louder at a foreigner and then slapping them until they guess correctly

When you can read a horses body language, there is no problem and the guess work is taken out. That's how they communicate with each other and the way PNH students strive to communicate to them.

And Yann,
For once it might be nice if you actually offered some solutions for people instead of only being able to pick on others methods. You methods are obviously superior since your horses do everything you ask them to without questions, so perhaps you can share them.

[smaggi]

I agree Naturally. Given a horse's herd mentality, I can't imagine a training program that doesn't involve some sort of 'bullying'. The horse will eventually try to test his dominance over you. It doesn't have to be in an aggressive or even obvious way, but it will happen again and again. It's just instinctive, and you need to respond to it or lose your leadership position.

[Yann]

Err what Naturally? I thought I was participating in a reasonable discussion here. I don't think I made any unreasonble points, quite the opposite, and I'm perfectly entitled to voice my opinion here. I'm sorry you clearly have such a problem with that. As the last thread showed some PNH followers appear to find any questioning or criticism of the system they follow impossible to deal with without resorting to personal attacks and sarcasm. Not that I was criticising anything other than the use of a screwdriver as a training aid :rolleyes:

As to what I do with my horses it isn't up for discussion here, but anyone who has met them would agree that they are nicely mannered and a contented pair. As to making suggestions to try and help people there are possibly a couple of thousand posts on here where I've tried to do just that where I thought I could share something that had worked for me. I'm no expert on anything at all and I'll never stop learning, but I do have an open mind and most importantly I do think for myself ;)

[notpoodle]

i dont think getting a horse to act in a way that we want it to act (or more to the point, to stop it acting in a way that we don't want cos its dangerous!) is 'bullying'. remember they are huge, strong animals and can get very dangerous very quickly.

i dont bully my pony in the sense that i am using brute force or abusing her, but i have learned (took me a while) that even the gentlest and sweetest pony will try to push boundaries once in a while. i am probably still too soft in the grand scheme of things, but there are times when nothing but a smack on the bottom will help (and no, i don't mean belting her). i also learned that there is no point letting her get her own way all the time for the sake of peace and quiet. she got confused (ah but yesterday it was okay for me to dive into the middle of the school .... how come you get so cross today?) and (understandably) miffed!

julia
x

[Jacquie]

Err what Naturally? I thought I was participating in a reasonable discussion here. I don't think I made any unreasonble points, quite the opposite, and I'm perfectly entitled to voice my opinion here. I'm sorry you clearly have such a problem with that. As the last thread showed some PNH followers appear to find any questioning or criticism of the system they follow impossible to deal with without resorting to personal attacks and sarcasm.
:rolleyes: Here we go again............give it a rest Yann ;)

[RazzleB]

Im lost here...... who is against Parelli and who is for

[Francis Burton]

Chev - Many thanks for clarifying and elaborating on your initial statement. (Hope your son is alright?!)

I am glad that you are not advocating dealing with all aggressive behaviour in the way that you deal with barginess and dominant-aggressive behaviour i.e. with what you call "bullying". (I now understand much better what you mean by that word - thank you! :) )

Still, I can't help thinking that at least part of this very common way of thinking is based on the assumption that dominance and leadership are two sides of the same coin - that they are always present together in an individual. People often refer to the "alpha leader". This lumping together implies that to be a good leader you have also to be seen as dominant.

But it needs to be said again... Dominance and leadership are not the same! A horse can be the most dominant in the herd and yet not the leader; another horse can be the leader and yet not be top of the dominance hierarchy. To understand and accept that these qualities are fundamentally different opens up new ways of looking at human-horse relationships and new approaches to horsemanship. For a start, it means we can give our horses good leadership without having to bully them! (This may sound revolutionary, but it's not really.)

You see the direction this is going! :rolleyes:

To illustrate the difference, I'd like to quote a passage from a chapter in a book by Lucy Rees. The chapter is, appropriately enough, titled "Bullies, leaders and friends". (I like it for the clarity of her writing, which I can only dream about matching.)

"If you keep your pony with a group of others in the field, you will notice that there's one horse that's boss over the rest. She drives them away from the food, gets the best place in the shelter, is first at the gate for titbits and is often seen charging at the others with bared teeth, or kicking them away furiously. In a mixed-sex group the boss is usually a mare, and the other ponies fear her.

