extremes - what's the deal?

Is it just my imagination, or is there really a tendency for attitudes to swing from one extreme to another? It just seems that all too often, people seek out and zero in on something specific, which is part of some riding style or purpose. This then becomes some kind of mantra, a goal in itsself, which then starts to overtake in importance the original purpose. In their zeal to become better than each other (to win money, ribbons, admiration etc), riders, trainers, breeders and all kinds of enthusiasts will go to unbelievable lengths. I wouldn't care if they just wear bigger and bigger hats or brighter and brighter clothings (and some do!). But unfortunately, some of these obsessions are quite damaging come at the expense of our equine friends.

Go and watch Western Pleasure. I'll be damned if what goes for a lope there in the show-ring isn't downright abominable. I see a caricature of a horse doing some horrid four beat "thing" which ought to be a canter. It's so far on the forehand it's damaging the horse. It's so slow it's almost backwards. I can't begin to describe how appalling I find this. What goes for trot is no better. Slow-motion zombie-like horses ridden by grim and deathly determined looking folks. Oh yeah, and must have BLING. I mean, the judges have to look at somthing.... But Western PLEASURE? Really??

Ok, now go to Saddleseat shows. It's the total opposite. We've gone from noses scraping in the dirt and deadened tails (sheesh, can't have that tail move!) to exaggerated movement and tails that have been manipulated to stick up. Evidently, tails carried naturally high, showing a happy horse showing off is no longer good enough. Jerky, exaggerated movement is encouraged by the use of over long hooves with gadgetry which has to be seen to be believed. Horses are stirred up so they look wide-eyed and crazy and barely within control. Oh, and for total BS, have a look at the Big Lick shows for Tennessee Walking Horses. Whatever possesses people to call that riding, to do THAT to their horses in the name of a few measly dollars and trophies, is totally beyond my understanding. These horses look like robotic zombies, like caricatures out of a horror movie. They move like a real horse would never, ever voluntarily move. Sure they have shiny coats, but what do they have to go through to be so brainwashed that they can move like that. Bear in mind, I do understand and love gaited horses. But this has nothing to do with gaits. Even without soring and all the other crappy "training" methods used to make their horse do THAT, it would have to be a sad existence for a horse.

Next extreme: let's look at modern dressage horses. They must have snappy movement also, and EXTENSIONS!, but for some reason it seems necessary (especially of late, and especially in certain parts of Europe) that their nose is cranked back to their chest. Rollkur is fashionable. Deep and round is the motto. Never mind the fact that you never see horses move like that in real life, just as you don't see real horses move like show-ring TWHs or QHs... And never mind that these horses can't see where they go and and end up in a state of learned helplessness. Oh, and it seems to be ok to ruin their backs and necks also. Again, some of the big names start that BS, and every little wannabe copies it, in the hope of being "in the ribbons".

There are other examples, but these are probably the most obvious and widespread ones. Thankfully, in all those areas, there are voices of reason, peopl e who care and people willing to educate and change to bring about a better life for those horses.

Going away from specific riding methods, we see excesses elsewhere, too. I'm thinking of excesses in attitude toward horses. On the one hand we have people who treat horses like bikes and don't give a damn about the creature. To them, a horse is just a method to get from A to B, to impress the friends, to have some mindless fun or as a sporting tool to win ribbons. Use and abuse and throw away as they see fit... Then there are folks who are just plain cruel. In the olden days, a lot of that cruelty wasn't directly pointed at horses or other animals. It was a cruel, harsh world, and people did terrible things to each other, animals probably just got in the way or were tools to be cruel to other people. But there are nasty folks out there who don't abuse animals out of ignorance or need, but who take a certain kind of perverse pleasure in doing so. Those people are sick and need help. I won't elaborate on what kind of help I'd love to give them.

The opposite extreme to that mindset are the folks who treat their animals like children. Those who are unwilling (incapable??) of being a leader to their horse, to give guidance and encourage the horse to do things which will help him to fit into a human world. Just as I'm sick of hearing of uncaring, ignorant or nasty people doing crappy things to horses, I'm exasperated about the attitude of those who seem to think they must impose no boundaries on their precious and beloved equine children.

The idea that a horse grows up in a vaccum, that no social rules exist and are enforced within a natural herd and that therefore, the human "herd mates" also have to just let it do it's own things always is, quite frankly, a lot of crap. Horses are gregarious, they love company. Most horses love to fit in and to have their place in a herd. Very few have the mental make-up to be leaders, and even those are usually happy to concede leadership to another individual, so long as that individual has leadership qualities, including calmness, consistency, charisma, boldness etc.

