Take part to this month’s Great Debate: Should breed standards for temperament be rewritten with “friendly” as the desired trait, keeping in mind that the dog’s main “job” is to be a pet?
Much like humans, all dogs have their own unique personalities – and we love them for it. However, there are breeds whose standards make an aloof temperament more desirable than others. For example, the Afghan Hound‘s ideal temperament is described by the Kennel Club as “dignified and aloof, with a certain keen fierceness”; the Chow Chow ought t be “independent, loyal, yet aloof”; the Akita as “dignified, courageous, aloof” – and so forth.
Aloofness does in no way make a dog aggressive, but some are wondering if this trait should be maintained at all, as it is often a leftover of what used to be the dog’s original purpose. Now that the vast majority of dogs go on to become family pets, some are arguing that there is no reason to purposely breed for ‘aloofness’, and that breeders should aim for every dog they breed to be as friendly as possible. After all, they argue, the dog’s main job is to be a pet.
Others are not as keen to see standards change. Not all dogs need to be overly friendly and, they argue, different temperaments work for different people. Some go on to say that rather than trying to make every single dog friendly, it would be important to educate the public to understand not all dogs are necessarily people pleasers. Even if everyone tried to breed for friendliness, there will always be dogs who are more aloof – and this should be respected.
What do yo think – should breed standards for temperament be rewritten with “friendly” as the desired trait, keeping in mind that the dog’s main “job” is to be a pet?
Let us know what you think here, on this Facebook post, or by writing to firstname.lastname@example.org with “Great Debate” in the subject line.