If we watch a breeding herd of wild ponies or mustangs, living in wide-open spaces where there are no piles of food to be fought over, no haynets or buckets, no gates, fences or titbits, we see something that seems to be the same. There's hardly any kicking or biting, much less than in tame ponies, but there is one mare that is the leader. When they go from place to place it is she who starts moving first, while the others fall into line behind her with the stallion at the back rounding up the stragglers like a sheepdog. When there is an alarm it is she whom they all watch, and often she who gives the sign that they should move or relax.

With our ideas that bosses are the ones that give orders and the rest are the ones that fall into line behind them, we naturally assume that the boss mare in a tame herd would be the leader mare if the herd were wild. But we are wrong. The boss mare is the one that the others fear and have learned to give in to; the leader mare is the one that they trust and follow. They run away from the boss, but they follow the leader. Boss and leader are not the same horse."

A few ethologists have studied both dominance and leadership in the wild, and their published findings appear to confirm that they *are* different. For example, Claudia Feh writes:

"Priority of access to resources is not to be confounded with leadership. Most of the time, one mare initiates the movement and leads the group to drinking or new feeding grounds. Neither in Camargue (Wells, 1978) nor in Przewalski horses (unpublished data) did we found a correlation between this leading position and rank ."
Source: http://www3.vet.upenn.edu/labs/equinebehavior/hvnwkshp/hv02/feh.htm

Also, this is very similar to Mark Rashid's idea of "passive leadership", which he describes at length in his book "Horses Never Lie" and briefly in an article on his website:
http://www.markrashid.com/CTHArticlePassiveLeadership2.html

So given dominance and leadership are different, what is each of them [I]for? What is their significance to horses?

It is the generally held view amongst ethologists that social dominance is about a) who gets priority access to resources and b) limiting aggression in competing for these resources. Instead of having a fight every time, which wastes energy and could leads to injuries, a dominant horse displaces a subordinate by threatening violence through more or less subtle displays. All the subordinate has to do is move out of the way to avoid actual violence. Once horses have learned to defer to certain other horses, they rarely come to blows. Of course, some dominant horses show more overt violence towards others than appears to be necessary. We have all seen that kind of "unreasonable" behaviour, which could fairly be described as bullying.

So dominance is a safety mechanism with definite survival value. Is dominance about anything else? Well, we know it's not about leadership, because the leader isn't necessarily the most dominant (and vice versa). To be honest. it's not at all obvious to me what other function dominance might have.

Is dominance important to training and our relationships with horses? To my mind it doesn't have to be an issue. After all, we're not competing with horses for scarce resources. No doubt it can be allowed to be an issue, or even deliberately made an issue, but is it something we want to encourage?

It has been stated that the existence of a dominance hierarchy gives reassurance to herd members: "horses like to know where they stand in the pecking order". I think this is entirely consistent with horses' desire for a quiet life and predictability (which of course we can give them without recourse to dominating them). However, I don't think horses are happy to be dominated - it's something they either accept or they don't. Many do simply accept it, which explains why it is so easy for us to win most dominance games. It's those who don't give in to being bullied who are a problem. Personally I think it is much better not to play dominance games at all, even with horses that are easily dominated.

Leadership has different aims and outcomes. One obvious, simple difference is that a horse will move towards a leader (but away from a dominant). What makes horses follow a particular horse - the leader? It isn't hard to think of desirable qualities of a leader that other members of the herd come to rely on. However, being dominant isn't one of them!

A few final points in an already too-long and contentious post:

I haven't gone into specifics of how I stop unwanted behaviours. I can if you like. As I said before, I do think it is important to set boundaries. One example: horse swings head towards me, either to bite or simply because he doesn't consider me an obstacle, runs into a hard part of my anatomy (e.g. elbow), and effectively self-punishes for his action. That isn't bullying in my book. Nor is it anything like how either a dominant or a subordinate horse would react. Punishment doesn't need to be aggressive (arguably it shouldn't be) and it doesn't need to be severe - e.g. gently and consistently pushing a horse's head away to stop unwanted nuzzling. By definition it's a punishment if it stops the behaviour.