In a horse-human "mini-herd", the human ought to be the leader. If for no other reason than that he's qualified by way of a bigger brain and better understanding of what is required for survival in a world full of humans. However, if the human is ineffectual as leader or willingly relinquishes his role in the name of "kindness" our out of some other misunderstood notion about what makes horses happy, then the horse will fill that leadership vacuum. In some ways this may work ok for some time. Horse gets his way, horse learns that he can do what he likes and therefore does as he pleases. Human is happy to watch horse do as he pleases and is happy to make no demands whatsoever, only hoping that the love for the horse will be returned by the horse.

The fly in the ointment comes when there is an unavoidable task. Maybe the horse needs drenching, or his feet trimming. Being vaguely unpleasant, horse might decide to walk away instead of returning the human's love. Now the human has a dilemma. Be consistent and let the horse decide but ultimately see it come to harm as a result. Or... be insistent on the procedure and risk upsetting the poor darling horse. Sometimes, they try the latter only to find that the horse has well untruly learned that the human has no say in matters, and the horse actually reacts hostile to attempts to make him do something. Now there is a real problem. This usually escalates and then something happens that endangers the human and/or the horse, and then an "expert" will be called in to help and fix the problem. In the end, the artificial "freedom" we gave that horse is getting the same horse into potentially life-threatening situations.

Another scenario: the overly kind person won't insist on their horse to follow and pay attention. The day comes when a flood threatens the area and the person would like to rescue the horse from it's paddock. The horse does not know or understand the flood, therefore he does not see the danger. The kind person cannot get the baulky horse on the float and as a result, the horse has to be abandoned and downs. Dead horse and unhappy human.

I've heard of people who wait for their horse to "tell them" they wish to be ridden. Really? Same as I don't see any issue in people working for money, I can't see a problem in a horse being ridden sometimes in exchange for a good life with plenty of food, health care, shelter from the elements and a social life. This is the real world.

I've seen bolshie fillies run over their owners because they had learned they can get away with it. I've seen horses with abysmal feet because they kicked their owners to smithereens once they learned that nobody insisted on cooperation. In the end, those horses end up being put out to pasture until they get sick and/or injured and/or hurt someone. And then they get fixed by an export or put on the truck to the knackery. Does that still look so kind??

Sadly, many people who have good intentions, but lack the experience and the opportunity to learn are attracted to gurus or to ideals which lack any common sense or connection to reality. The Internet is full of self help groups and advice from experts. There are self proclaimed gurus, like Nevzorov, who are taking the esoteric approach to horsemanship to such extreme lengths that people are brainwashed into thinking his way is the only way. The preachings of some of those gurus very nearly resemble religious rantings and condemn all but what the guru himself approves (=sells). All I can say is that behind every successful guru there is a successful marketing person who knows exactly how to appeal to the emotional needs of the average well-meaning but ignorant horse lover.

What to do??

I'd like to call for rational action. For attempts to understand the horse as a living, feeling creature with it's own free will and certain desires. I call for kindness and for thoughtful leadership which benefits the horse and guides him in an environment far removed from natural herd life and undoubtedly stressful to a born prey animal. I encourage people to follow a path that treats a horse like a real horse: a valuable individual which enriches our lives and deserves our devotion. But also requires our kind leadership and guidance. This path is best followed if we avoid extremes in everyday interaction, in training, husbandry, socialisation and all other aspects of life.

If, on top of that, we can do away with manipulating hooves and leg action, fixing tails in the up or down position and let horses move naturally as opposed to against their nature, we should be a long way towards having an ongoing good relationship with our horses. Happy, contented and healthy horses are more delightful to watch, to ride and interact with than any currently fashionable, man-made, artificially "enhanced" robots which are on the scrapheap before the age of ten..

I, too, am on a search of bettering myself. I would like to be a better leader and friend to my horses, and I will continue to strive to achieve that. But I am prepared to use common sense, and fairly rigorously apply logic, which filters out a lot of BS. I'm in the lucky position of having a decent amount of experience, and therefore, I can usually interpret the response of my horses to my requests. Is it working? Are we progressing? Is the horse relaxed, keen, attentive, happy to do more?

I am wary of extremes of any sort. I try to be open minded, but I question everything. I am careful of people who promise ALL the wisdom and ALL the answers. The good horse people out there are the ones who are on a lifelong quest to learn, and admit there is always more to discover and understand. They make no false promises. In my observation, it doesn't matter which background they come from or which equestrian discipline is their passion. Good horsemen and women share the very similar basic set of of skills and ideas and philosophies, none of which are characterised by extremes.

ego kills learning

I had a scary experience. I met a closed mind.

