skibum wrote:
Toy_Soldier wrote:
I love my dogs dearly, and love when they snuggle with me, but don't like the licking sensation. It tickles and is a bit gross to me. I try not to react badly to it (I know this is stupid, but I don't want to hurt their feelings) but will do something to change/stop it like pick them up. Much of the time they just give one greeting lick which I just grin and bear.
They of course are completely onto the situation and use licking to get me to give them attention. As in 'Pet me or I will lick you.' They also know and use the worst possible places to lick, like in the ear, in the eye, or worst of all, up the nose.
It's no stupid at all. Animals have feelings just like we do and we can hurt their feelings if we are not careful.
You know I believe that too, but I don't find a lot of support for that view in reading about pets or in conversations with more experienced animal handlers. Its more like I get that look like I am reading too much into the animals reactions and giving them more human traits (that they don't have). Often I hear the statement something like "Look, its a
dog" or "Its a
frog" and in the sense that they don't have sophisticated feelings (if at all). And professionals too in studies, etc, usually try to find more basic biological reasons to explain behaviors, and in a sense explain away the emotional element.
But I think, I really do, that they are missing something. Just because an animal cannot communicate its feelings does not mean they don't have them. Think for a comparative example of a non-verbal person. You do have some amount of things you can observe and watch to see how things make them react. For example you can tell from body language and barking, when a dog is happy, sad, relaxed, nervous, etc. I can't believe that happiness in a dog is only a set of muscular actions, or even just a vague sense of well being. There is more to it. I know it.