The same behaviour all over again, perhaps expecting a different outcome?

Allow me to refresh your memory, since you seem to be deliberately ignoring how you in fact ramped up this particular hullabaloo, and instead prefer to project the *blame* for this little tiff onto me instead of taking responsibility….as an adult would, I believe is how you would prefer to put it?

I related two simple stories regarding a creature who’s companionship I had the priviledge of enjoying for a very long time.

Those stories were simply meant to illuminate the animal – and generally the breed’s – character, and in my opinion both stories reflected positively on the breed.

Nothing more nor less at that point, and certainly nothing that millions of people throughout history have not also experienced and could relate to.

Also not something I expected someone to make a big issue out of.

You made the decision to come along after that and prounounce judgement on the dog – and me.

You claim I overreacted?

Here are some telling quotes:

“The real problem here is….” (referring to Jake).

“It means that you aren’t the leader in his eyes…” (referring to Jake).

“Because no matter how smart the dog or how well behaved, the human bears ultimate responsibility for what that dog does.” (referring to both me AND Jake).

“Which means you had better be in control.” (since you were repeatedly referring to Jake, then obviously this would be referring specifically to me).

“When a dog thinks it owns you rather than the other way around, we have a problem.” (responding specifically to my own statement which you quoted, already having diagnosed in your own mind that Jake had a problem and clearly directed at me).

Please note that you are the one who repeatedly spoke in derogatory terms regarding the “owner” who couldn’t “control” the dog.

Had nothing to do with identifying with any animal – but rather plenty of snide comments that could only be directed at me since I was clearly the “owner” of the dog in question.

You didn’t expect a response?????

Honestly????

Instead of saying what first popped to mind – I do respect neo after all – I instead provided detailed responses as well as reasons for the behaviour you brought up.

I provided obvious parallels to that behaviour, and left it to the reader to draw their own conclusions as to how far more highly trained dogs in similar situations would react.

I noted that my own responses are from real life experiences in dealing with the breed, as well as other dogs – and even other animals since I was raised in the country.

I did not feel the need to refer anyone to episodes of the “Dog Whisperer”.

It ain’t book learnin…it’s a lifetime of life lessons.

Your responses are clearly canned from somewhere other than real life – in which case I choose not defer to your judgement on the matter.

In all honesty, it appears to be infuriating to you.

Now going back through all that I wrote and all of the information I provided and all of the analogies I mentioned, I will admit that the last statement was a bit sarcastic – but other than that the remainder is absolutely correct and irrefutable, if worded bluntly at times.

Every single thing I wrote is specific and accurate, and completely demolishes the assumptions you made.

If you wanted a debate, that was certainly the time to react accordingly, to mitigate your position, or to accept that perhaps you had been mistaken in your assumptions and judgement in the matter.

Missunderstandings do occur – and this was your opportunity to defuse the situation.

Instead you stuck your foot in it Ymarsakar, and you know it.

Instead of admitting that you did not know enough prior to expressing an opinion – which is not something to be so defensive about, or even admitting the possibility that you were in error – you responded quite aggressively.

You cling tenaciously to the position you staked out regardless of facts that could allow you to change your position.

There’s a saying that when the facts are on your side, you argue the facts. When they aren’t, you attack the other side.

While I have already admitted the last statement I made was a bit sarcastic, I was actually holding back at that point and providing you plenty of opportunity to back down or modify your position. I even provided plenty of information that would justify modifying your position.

Considering all that you’d posted by that point, I feel I’ve exercised considerable restraint in the matter actually.

You chose not to.
—-
Instead, you toss out an accusation of neurotic behaviour.

That would count as an attack.
—-
You toss out “psychological angst”.

That would be another attack.
—-
You accuse me of rude behaviour? You describe me as acting “contemptable”?

Hypocrisy – yeah, I said it.
—-
You talk of adult responsibilities, yet you created this mess and now seek to project the blame onto me?

Very childlike indeed.
—-
Accusing me of lying – even after I specifically gave you the benefit of the doubt in the matter?

Another attack.
—-
Accusation of harassment?

Projecting again.
—-
Accusation of rude – well, there was that last paragraph as I admitted, but nothing on the order of the BS you were shoveling out by the truckload.