Behaviour can be punished by putting a horse to work after the event, getting him to move his feet. I don't think it is an unreasonable punisher in some situations, though I seldom use it myself.

Fully agree that "if what you're doing results in an unhappy, cowering, frightened horse, then it's wrong". How can anyone criticize something that does no harm!

Example of what I would call bullying? When a horse is subjected to unrelenting pressure over several minutes causing inevitable stress.

"There isn't a trainer born however low key (that I've ever come across) that would let a horse barge over them or invade their personal space without reacting in kind and correcting it."

Well, I won't let a horse barge over me either. As for "invading my personal space" - that's really a non-issue for me - as long as the horse doesn't hurt me or knock me over. Why should it be an issue?

Respect (as in "respecting space") - I think this word describes the behaviour in human terms, but not the way horses feel.

Screwdriver. First reaction - urgh! :( If the horse didn't yield in the porcupine game, then maybe that was the wrong game to be playing at that time, perhaps? As Yann said, maybe the horse didn't understand. I would add: possibly because the horse wasn't adequately prepared to understand what was being asked/demanded of it?

Anyway, interesting debate - hope I haven't offended anyone! :eek: At least, not too much!

[Naturally]

[QUOTE=Yann]Err what Naturally? I thought I was participating in a reasonable discussion here. I don't think I made any unreasonble points, quite the opposite, and I'm perfectly entitled to voice my opinion here. I'm sorry you clearly have such a problem with that. As the last thread showed some PNH followers appear to find any questioning or criticism of the system they follow impossible to deal with without resorting to personal attacks and sarcasm. Not that I was criticising anything other than the use of a screwdriver as a training aid :rolleyes:

QUOTE]


Oh Yann, you are so sadly predictable. I never said you weren't entitled to your opinion and I thought it was a reasonable discussion too....ho hum ho hum ho hum.

But I do question an "open" mind that is so closed to everything PNH.

[Naturally]

Wow, very enlightening. Thanks for putting the time into it.

I have a very dominant horse. He is young and is forever challenging me in new and interesting ways. I don't take offense to it, I accept it as his individual "horsenality". I know how to deal with it, without using fear or excessive force, but I do know how to be firm and effective when necessary.

I have had many other horses, who are not dominant, or not as dominant and have had totally different relationships with them. I use exactly the same principles behind my training for each of them and it has worked without exception resulting in beautifully mannered horses.

I strive to be a strong and consistent leader for my horses. I don't refer to anything I do as bullying. I used to think that my current horse was a bully to our pony, then I realised that he is just being a horse and playing the same games that horses play, and that' what I do as best I can.

Anyway, thanks for the time you put into you post. It was very interesting. :)

[Mossy]

i have both lost my temper with copper and belted him on occasion. to this day, if he is having a moment, if you're nice to him and offer food, he will run at you and mean it - if you square up, yell 'just try it and see what happens you monster!' and stomp up to him looking as big and intimidating as you can, he is fine. i can stomp up to him waving my arms and flailing the headcollar and yelling, and he sticks his nose in my pocket. if you walk up quietly and tentatively, you get a pair of heels in your face. the bullying i've done has not scared him, it has given him respect.

Discipline and horses is a subject that fascinates me. They are so big, physically but need somebody, a herd leader of some description, to determine their boundaries and give them security. However, as has been said previously, how you establish those boundaries has to vary between individuals. Like the quote above, I stood up to Moss on a regular basis. Now when he gives me that look I just march over and inform him that we can do this the easy way or the difficult way. He lowers his head and licks and chews, very contrite. Some other folk he challenges, others he respects without a murmur! I do not consider that I bullied him. Yes I have chased him round the field swearing at him, but only if he has come at me feet and/or teeth at the ready! Yes I have lobbed a plastic curry comb at a 17.2 black thing that came hammering straight at me! Had I not I would not be relating the tale! I have also stood in the field in a thunderstorm singing "rock a bye baby" to a terrified horse! For some reason my warbles calmed it! :rolleyes:

Im lost here...... who is against Parelli and who is for

Please do not open the pro and anti Parelli argument again! It causes more hassle than the h word! I have never known anything that is supposed to be natural and lead to peace and harmony cause such dissent and strong feeling! Max does not stir up such strong emotions, neither do Kelly, Michael, et al.
A fascinating thread

[RazzleB]

This is the first time on here and as my horse is on this technique i just thought i would get some opinions on it :confused:

[Jacquie]

Im lost here...... who is against Parelli and who is for
I don't think this thread is supposed to be about who's for or against Parelli is it? :rolleyes: :)

[chev]

Anyone wanting to discuss Parelli can please do so on another thread, rather than bringing it up on this one. This is too interesting a discussion to sink into bickering again (and will be edited if it does.).

