Noem is no leader. Cricket knew that.

Photo: Anja, Pixabay

It’s news to no one by now that vice-presidential hopeful Kristi Noem shot and killed an uncastrated male goat for looking, smelling, and acting like an uncastrated male goat. She also shot and killed Cricket, her 14-month-old wire-haired pointer puppy. Her reasons: Cricket was untrainable, aggressive, and predatory.

Photo: Annette Meyer, Pixabay

The goat’s behavior speaks for itself. But I say that what best describes Cricket, if Noem is to be given any credibility, is undisciplined. And what does it take to discipline a dog? It takes a leader. It takes someone the dog recognizes as a leader. Noem, currently Governor of South Dakota, is lobbying for another leadership position. Yet she displays so little actual leadership that even her dog does not obey her.

Discipline is different from punishment. And leadership is different from dictatorship.

Dogs don’t understand punishment. They understand consequences from a leader, but only if those consequences come from a leader who is calm and assertive (thank you, Cesar Milan). Domestic dogs have been—well, domesticated—to a point where observing pack behavior is almost always tainted by inadequate human leadership, but some things are very evident.

Image: aitool.ai

Canines are hierarchical. Think of them kind of like Klingons; they need to know who the leader is, and if a dog is not convinced of another pack member’s leadership, that leadership—by default—falls upon that dog. A canine leader has responsibilities. She makes sure her pack’s needs are met, that its territory is not invaded, and that the environment is safe and stable. If one animal becomes over-excited, anxious, or acts in any way that is upsetting to the stability of the pack, the leader is expected to let that animal know that its behavior is not wanted. Canine leaders do this by nipping at the troublemaker, gently—not to draw blood, not to start a fight. The message is “Knock it off or else.” The “or else” might mean harder nips, or (if the behavior does not improve) an actual fight. If a fight happens, it might be not just the leader attacking the troublemaker; the entire pack might get in on the act.

Photo: Pixabay stock imaghe

Some dogs want leadership. Think German shepherd, or rottweiler, or border collie, or chihuahua, or almost any terrier (including the pit bull, which—while a gentle dog by nature—can be ferocious without strong leadership). Again, like Klingons, dogs of these breeds will watch any creature (canine or human) for proof of leadership, and if they see a crack they will step in. This does not mean they will be vicious; it just means that in addition to accepting a leader’s responsibilities, they get to tell the other pack members what to do. And if those members don’t do as they’re told, there are consequences.

Some dogs want no part of leadership, and if they’re in a situation where leadership falls on them by default, they are likely to develop troubling behavior in an effort to distract themselves from a job they know they aren’t suited for. They’re likely to develop obsessive behaviors like barking at everything, running in circles, humping people, “friendly” jumping onto visitors, digging, or possessiveness around toys or food, to name a few problems. Think golden retriever, bouvier des Flandres, great dane, or greyhound.

There are many ways for a human to establish and maintain leadership with their dog(s)s. Yelling, shouting, and teaching tricks are not among them. Neither is shooting them with a gun.

Dogs are predatory by nature. Puppies are excitable by nature. Dogs look for leadership by nature. All of the misbehaviors of which Noem accuses Cricket are natural. And dogs, like people, are individuals, with each animal requiring at least some individual treatment when learning how to be a dog that understands when predation, excitement, and aggression are warranted, and then they are not.

As humans, we hold ourselves to be more intelligent than dogs. This ought to mean that in dealing with dogs, it’s up to us to understand the needs of the dog because of its nature, and not to expect the dog to understand human behavior.

Noem has shown that she does not have the ability or the intelligence to be a leader to dogs. When she included the story about Cricket in her recent book (No Going Back: The Truth on What’s Wrong With Politics and How We Move America Forward ), she was clearly expecting others to understand her actions. But in doing so, Noem demonstrates her inability to understand that not everyone thinks as she does.

How are we to trust her in a leadership position in a country where many, many people are in fact not like her in many, many ways?

Photo: Gerd Altmann, Pixabay

You can subscribe for free to Robin Reardon Writes, though I hope you’ll consider becoming a paid subscriber. It’s not expensive, really! You’ll have access to everything I write on Substack. You’ll also have my undying gratitude.

Not ready for a paid subscription but you really liked this post?

One more thing: If you share this post, you’ll get credit for generosity, and I might get more subscribers. 😊

I’m an inveterate observer of human nature, writing novels about all kinds of people, some of whom happen to be gay or transgender or bisexual or intersex—people whose destinies are not determined solely by their sexual orientation or gender identity. Check out my work on my website.