At any rate, another attack.
—-
Accusation of narcissism? Simply because I called you on your BS?

Another attack.
—-
Behaving like “an attack dog”?

Another attack?
—-
Accusations of “hurt feelings”? Right…just another way of attacking my response instead of responding constructively to what I said.

Was that yet more projection?

Are your feelings hurt?
—-
Accusations regarding my “ego”?

Attack again…
—-
This statement by you is truely rich:

“But we can’t all be adults that abide by common standards of decency and courtesy, now can we.”

You are clearly making an example of yourself here as it’s just as clear you have no intention of abiding by any such standards – especially in light of all of the attacks you lobbed instead of responding more appropriately – and more maturely.
—-
Then there’s this statement at the end of that specific post:

“You want to take your ball home and declare “victory”, go right ahead. I don’t really give a damn….”

YET – you come right back again immediately afterwards and post again long before I even realized this conversation was still going.

Quite fixated all of a sudden, aren’t you?

Now a few Ymarsakar threats:

“if you keep pressing me, Scottie, I assure you, I will very clearly outline what your problems are and not from a defensive curled up manner.”

And another threat here:

“But if you keep pushing it, I cannot guarantee that I won’t make this personal myself.”

And finally this:

“You can apologize, you can retract your statements by saying they were excessive, or you can go away. Or you can continue to harass me, but I have given you fair warning and that is the best I can do at this time to give you a reason to change your current behavior.”

I have not chosen to harass you – you interjected yourself in a very negative manner into the conversation.

Now your own ego – that which you accused me of having a problem on – is moving you to demand that I apologize?

You demand that I retract my statements, which you have yet to address directly while at the same time claiming I wanted no real “debate”?

“Go away” – gee, I thought this was neo’s site. Talk about an ego.

Claim more harassment of you by me – have you actually read what you wrote?

So let’s see, you’re exhibiting a complete inability to admit error on your own part, yet DEMANDING that others conform to your own expectations of reality?

You’re exhibiting a hyperdefensive response at every turn while refusing to respond to what was actually said.

You’re tossing out derogatory remarks at every turn as a means of attacking me instead of responding to valid points.

You’re exhibiting an almost mindless aggressiveness in how many threats you’re tossing out so haphazardly.

Perhaps you should read the definition of neurosis once more?

I’ll even quote your own words for you:

“characterized by excessive anxiety or insecurity without evidence of neurologic or other organic disease, sometimes accompanied by defensive or immature behaviors…”

Yep, that about covers how you’ve conducted yourself in this matter.

[NOTE: I apologize to neo and other readers who have been viewing this exchange and were offended.

It certainly is not what I had intended when I made my original statements in the conversation, and it’s clearly gotten out of hand, but I also cannot stand the smell of BS – especially when clearly directed at me.

So all can take the comments for what they’re worth.

And again, to our host neo, my apologies.]

That is the definition I used in the context that I used it.

Hope it helps.

Most people don’t react as strongly as you did without a personal reason. I knew it had something to do with your dog, but the exact reasons eluded me. Because you motivated me to pay so close an attention to this topic, I went back and re-read your comments and now I realize exactly what is motivating you. That’s very sad, but if you keep pressing me, Scottie, I assure you, I will very clearly outline what your problems are and not from a defensive curled up manner.

I have currently prevented your personal attacks from influencing my judgment on this matter. My responses are standard operating procedure to people who intentionally insult me after I gave them no intentional offense on my part. But if you keep pushing it, I cannot guarantee that I won’t make this personal myself.

You can apologize, you can retract your statements by saying they were excessive, or you can go away. Or you can continue to harass me, but I have given you fair warning and that is the best I can do at this time to give you a reason to change your current behavior.

Thanks for admitting you took my comments personally, then. That, however, doesn’t excuse your rude behavior and outrageous responses.

Perhaps instead you should evaluate your own life in case you’ve never felt such an attachment to another living creature that didn’t happen to walk on two legs?