Francis - thankyou for that post. I don't see how it can offend at all.

It's interesting what's been said about horses in the wild. From what I've seen of ours (living out 24/7, on big acreage, in a herd) the lead mare is very rarely seen bullying. In fact her body language is very quiet - she rarely has to pin her ears to get what she wants even. Bullying is more common in the lower ranks, or (and this is where it interests me) when something like buckets is introduced. The minute food is no longer freely available with no worries about invading another's personal space (eg grazing is limited and hay fed) then bullying becomes more obvious. In a 'natural' situation (that is, one where food is plentiful and widely available generally) there is no need for that behaviour.

It's also interesting what's been said about dominanace. I'm not a dominant person by any means; and my relationships with my horses tends to be built on working out how best to get along, rather than making myself boss. I've found they're much more likely to co-operate if they actually like being around me! Horses that expect to be dominated don't, in my experience at least, really enjoy being around people. If I watch teh lead mare in our herd, it's obvious that the others listen to her because they respect her; she chooses the best places to stand when it's too hot, or rainy; she takes them to the best grazing; she looks after them. She is lead mare because she's the most knowledgable, most experienced mare there - not because she'll bite someone who gets in her way. When a new horse is introduced to the herd, she rarely takes an active part in sending them away; her herd companions do. She doesn't need to keep bullying anyone out of her way.

But if someone challenges her directly; then she makes no bones about putting them right back in their place. I suppose that equates roughly to when I feel it's appropriate. The vast majority of what I do is quiet, non-confrontational stuff. Working with Monty's yearling, who refused to let anyone touch her stomach, is one example. She threw herself all over the place - at one point she actually lay down - and all I did was stand there with my hand rubbing her side, until she let me rub her stomach. It took that one session for her to realise that nothing terrible was going to happen, and that it was actually nice to have your belly scratched. No shouting, not force, nothing. I just stood and talked to her. It's a brilliant feeling.

It's also very different to a horse that has learnt to ignore its handlers though - which was what I had in mind when I first typed out that quote. The quiet approach would not only have failed with the half Shire filly I mentioned, it would very likely have got me trampled.

I don't want to dominate my horse; but I do want him to understand that I won't take any crap either. That's mostly achieved through working on building a good, trusting relationship; but there are situations where that won't work.

[Naturally]

Anyone wanting to discuss Parelli can please do so on another thread, rather than bringing it up on this one. This is too interesting a discussion to sink into bickering again (and will be edited if it does.).

Lets not be too harsh on someone who has only a few posts up there sleeve. Razzle B was unaware I am sure and I did specifically ask which method to which he she was reffering, so hardly her fault. I didn't realise it was taboo either.

Just so I'm clear....is it OK to discuss our methods, but just not refer to what they are called?????

[Yann]

Francis, what a terrific and interesting post. You've made the point about the difference between a dominant horse and a herd leader far better than I ever could. I'd agree wholeheartedly that it isn't necessary to be overtly dominant or force a horse to submit (by bullying?) in order to build a good working relationship.

As for "invading my personal space" - that's really a non-issue for me - as long as the horse doesn't hurt me or knock me over. Why should it be an issue?

I meant that particular comment in the context of a horse that is trying you out by nose bumping for example. I don't subscribe to imaginary exclusion zones with my own horses, but they know what is permitted and what isn't.

[chev]

Naturally - there's nothing taboo about it at all. There's no reason not to discuss Parelli at all. But I would like this thread to stay on topic - and that was the subject of bullying, and its definitions, not a discussion about Parelli.

Sorry to be blunt but every time Yann mentions anything even remotely connected to Parelli a number of people start bickering; it's already started on this thread and if previous threads are anything to go by it'll degenerate again.

It's actually getting very tedious; I learnt a lot on the last Parelli thread, some of which is relevant here it's true - but I'm not prepared to let another thread get bogged down in the same old sniping yet again.