"Leave your ego at the door" - motto of many BJJ schools.

"Leave your ego at home" should apply to horse people. Too much ego is involved when we work with our horses, when we go to clinics, when we go to competitions and when we go out riding with our mates.

According to the Oxford Dictionaries, ego is: "a person’s sense of self-esteem or self-importance". We all have it. Some people claim to have none, but I believe it's part of how we define ourselves, and that in itself is a necessary part of us being who we are. I know this is getting into pretty deep philosophical waters (where clearly, I'm out of my depth..). But I posit there is a "healthy" level of ego which everyone should have. Too little is bad and has it's own problems. Too much ego, on the other hand, can lead to conditions such as "egotistical" (a.h.), an inflated sense of self-importance, self-delusion, arrogance, disrespect for other human beings and that most horrible of all problems called a closed mind.

The strange thing is that an oversized ego and inflated sense of self-importance is often associated with a certain fears. Most often, the fear of losing face. Often, this seems underpinned by a lack of expertise or understanding. So on the one hand, there is the need to look good, while on the other hand, there is feel of uncertainty. So what does the big ego demand? A cover-up. No way is it possible to admit that there may be something missing. In fact, the really deluded ego doesn't see the gaping hole in knowledge. How is the cover up achieved? By BS mostly. The ego-driven person lies to self first and foremost, and everyone else also. They will divert attention away, point the accusing finger at their horse, their teacher, the circumstances, their friends or any bystanders, anything. The ego driven person thinks and proclaims they never err, never make a wrong decision. Therefore, they cannot accept responsibility for anything they say or do and choose to play the blame game.

As they already know everything and make no mistakes, there is then no need to attempt to learn anything new. In fact, this reinforces the whole closed mind scenario, because no new facts need to be absorbed, critically evaluated and there is no need to change as a result. A closed mind sometimes reacts with hostility to new ideas. It's like a clam that snaps shut. The only reason I can figure for that hostility is that niggledy uncertainly in the back of the mind about things not being quite perfect. After all, if all was truly as magnificent as the big ego tells itself, then there would be no need for hostility. Magnanimous indifference yes, but not hostility.

All things are not black and white, and on the ego scale, most of us fall part way between too little and too much. Sometimes, we just have a little too much, and we may be able to tune it down when we realise its an issue.

But let's look at learning.

What is a prerequisite to learning? Surely an open mind: a willingness to listen to new ideas and concepts. A willingness to immerse ourselves in the material presented, to critically evaluate what is offered, to try out, test and make mistakes with the new stuff until we find those parts that work for us. Then we integrate that new knowledge and the associated skills with our current way of doing things. And as a final step, we give credit to our teachers, mentors, colleagues, training partners and whoever else helped us to grow.

To begin with, we need to realise that we don't know everything, and that we need to fill a void. Not with hollow fluff about our own self importance, but with real knowledge from people who have gone down that road before and who have things to teach.

The typical learning journey has several important stages. Psychologist have come up with four distinct steps (from Wikipedia):

1. Unconscious incompetence

   The individual does not understand or know how to do something and does not necessarily recognize the deficit. They may deny the usefulness of the skill. The individual must recognise their own incompetence, and the value of the new skill, before moving on to the next stage.^[2] The length of time an individual spends in this stage depends on the strength of the stimulus to learn.^[3]

2. Conscious incompetence

   Though the individual does not understand or know how to do something, he or she does recognize the deficit, as well as the value of a new skill in addressing the deficit. The making of mistakes can be integral to the learning process at this stage.^[4]

3. Conscious competence

   The individual understands or knows how to do something. However, demonstrating the skill or knowledge requires concentration. It may be broken down into steps, and there is heavy conscious involvement in executing the new skill.^[3]

4. Unconscious competence

   The individual has had so much practice with a skill that it has become "second nature" and can be performed easily. As a result, the skill can be performed while executing another task. The individual may be able to teach it to others, depending upon how and when it was learnt.

The way I interpret this progression is that the closed mind is stuck in stage one. They don't recognise their own incompetence. This precludes them from moving on to the stages where learning really takes place and where they would have the opportunity to develop basic skills and eventually, mastery.

So the next time you hear someone tell you "I understand", "I know", "I see" when clearly, they do not, then be aware that you may not be able to help that person. At least not immediately. Most people are able to change though. I've certainly seen some pretty amazing transformations, and I'm an optimist. Sometimes, just by quietly continuing to do what I do, and offering knowledge in a non-confrontational manner, ego barriers drop. At other times, I just walk away, because I'm not prepared to waste my time. Or suffer the thrashing around of a closed mind which acts like a cornered wild beast when confronted with hard to deny truths.