Female handlers weakening the breed?!? - Page 6

VonIsengard,

Hexe, thanks. What does a dime-a-dozen pet trainer know, anyway?

And Jeff, I suppose if all you could nitpick at was one of the more tongue-in-cheek points in my post, I can return in kind. There a few women out there who drive Hummers, too. I suppose some people need a "really hard dog" because hey, something in their life has to be, right?

Quote: 

And Jeff, I suppose if all you could nitpick at was one of the more tongue-in-cheek points in my post, I can return in kind.

How many times do I have to tell people that I do not take this seriously. Think about it. Someone took something I said and a bunch of people lost their minds. At some point, you have to get that the joke is on all these people flipping out. 

I stated a fact. Something that I had seen over and over. Hexe thought it would be a good idea to flip out, and people posted playtime dogs (not serious dogs) as proof that girls (all girls was implied) could handle anything that comes along.

And I have seen men that had no business handling a dog out there as well. So many of them were never picked to be on a team, never could MAKE a team, but buy a sleeve, or a suit, and without ever training a dog, you are now a dog trainer. 

Go to the other thread and read it. It is just my opinion, and looked what it bloomed into. By now, I hate women, I think women are all stupid, and should be barefoot and pregnant all the time, and whatever else these people could think of implying.

I do not believe any of those things. The market for a dog that a woman or one of the many many many "never got picked for a team" insecure guys is huge in working dogs. So much easier to sell an average dog than a high end dog. Breeders get serious dogs back, not to mention that nature always fights to go back to average.

The problem, is average has become something it never was intended to be. Average is many many people on heres definition of strong. high end of average is super dog. 

Kinda crazy all the fuss when you stop and think about it. Who else besides me will actually speak his mind ? I am not alone in this world with that thought. I just don't think that thinking one thing and saying another is how I want to be as a human being.

Yeah, my sport folding up shop out west and then shortly thereafter my club doing the same, kinda put a damper on trialing. You have no fing idea what you are even talking about..teaching a dog to out, haha. My dog used to out perfect, trialing f'ed that up, not a lack of training. My dog just has the "juice" to bite. LMAO

I'll admit my dog isn't "trained" to out, when you admit Buko isn't even trained to heel since he can't even manage that at trial. He knows you wont sledghammer his head in public so why listen? Is that a trained dog or ? It's not what I call well trained. But WTF do I know right???

I am sorry, keep forgetting delusion cannot be bandaged on an internet forum.

However, 

Quote: 

My dog used to out perfect, trialing f'ed that up, not a lack of training.

The really sad thing is that you have no idea how to train, and if I keep responding to you, you will continue to prove my point. 

Quote: 

I'll admit my dog isn't "trained" to out, when you admit Buko isn't even trained to heel since he can't even manage that at trial.

I am not sure you understand what heel is. Go and look it up. I'll wait for you to get back. 

Quote: 

My dog just has the "juice" to bite. LMAO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOE85VVPePM&list=UU7bsOJ3bQXk0EyPyzS2FP5Q&index=15&feature=plcp

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbfRxifbKOw&list=UU7bsOJ3bQXk0EyPyzS2FP5Q&index=38&feature=plcp

Quote:

At least my dog doesn't run willy nilly all over the damn place during trials,

I think this is the video you were talking about. It is the call off. It is a control exercise. The dog is NOT supposed to bite, and come back on the whistle. I thought I would explain that to you, as you are not a dog trainer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3F73MS74b8&feature=related


Quote: 

Yeah, my sport folding up shop out west and then shortly thereafter my club doing the same, kinda put a damper on trialing.

I have no club. Had to teach my own decoys and myself, and the dog. Did not pass ring three, and sadly Buko is retired. Goofy sports like the one you were in, (sure you were) there is no need to have an experienced decoy at the higher levels. In MR, a new decoy is worse than useless to train MR3. Nothing you can do about it but train the next dog. Esko has a leg on his MR1. Just me, no club. He knows almost the whole ring 3 routine already. Pretty quick considering I have to teach it all myself. By the way, he got a 185/200, and I did not train him on several things that cost him a bunch of points, as it is ring one. 

