[Qyn]

There have been a few threads regarding the worth of "dominance" and "alpha" used as labels or descriptive terms and I find that for those who are either natural leaders, or who have not had a problem with their dogs, consider that these terms indicate compulsion methods. While I am aware that that can be a possibility, I (personally) mostly read it as a name for the role the dog would prefer to (and mostly will anyway) see the human have and be worthy of having, not the method used to obtain that role.

Many humans do not have any problems with their human/dog relationship but those that do (for what ever reason) and seek advice, are often told the problem is due to the dog not seeing the human as the "Alpha" or "dominant" partner in the relationship. This, IMO, does not mean that the human needs to dominate the dog or use compulsive methods but maybe the human needs some guidelines as to how the dog sees the relationship and some help in behaving like a natural leader worthy of respect. These should not involve bully boy tactics but should involve a guidance to attitude.

If that means the human with less knowledge or leadership skills needs to do some things (example exit the door first; eat first; etc) that a natural leader does not have to do (because the leadership issue is not in question) then, that is not a something that should be considered unnecessary for everyone just because it is unnecessary for those that already have those skills.