So; if Parelli crops up in the discussion, fine. But the topic is that of bullying, not just Parelli - and I'd like things to please be kept in perspective.

[Jacquie]

Sorry to be blunt but every time Yann mentions anything even remotely connected to Parelli a number of people start bickering;
This post will no doubt be edited or removed but just for the record chev could you please explain why Yann's posts always seem to be defended?
No offence intended, I'm just genuinely puzzled. :rolleyes:

[chev]

Yann's posts are not being defended. I simply pointed out that the minute Yann mentions or responds to anything to do with Parelli this bickering happens. :rolleyes:

My request that this discussion be kept on topic and the sniping be kept out of it was aimed at everyone.

I don't see how I have defended Yann in any way?

Perhaps any further queries could be sent to me via PM, since this in itself is now a distraction from what was an interesting thread. :rolleyes:

[clicker]

Thanks Francis for that very eloquent and interesting post!

I think we get a bit hung up on dominating our animals rather than leading and being in charge - as you reasoned very well!

Brings to mind the dog 'training' fad a few years ago which used 'dominance ' moves such as alpha rolling (where you pin a dog on its back to the floor as another dog would another during a fight). The theory was that if you used dog body laguage the dog would understand you better ( same theory as horses and much of NH). Actually turned out that this didn't work very well and was not only dangerous but difficult!
More subtle methods which involved leadership but not dominance were more effective and less stressful for all involved.

OK, dogs are not horses and are very different socially and in how we interact with them - but both are potentially dangerous animals who need a certain level of control in order to be safe and enjoyable to be around. And given that there is virtually no research into the effects of training using different methods, we just don't know how different training methods affect animals, so have to second guess.

Example of what I would call bullying? When a horse is subjected to unrelenting pressure over several minutes causing inevitable stress.

Agree Francis!!!! :D

[smaggi]

As I said before, I do think it is important to set boundaries. One example: horse swings head towards me, either to bite or simply because he doesn't consider me an obstacle, runs into a hard part of my anatomy (e.g. elbow), and effectively self-punishes for his action. That isn't bullying in my book. Nor is it anything like how either a dominant or a subordinate horse would react. Punishment doesn't need to be aggressive (arguably it shouldn't be) and it doesn't need to be severe - e.g. gently and consistently pushing a horse's head away to stop unwanted nuzzling. By definition it's a punishment if it stops the behaviour.

Good point Francis. When you are correcting a horse I think it's important to keep emotion out of it. If my horse moves his head close to my arm for a nip, I don't even look directly at him, just flick my arm to bump his nose, and act like it never happened. Usually that's enough to correct it. You don't need to increase the pressure unless he tries again, but if he does you need to answer with increased pressure.


I'm not a dominant person by any means; and my relationships with my horses tends to be built on working out how best to get along, rather than making myself boss. I've found they're much more likely to co-operate if they actually like being around me! Horses that expect to be dominated don't, in my experience at least, really enjoy being around people.

I also try to work out how to best get along with my horse, but I think that you still need to be the boss. For example, we have one horse that loves to go. If you work him in an arena and ask for a trot or canter he will keep going until you ask him to stop. We have another horse that hates arena work in circles at the trot or canter and it used to be a constant battle. I found that he doesn't mind working a bit if you add an interesting twist like cones, barrels, poles, boxes. I know that I make a compromise with this horse by not doing the circle work, but I still feel like I'm his boss or leader because we are still getting the work done.

[Naturally]

. I found that he doesn't mind working a bit if you add an interesting twist like cones, barrels, poles, boxes. I know that I make a compromise with this horse by not doing the circle work, but I still feel like I'm his boss or leader because we are still getting the work done.

Smaggi, that is an excellent example of good leadership in your horsemanship. You know what motivates your horse and are prepared to move outside the "box" to accomodate it, yet at the same time accomplishing the task for you and your horses developement on a chosen task. :)

[Yann]

Horses are by nature cooperative and if you can tap into that, then it can improve things in all areas in the longer term. For instance you could make a schooling session more interesting by using poles and cones as per the previous post, rather than using pressure to get the horse to do what you want. I suppose this is what Mike Peace talks about in terms of finding and working with the softness, other trainers appear to use similar terms.