The natural human desire to attack those that you see as threatening you, your family, or your identity is natural. It is also contemptible. Are you a human being given free will by God or are you just a proto-plasmic puppet ruled by your instincts and base emotions? You have a responsibility as an adult to hold your emotions in check and actually find out whether your fears or emotions reflect an accurate portrayal of reality before you act upon those emotions. You are not a child with a child’s excuse of lack of discipline. I expect you to hold yourself to a higher standard than simple knee jerk reflexes.

BTW, note that I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here

Stop lying, Scottie. Who do you think you are fooling here? This is me you are talking to, not a Leftist drone beholden to identity politics and MSM propaganda.

Proof is in the pudding:

Ignoring what I wrote, you go on to note the incident with the cousin and offer your generally ill informed analysis of an animal you never laid eyes on.-S to me

I am so gracious that you gave me the benefit of the doubt by telling me I ignored what you wrote. I am also gracious that you sought fit to name my “analysis” “ill informed” just cause you felt very strongly on the issue.

I’ve seen it – not described to me in a book as you seem to be quoting in some apparent attempt to appear intelligent and informed on the matter

That is very nice of you, Scottie, to give me the benefit of the doubt on my intentions for this matter. I would be much afraid of how you would have phrased things had you not given me that precious benefit of the doubt of yours.

You tossed out an opinion without really knowing what you were talking about, and based upon just a few comments.-S

Thanks again for that very polite and generous “benefit of the doubt”, Scottie. I don’t know what I would have done without it.

So please, go back to the book store or wherever it is you got your reading material from and get your money back.

Really, S, who do you think you are BSing here?

Now that that is out of the way, how about responding to the points I made that refute everything you tried to assert, rather than curling up behind psycho-babble?

I have no responsibility to respond to children harassing me with their rude and narcissistic demand that I devote my time to satisfying their emotional needs.

Until Neo-Neocon tells me that I have a personal responsibility to debate points with everybody that harasses me on her blog, I am free to address whatever points I wish to address. If that hurts your “feeeeelings” S, then I recommend you behave like an adult and not like an attack dog.

You have no idea of what I “tried to assert”. You have no intention of finding out. Just as I have no intention of satisfying your ego that demands a fight from me on this subject. You want to take your ball home and declare “victory”, go right ahead. I don’t really give a damn, except vis a vis that I had expected better standards from you, S. But we can’t all be adults that abide by common standards of decency and courtesy, now can we.

Hmm, so now I’m emotionally unstable because I have strong feelings for a creature to which I developed a deep personal attachment?

I assume that’s what you meant by “neurotic”?

Perhaps instead you should evaluate your own life in case you’ve never felt such an attachment to another living creature that didn’t happen to walk on two legs?

If this is the case, you’ve obviously missed one of life’s great pleasures – as well as one of it’s greatest lessons.

I’m sure you could probably even google some sort of psyciatric or psychological treatise on the health benefits of a person having a close relationship with a pet.

BTW, note that I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here – which is more than you’ve provided in your posts as you hold forth at length regarding the “problems” with the animal in question.

I pointedly noted a warning about the dog being analyzed, so when you felt free to do it anyway I certainly felt free to correct you on your numerous errors.

As is clear by now, you knew little about the situation, the dog in question, or more generally about how dogs interact – yet felt free to diagnose anyway.

A mistake that, not content with your first failure, you’ve decided to repeat by now attempting to diagnose me as well – even though you again know little about me.

Kind of silly….or stupid…but since we’re being generous we’ll stick with silly for the moment.

Now that that is out of the way, how about responding to the points I made that refute everything you tried to assert, rather than curling up behind psycho-babble?

I could play your little game of arguing about the things you brought up, but it is obvious you are not interested in an intellectual debate. You are interested in protecting your identity, which is linked with that of your dogs. I could argue with you on this score, but it’d be like arguing the military is necessary to a pacifist. It’s pointless.

Be aware, Scottie, that I included several quotes that I was replying to, not just your own. Whatever psychological angst you have is because of your own choice to make it personal. I wash my hands of any responsibility on this score.

You know Scottie, you should really divorce yourself from your dogs so that you don’t take a comment about your dogs as a personal attack upon yourself.

You do understand that this is completely neurotic?

OK, this is going to be long only because you are so far off base here.

First, it looks like you completely ignored this passage that I wrote:

“Now before anyone analyzes the dog, I do want to point out that he was always protective and watchful anytime anyone came over who he didn’t know.