Got a couple new pups coming up as well. Bulvai is 6 months, and Skittles is 5 weeks. They are going to have titles as well, because I can actually train a dog. 

Hmm and I have actually read you more than once say that any dog could get a MR1. But now it's special, cause you did it yourself? You have Jimmy Vanhove decoy for you but all of a sudden your a one man band? Come on quit trying to "pretend" your as tallented as the girl with Jr Mint, who actually did do it herself. Oh waiiiit...but she's a chick? How'd that happen?

Oh and....
 

Jeff Oehlson wrote:

'I stated a fact. Something that I had seen over and over."

While it might be accurate to say that something has been YOUR experience, that hardly makes it a FACT, Jeff.

"Hexe thought it would be a good idea to flip out, and people posted playtime dogs (not serious dogs) as proof that girls (all girls was implied) could handle anything that comes along."

Oh, honey, if this is what you consider 'flipping out', you really need to get out more.

You made an extremely broad claim, but placed it in the midst of a thread where it was apropos of nothing; I (and clearly others as well) found that claim to be interesting, albeit outrageous, and thought it was worth its own thread--and hoped you would provide (a) supportive data for your claim that the changes in the breed are due to the increase in female handlers in sport, and (b) examples of dogs which rise to the standard you've set to identify 'strong'. 

Personally, I agree that there's been a change in the type of, and the threshold for, aggression in the breed, but I believe that's due to the changes in the environment in which we make our dogs live.  An extremely civil dog with a lower threshold for reactive aggression is now a bad fit in most situation its owner would experience, in a society where people take no responsibility for the consequences of their own actions, children are permitted to act upon their every impulse and everyone else is expected to be tolerant of this, and casual dog owners fail to do their homework and then further fail to train for appropriate behavior because it's time consuming and inconvenient.  The general public expects all dogs to be stuffed Dakin toys. 

As a German I didn´t understand all of your posts, but why don´t you think about the words Jeff said instead of "killing" him?
I´m a woman, involved in dogsport for more than 30 years - times, dogs, training methods, and handlers HAVE changed a lot during these decades . In former times there were as much as no women training dogs - today there are more women on the field than men .
Most of these women ( I don´t say ALL ) train dos with "normal" drives, and they are very successful. Some of these dogs most of the male handlers ( again I don´t say ALL ) wouldn´t train because these dogs aren´t strong enough for them. These women are very good in training, they are very successful on trials, they breed these dogs...
At the end people only see the result, not the dog and its training. There ARE a lot of dogs on the Bundessiegerprüfung with great results, a lot of men wouldn´t take as a "green dog " because they miss strongness or drive, but female handlers developed these dogs to do there best.
These dogs become studdogs later on because of their success, but the dog didn´t change, it´s still a normal dog.
As a result Jeff isn´t wrong, most female handlers don´t look for "strong" dogs, BUT some of them are very good trainers and handlers. They believe in there dog, they are more patient...
Female handlers ( mostly ) look for drive, trainability, not for strongness. You don´t need a "strong" dog for 300 points, but the 300 points dogs will be bred because of their results.

Times have changed, handlers have changed, dogs have changed, a normal development...and there are still good handlers and bad handlers, strong dogs and well trained dogs...
But one thing is for sure: female handlers ( mostly ) are the better handlers...
 

Forgot to say:
a lot of the women keep their dogs in the house, they don´t want dogs who try to become Alpha against their children - most men keep their dogs kenneled
women walk their dogs, so they don´t want them to fight against other dogs - most men only "walk" their dogs on the training field
women stick with their dogs - men sell them, if there a faults
women believe in SAR, therapy dogs and other stuff where no "strong" dog is needed, but they breed them because they are doing a good job ( a lab can do this too...)
women want a companion - men want to do dogsport...
and so on...
I am a woman, and I say, FEMALE HANDLERS CHANGED THE BREED ! 
AND THE TRAINING METHODS TOO