I find it's always useful to think of the human / horse relationship in terms of the boss / worker one. What the boss says always goes at the end of the day, but there are huge differences in how things can be transacted between the parties up to that point. I know the sort of boss I like to work for and perform best under (not a sloppy one either), and would always aim towards that kind of relationship with my horse.

I would question whether it's always necessary to up the pressure in response to a particular behaviour either, but it is important that the initial response is at a high enough level to be meaningful and understood. A horse bumping its head against your elbow will soon get the message, it isn't necessary to start actively bringing the elbow into the horse's face.

[Jacquie]

Yann's posts are not being defended. I simply pointed out that the minute Yann mentions or responds to anything to do with Parelli this bickering happens. :rolleyes:
I don't see how I have defended Yann in any way?
Perhaps any further queries could be sent to me via PM, since this in itself is now a distraction from what was an interesting thread. :rolleyes:
I'm sure many PM's will be sent to you regarding this chev as I know many members are disgruntled about it. ;)

[*Sez*]

Just my two cents - sorry, I've not read the second two pages, but will go back to them afterwards, before I forget what I want to type :rolleyes:

Going back to the initial couple of posts about bullying and the definition of bullying, I sometimes reckon people must think I'm a hell of a bully! :rolleyes: Jacob's last owner was completely dominated by him, and since he fancies himself as a stallion it takes a strong person to become his "herd leader". Jake hadn't been schooled very well, and had learnt to buck (some of this was partly due to poll pressure caused by his bit) when he didn't want to work. The result was that his owner completely backed down and turned him out again. She never cantered him on his right rein, in fact, she rarely rode on his right rein, because "his left rein is his good rein". :eek: So Jake learnt that he could boss her around, do as he pleased and learnt to bend in only one direction (and not very well at that).

I'm a much firmer rider, and won't let him push me around, and it probably looks like I've bullied him out of bucking (although we still get the odd protest), as as soon as he lands on all four feet again, he gets a good kick (never a smack with the crop) and I force him to trot a full circle of the school. We've started doing lots of pole work, walking and trotting through sharp bends, over raised poles and various activities to keep his mind working and he's now actually enjoying his schooling sessions. He always gets a pat and a "good boy" when he's done this, and never goes unrewarded for good behaviour, but the idea of "bullying" like "rescue horse" is a very grey area. Some think "bullying" is simply growling and pushing your horse on when he naps, others, like myself, think of it as serious agression and, my take on bullying tends to be "agressive and cruel behaviour towards someone who can't defend themselves to make the bully feel better about their own inadequacies". I suppose with horses, as with most animals, this mostly be seen as a physical agression as name calling won't have the same effect it does on people, but tone of voice can also be emotional punishment/cruelty for an animal.

Jake certainly doesn't fear me, but has learnt to respect me and my authority over him because I refuse to back down. We rarely reach loggerheads, as his challenges tend to be half hearted anyway, but as soon as I let him think I'm happy to take him on, he often backs down. We've got to the point now where he tries desperately hard to please, whether I'm on the ground or in the saddle and he's a much happier little boy because he knows his boundaries and that Mum won't back down with him.

I agree with Francis that discipline should never be agressive and I refuse to loose my temper with him, even when he's really trying it on, and I find if he's behaving very badly the best way round it is to distract him by knocking over a bucket (gently, so it makes a little "Thunk" and rattles.. not so it scares the beejesus out of him!) or similar rather than start a fight over it (after all, in a Tug of War, we all know who'd win!).

I've turned this into a bit of a mad ramble, so will stop now and go back and read all your other posts (and probably delete this once I actually catch up with what everyone's talking about and realise I'm talking loads of rot!)

[Big Ears]

sounds like Jake has met his match! well done you for persuading him that being a good cooperative horse is a nicer situatoin to be in than being a complete brat that no one loves.

[chev]

I'm sure many PM's will be sent to you regarding this chev as I know many members are disgruntled about it. ;)

Only two.

And I ask for the last time that this quarrel be dropped, now.

Will all parties please just accept that we all have different views on Parelli, and leave it at that.

Further negative comments, by either side, will not be tolerated.

[chev]

I also try to work out how to best get along with my horse, but I think that you still need to be the boss.