He was never like that unless there was something really odd going on that he didn’t like or a stranger was around , and all anyone had to do was back up and he was fine – and he never – ever – bit a soul.”

Ignoring what I wrote, you go on to note the incident with the cousin and offer your generally ill informed analysis of an animal you never laid eyes on.

Quoting you now:

“That’s a territorial warning to back off, often seen amongst canines, which include wolf packs.”

Cute quote, wonder where you cut and pasted that little gem from?

Anyway, you go on:

“The real problem here is that if the dog is taking this action on its own, then it can think it is the pack leader or at least responsible for defending certain members of the pack. It means that you aren’t the leader in his eyes ; ) This is not a good idea all in all. Because no matter how smart the dog or how well behaved, the human bears ultimate responsibility for what that dog does. Which means you had better be in control.”

Wrong.

It was not a “territorial warning” – after all, the guy had been on the property – the “pack territory”, if you will – for hours at that point, often in close proximity to Jake, without incident.

His response was a protective warning regarding the personal safety of a member of the “pack” of which Jake considered himself a member of. Up to that point Jake had never even acted like he noticed the guy.

It was only when he acted aggressively towards a member of the “pack” that Jake responded.

If you were familiar with how packs work, you’d realize that it doesn’t have to be the alpha animal that responds, as all members of a tight pack will respond to anything they think may be a threat to the pack or a member of the pack when they are immediately faced with a situation, and will do so with or without any “leadership” from an alpha.

I’ve seen it – not described to me in a book as you seem to be quoting in some apparent attempt to appear intelligent and informed on the matter – but rather by watching “packs” ranging from groups of small ankle biters to packs of hunting hounds that could range from 15 to 30 animals or more at a time (whitetail and fox hunting in eastern NC often involves rather large packs), to yes – “packs” – that included a mix of people and dogs that form a very tight knit family unit.

My knowledge doesn’t have the pedigree of some nice book on the best seller list – it’s from watching how packs operate first hand and actually living it.

Jake definitely knew his “place” in the pecking order and deferred to EVERYONE else in the pack – including my parents, siblings, wife, and in later years my very young son.

You tossed out an opinion without really knowing what you were talking about, and based upon just a few comments.

I would also point out once more that in the incident that you are so blithely analyzing – again without a shred of first hand knowledge of the animal or the events – that the dog in question DID NOT BITE anyone, and immediately backed off as soon as the cousin backed up and dropped his hands to waist level.

That’s called self control on the part of the animal – it also denotes intelligence in this instance, not a belief in pack superiority, and it’s not something to be criticized as a trait in the animal.

Something else I may not have clarified in the account is the fact that the incident took all of about a second, and that immediately after the cousin backed up Jake’s focus turned to me looking for attention and approval.

That’s not the actions of an alpha.

Now, if I were to really get serious about ANALYZING your own comments, I’d point out that police and military ALSO train their guard dogs to respond in a certain way.

One means is by having trainers mock attack the dog or the dog’s handler while wearing protective gear. Obviously the trainers are play acting in this case, albeit with very serious intent.

Next time you see a K-9 police officer with his animal, how about you try to approach him speaking in a loud voice in a threatening manner and raise your hands?

Hmmm, I wonder what kind of response you’ll get from his dog?

Bear in mind that K-9 animals are also typically on a leash, Jake wasn’t.

Of course, if the dog responds as Jake did with a simple growled warning then that obviously means – according to your painfully ill informed analysis – that the officer in question in fact does not have control over his animal and the animal in fact considers himself to be the alpha.

Actually, my gut feeling is the response from the K-9 dog will be far more, shall we say *energetic*, than the behaviour that Jake displayed.

Additionally, consider if the situation was such that the cousin had NOT been joking, and in fact had been about to, or did, physically attack me or another member of my family?

I guess in your world Jake was not supposed to even move or growl until ordered to attack the guy!

One other little thing I’ll toss out. Yes, you are correct in that the owner is responsible for what the dog does.

This is the rule and it’s a good one.

Anyone who has a large breed needs to accept that rule or not have a dog. Hell, anyone even with a small breed must accept that responsibility!

