Perspective: The Opposite of Dominance is Not Submission

Dominance is not a dog's identity.

Before you can understand how that can be true, it’s important to understand what dominance is and what it is not, especially as it applies to our dogs.

In the training world, the word “dominance” has lately become known as the Dirty D Word. There has been controversy over how to best explain it or help our clients to understand the science behind it. In the pet dog world, it is deeply intertwined with the idea of being a dominant or submissive dog, or of being the “Alpha”. It is seen as an intrinsic character trait of a dog - as in... that dog IS dominant. 

There is a fine line between what has become known as “dominance theory” - the misguided belief that dogs form rigid, hierarchical social structures where they gain status through conflict. He does not get rolled over by the more dominant wolf in that situation. But even then, dogs are not wolves. Dogs are scavengers and opportunists. They need to remain flexible and adaptable around humans. 

​What do we think of when we think of a dominant dog? A quick google search says that the dog is dominant if it is:
​

• Mounting other dogs
• Stealing or guarding toys and food
• Getting attention from all the other dogs — even when they don’t want it
• Pushing their way to the front whenever walking with other dogs
• Making other dogs wait for them
• Almost never licking other dogs on the mouth
• Always winning when the dogs play tug-of-war

Individually, dominance may have been present in each of those situations. It is something the dog DOES, not something the dog IS. As defined by Dr. Roger Abrante, dominance is a relationship dynamic between two individuals in a moment of time. It serves the function of gaining or maintaining temporary access to a particular resource on a particular occasion, without  either party getting injured. If there is injury, it is considered aggression, not dominance.

If one dog defers to another over food, a bone, attention, etc - that is a choice made by the dog who deferred, not a choice made by the dog who did not. When a dog makes a claim over a prized resource, the other dog offers appeasement signals and backs away. Aggression does not occur. It is only in the unstable relationship where you will see aggressive displays, often because there is an insecure dog who tries to force the other dog to submit to their will and wants. A stable relationship won’t have aggressive displays. In studies on wolves, scientists observed that the wolf who is deferring, offers appeasement. He rolls himself over. ​

So what does this all mean? In the book Canine Enrichment for the Real World, the authors Allie Bender and Emily Strong stated that the opposite of domination is teaching. I would wholeheartedly agree with that. Because dominance is more of a state of action than a state of being, this is a refreshing way to see the other side of dominance. Instead of staking claim over a resource by controlling that resource “just because” until the other dog defers; instead of taking what is believed to be his; instead of maintaining control over a situation; instead of dominating an interaction - the being in question would use the situation or context as a moment to learn. To learn who has rights to the resource in question. To learn who gets priority access. 

So let’s move forward in thinking of dominance not as a dirty D word, but as an action word - As an important way to describe a relationship, in the moment:
That dog is dominant over that bone.
That dog is dominating the attention.
That dog is being dominant over the bed.
How do we know that dog is being dominant? Because the other dog deferred to him. Not because that resource was taken.

Until there is a better understanding of what dominance is and isn't, the word will continue to polarize the community. Change the message.