I would agree. But I don't think there's any need to keep re-iterating the fact that you're the boss. When I'm talking about a partenership, it's important to remember that there is a senior partner; and that would be me. A co-opertaive partenership does not neccessarily mean that we are equal partners. What I'm saying is that I'd rather have a partenership, than a relationship in which I simply dominate.

[Naturally]

I would agree. But I don't think there's any need to keep re-iterating the fact that you're the boss

Well I think that largely depends on the horse. You have the aim of the perfect partnership and you must strive to get there, but in my case it may take me a couple of years before I have things on an even keel (51/49)with my young fella. So in the mean time and for however long it takes I continue to say....... "Thanks for asking, but not this time" and that is my take on being his leader.

It is also not a case of constantly "dominating" him, even though he is a dominant horse. It's more about figuring out how I can help him to understand what I'm asking, through communication.

[casey]

My view on NH, is if its done by knowledgeable, experienced horsemen. Then the very best is usally gotten out of the horse.

However, far too many people get into horses, with an overly idealistic view on NH training methods. I have seen feet that could have only by trimmed by butchers in the name of NH.

You only have to look at problem horse websites to find horses in trouble, because the owner has been overhorsed, or just generally have no idea. (not all cases, but most) Most of those horses are terribly unhappy, because no boundarys have been set, and frankly because they are not treated as the powerful/intilligent sensitive animal that they are, rather, as pets.

I am a believer that in a horse partnership, I am the leader at all times. I hold most shares 51/49% :) :)

[Naturally]

I agree with Francis that discipline should never be agressive and I refuse to loose my temper with him, even when he's really trying it on,




Good work Sez, I think you've shown great leadership and it has nothing to do with bullying IMO. The key is in not getting mean or mad and losing your temper.

[Chablis]

I second that (what Naturally wrote) as well. :)

[blumke99]

The problem with the word 'bullying' is that it has associations with human traits of intolerance, selfishness and lack of compassion. Bullying, with these traits, can be used to mask a behaviour simply because we don't like it, rather than fixing underlying causes.

Bullying indicates telling the horse what to do and refusing any response except the one you want. It also creates an artificially heightened tie between the bully and the victim, so the victim behaves in response to the bully not in response to the general stimulus. If someone points a gun at you and says jump out of a plane, it doesn't mean it will cure your fear of heights. Actually, the trauma of the gun incident will probably be associated to heights and thus increase your fear.

However, this is just semantics about the word bullying... I'm not saying that is how people train their horses! Maybe coercing sounds less negative?

[Francis Burton]

I firmly believe in being in control of your horse and staying safe. In that sense, I believe in "being the boss". Let's face it, you need to "be the boss" when you are with your horse, otherwise he would go where he liked and do what he liked. Losing control may mean 1) not being able to do everything you wanted to do with your horse, and 2) not always being able to prevent dangerous situations arising.

But that doesn't mean you have to be bossy or dominant. It doesn't require you to regularly remind your horse that you are boss. To my mind that's a bit like shouting. If someone was in the habit of shouting at their horse, you'd probably think it was a bit "off"! Surely it is possible to use skill and psychology to achieve control (quite possibly a very fine degree of control) without recourse to bossiness.

I think how one achieves control is very important. By emulating the dominant horse, you can achieve a measure of control (though I would argue that the kind of control it gives you is rather limited and lacking in finesse. Think: "Go away!"). This entails using threatening body language to move the other horse's feet. If subtle threats aren't heeded, more overtly aggressive threats are called for. In other words, you have to bully to some extent. If the horse stands up to you, you have to bully to a greater extent. In fact, you have to out-bully a horse that stands up to you. Follow the "logic" of dominance, there is no alternative to not escalating in this situation - unless you accept losing and becoming subordinate.

Being confrontational can create problems too. It can provoke some horses into responding aggressively and becoming confrontational themselves. You can do this deliberately and then make sure you win the battle no matter what it takes. Or you can avoid being confrontational in the first place. Which is better?

Remember, just because a horse is dominant doesn't mean she is leader, and the leader isn't necessarily dominant over the led. (That's one lesson we can learn from ethology.) Dominance and leadership - two different qualities.