HOWEVER, you can never – ever – absolutely “control” any animal.

We talk about how one has to “control” their animals, but it’s a slightly inaccurate concept.

Dogs have a brain, teeth, and claws, and while you may train and encourage certain behaviour there is always the fact that they still have a brain.

That’s something anyone who was raised in the country or on a farm knows, and it’s going to be true of any animal.

They are not robots, they are living creatures, and thus there is always that element of unpredictability no matter how remote it is. It’s a concept that many urban types don’t understand until it’s too late.

Then there is my statement you quoted:

“The only thing I would add is that because the animal IS so intelligent, it does require a strong personality in the owner to handle such a creature sometimes if you get one that decides he can intimidate you.”

My point is that some animals by their nature are strong willed. Even the wikipiki article noted this as one of the traits of this breed – and it’s a trait of numerous other large breeds. Because of this trait, this breed does require a firm hand from the person responsible for the dog – which is what I was clearly alluding to.

Anyway, you responded completely out of left field with this:

“When a dog thinks it owns you rather than the other way around, we have a problem.”

You make a HUGE leap from the simple fact that some breeds are strong willed – which in your inadequate analysis you completely missed or ignored – to claiming that “the dog thinks it owns you rather than the other way around”.

Just another piece of evidence that you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about, and besides, I prefer to think of dogs more as family rather than as objects to be “owned”.

One last thing, then I have work to get back to.

Anyone who tells you that a dog can be completely “controlled” is either a damn fool or trying to sell you something – probably a book on the subject….

At best you can train the animal to be more predictable – but there will always – ALWAYS – be that element of the animal known as their brain, and that you cannot ever fully control.

So please, go back to the book store or wherever it is you got your reading material from and get your money back.

Wagging of the tail just means that they are excited, not that they are calm or happy to see someone. In fact, you can see dogs bite people because their tails were wagging as a warning that they were anxious or afraid or too excited.

Anyway, at one point my cousin takes a step forward towards me and is all swaggering and joking still – and Jake takes one step forward, looks up at him straight in the eye, and you more sensed the rumbling growl than heard it as it came up from somewhere wayyyyyyy down deep.

That’s a territorial warning to back off, often seen amongst canines, which include wolf packs.

The real problem here is that if the dog is taking this action on its own, then it can think it is the pack leader or at least responsible for defending certain members of the pack. It means that you aren’t the leader in his eyes ; ) This is not a good idea all in all. Because no matter how smart the dog or how well behaved, the human bears ultimate responsibility for what that dog does. Which means you had better be in control.

I honestly was shocked, as we were joking around.

Dogs can actually read human body language. Even if we can substitute some of our social settings on top of body language rading, the dogs just reading the body language.

Is there a way to get a guard breed like the Elkhound to accept a friend or trusted acquaintance as being part of the trusted pack? Are they adaptable that way?

According to the Dog Whisperer, any dog can accept any other dog of any other breed or trait or whatever so long as the human is recognized as the pack leader and has successfully socialized both dogs. This includes strange humans as well. If you are the pack leader and you accept that person, then the dog automatically follows your guide if it recognizes your dominant role. If it doesn’t, then it’ll do whatever it wants to do.

Just look up some of his episodes Fred, if you want some kind of guide. The training and discipline is very easy to do. All you have to do is to change his (the dog’s) initial reaction to a stranger. Meaning, unless the dog trusts you to look after him and yourself, the dog is going to stand up and do a guard behavior regardless of what you want. If you are angry, afraid, or excited, that will incite the dog to even attack in some cases. Because the more excited a dog’s humans are, the more excited that dog is and dogs don’t have human social rules to keep them in check. The fact that its users feel fear that their dog will bite someone will actually increase the anxiety of their dog and make a bite more probable. Dogs are very social animals in this respect, far more than us, both because of their noses and their pack mentality.

The only thing I would add is that because the animal IS so intelligent, it does require a strong personality in the owner to handle such a creature sometimes if you get one that decides he can intimidate you.

When a dog thinks it owns you rather than the other way around, we have a problem.

My theory is that many of these larger breeds have gone through a phase of too much popularity.

Inbreeding which causes organ failure early on and other defects.

Wow. Go Big or Go Home, er, “clone”….