I believe gaining "alpha status" to be a hollow goal - maybe even an own goal! It doesn't automatically make you a good leader. (Arguably the repulsive aspect of dominance is at odds with the attractive aspect of leadership.) It doesn't make you more trusted, except inasmuch as the horse learns that you behave in certain bossy ways more or less consistently. It certainly doesn't make you more liked. Does it make you more respected? I would suggest only in the sense of "respecting space". It doesn't ensure your safety (subordinate horses can and do kick more dominant horses in self-protection), though it may improve it somewhat. Being liked and trusted is just as important, if not more so.

Eschewing "alpha status" doesn't mean you can't set limits, punish unwanted behaviour, or use force to stay safe. Neither does teaching a horse to move away from you need to have strong dominant connotations for a horse (though at some stage it will have some, I'm sure).

Once you can control your horse, you can consider yourself "boss" (if you wish to use that word). Striving to be "boss" in the eyes of your horse isn't the same. If you appreciate the difference, I think you will have understood my point of view.

[Mossy]

Just a thought. How many people do you know, possibly at work or school/college, who gain obedience due to their use of their position in the company, or their position in the firm's unofficial pecking order? How do you feel being around them? Now think of those folks who just seem to take people with them without any apparent effort. Next consider how you feel being around those people? That is the difference between a leader and a bully. Both are "the boss" and get the job done......

[Yann]

Mossy, I made just this point earlier in the thread, a lot of human leadership scenarios transfer very well to what we do with horses.

If you appreciate the difference, I think you will have understood my point of view.

Very much so - what you've posted pretty much summarises where I'm personally trying to get to :)

[Jacquie]

Just a thought. How many people do you know, possibly at work or school/college, who gain obedience due to their use of their position in the company, or their position in the firm's unofficial pecking order? How do you feel being around them? Now think of those folks who just seem to take people with them without any apparent effort. Next consider how you feel being around those people? That is the difference between a leader and a bully. Both are "the boss" and get the job done......
That's a very interesting point Mossy. However, what we must remember is horses don't and never will think or behave like humans.
I'm totally against any form of bullying but while passive leaders certainly have a place in any herd, I'm sure (but correct me if I'm wrong) even they follow the alpha horse in times of trouble.

[cvb]

Definitions of bullying on the Web:

blustery: noisily domineering; tending to browbeat others
the act of intimidating a weaker person to make them do something
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

A bully is an individual who tends to torment others, either through verbal harassment or physical assaults, or through more subtle methods of coercion.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying

The repeated intimidation of others by the real or threatened infliction of physical, verbal, written, electronically transmitted, or emotional abuse, or through attacks on the property of another. It may include, but not be limited to actions such as verbal taunts, name-calling and put downs, including ethnically-based or gender-based verbal put downs, and extortion of money or possessions.
www.aaps.k12.mi.us/aaps.forparents/parents.studentrr/definitions

Ok - a few different thigns there. But in general there is a theme that it is:

repeated
intimidating

and not all of the definitions mention the "end result", so bullying isn;t always for a reason !

For me I would add that it is often irrational and illogical i.e. lacks a link between the stimulus and the action.

Taking it back into the human realm for the moment, I can think of occasions when people have both physically and verbally bullied me. These are also people I have a close relationship with and the bullying was out of character, almost random. So the rest of the time, when their behaviour IS rational, predictable, I don't react to them as "a bully".

This is a long thread - so I should just comment that I am putting myself a little in both Mehitabel and Copper's shoes...

I know there have been times when I have not behaved rationally - towards either a horse or a person - and they kind of look at you with a "what planet did you just arrive from" because it is NOT the normal mode. They don't then expect that I will always operate in that mode - and actually I see lapsing into irrational behaviour as an enormous failure on my part :(

And in a way, creating that irrational response in someone else is also a failure...

However that does NOT mean that I will not set boundaries, be assertive, give direction ... in fact "lead".

I know we've gone over this a few times - bullying vs leadership - but I do feel it is an important area. I also do not believe that "alpha" leadership is the only model, or even the only desireable model.

I don't believe that reinforcing behaviour is bullying.

For me "less is more" and if I always use more "force" to get a response I am not "training" my horse to respond to a lighter cue. And I like an easy life with light cues and clear and simple communication ;) This is heading off into slightly different territory so I'll stop there...