Old School Philosophy for Modern Day Horsepeople Warren Bengston has a heart for horses and people. He's spent 42 years as a farrier, 3 years breaking horses, and 10 years as a missionary to the Ojibwe Indians. You will find pieces from each part of his diverse background interwoven into the fabric of his writings.

The Bible warns of a time when good is called evil and evil is called good. If we are not there yet we are scary close. Society’s obsession with tolerance, diversity and political correctness has had some legitimacy as an effort to right some wrongs. These concepts could have served us well but they took on a life of their own and now exist for their own sake. They did have simple and clear definition but gathered so much baggage they can only be used as political weapons.

Maybe every generation has had these struggles to some extent until youthful idealism settles for status quo, starts a revolution or simply gets a grip on reality. Because of abusive practices in the past the horse world was just waiting for the current message of tolerance and political correctness. Some people throw the baby out with the bath water and some people kept the bath water and threw out the baby. Keeping the baby and throwing out the bath water doesn’t make sense anymore because it was the baby who contaminated the bath water in the first place. This is all a little confusing unless you are the baby.

Some of today’s equine clinicians are bringing a mixed message or incomplete message because there appears to be no other way. The liberalism of higher education has in some ways robbed us of objectivity by giving us a placebo to take away the useful pain of reality, truth and common sense. Our horses have real questions for us but those questions cannot be answered to their satisfaction unless we can function with them in confidence and clarity. I admit this topic is loaded with variables that can be intimidating. Nevertheless it deserves a closer look.

Clinicians are obligated to teach horse owners ways of handling horses that won’t get them killed. As a result techniques are taught that are “gentle,” stress-free and safe. That is not the problem. The problem comes when it is taught that quicker, clearer ways to engage a horse are evil. It is almost like advising pain killers when pulling the tooth would solve the problem. It is true, of course, that anyone can advise the use of a pain killer but not many are trained to be the dentists. A dentist gets to the “root” of the problem, yet they are not regarded as bad people. Advising pain killers is not necessarily bad unless there is an accompanying warning to stay away from dentists.

Sincere and misguided people believe or have been taught that dentists cause bleeding and temporary pain and therefore they are abusive. The fact that the bleeding and pain are very brief but yield long-term benefit is not even considered.

Then there is the problem of the clinicians teaching effective and maybe old fashioned techniques that when understood and wisely used give wonderful and lasting results. They can’t (won’t) do it because they know there are foolish people on a power trip that would take those techniques and be very abusive to the horses they deal with. That is a very legitimate concern.

There also is the matter of a horse-owning public that has been blinded by political correctness and would certainly ostracize the clinicians who would suggest dentistry. Popularity and livelihood are at stake so the clinician is stuck with being a closet dentist who sees no way around the dilemma. He or she is right; there is no way around the dilemma.

The animal-rights movement is against spanking a horse because they don’t know the difference between a spanking and a beating. They only know a dentist who ties a patient in a chair and without pain killer yanks teeth out with a pair of pliers. They don’t know that a competent dentist is coordinating science and art to bring relief and lasting benefit to the patient. To them there is no difference between professional dental instruments and a pair of pliers.

The current use of the word “natural” has also complicated this picture. It seems to go unnoticed that a herd boss does use pliers and no Novocain. Hair is missing and swelling is sometimes the result of natural herd posturing. The subordinate horse handles it all with no mental abuse or confusion. Now, it is true that the vast majority of horse-to-horse conflict is non-contact—but some clinicians don’t tell you that horses settle for body language because in the past they have felt the pain that non-compliance is sure to bring. That is the herd boss’s idea of making the wrong thing difficult and the right thing easy.

Because violence is in a horse’s DNA, they are not damaged simply by what is done to or with them, but rather the damage is from the horse not understanding why it was done. “Natural” has become the buzz word to validate a way of thinking, a product, or a way of doing things. Sadly, it has succeeded.

It is a shame that political correctness and half truths have created an atmosphere that does not make it easy for honest horse people to relate honestly about honest issues in the light of an honest understanding of herd dynamics.

Because I do not tolerate defiance does not mean that I hate the horse. It does not mean I am angry. It does mean that I believe every horse has a potential for good in the human world and I am not willing to let him “run away” from that potential. Of course, the potential I’m referring to has to do with his accepting and freely functioning in my agenda.

None of this is an issue if we let the horse run wild and arrive at his own natural potential. However, he is not free and his personal agenda must give way to the human agenda and accompanying expectations. If you see that as judgmental and demeaning then at least be honest and take your horses to Wyoming and turn them loose where they can fulfill their natural potential.

The horse that won’t cooperate and be at ease with farrier work and the barn sour horse have the same problem. They both are expressing a diversity of opinion that makes perfect sense to them. Whatever may be the excuses and reasons, it boils down to a sense of entitlement. They do it because they can and have no reason not to. It is a sad state of affairs when, for reasons already stated, it is not suggested that a horse might need a quick hit or a kick. Sometimes a well-placed, well-timed hit will bring more clarity than an hour of round penning.

Why even bring this up? Why not settle for status quo? Just because there are angry, scared, frustrated or confused horse handlers who hit and kick horses in a destructive manner doesn’t mean there isn’t a right and constructive way to bring physical consequences to a disobedient horse. Too many horses and humans are locked in low-grade war that is won by neither. In spite of all the information available to the horse-owning public, they are enjoying some degree of mutual misery. Most of the information is instructive. It is what is not said that is doing the damage—such as saying that 95 percent of horse-to-horse conflict is non-contact but failing to say that the 95 percent rests on or is the result of the 5 percent (physical, painful consequences).

When we allow a warped view of tolerance and political correctness to blind us we cannot be the leaders our horses need because we are preoccupied with issues that don’t even exist in the mind of the horse. We want him to trust, respect and obey us but due to our own confusion we won’t let him do it. Our horses do not like turmoil. They want to understand why they are in our world. Not intellectually, of course, but they want leadership that is confident and clear, leadership that is secure and comfortable in the truth. Honesty in us is the pathway for a horse to become honest.

In his own mind he looks at our world with its expectations as opposed to his world and initially concludes that his ways are superior to our ways. Are we willing to show him his confusion and why he needs to see and accept our agenda? If the blind lead the blind they both fall in the ditch. If all is not well in your horse human relationship it is because somebody is blind. If the blindness comes from sincere confusion, it is fixable. If it is the result of stubborn thinking created by political correctness it is not fixable. You may be in the ditch of cold and uncaring horse handling or you may be in the other ditch of bleeding hearts and permissiveness. Both ditches are littered with difficult and dangerous debris guaranteed to cause anxiety and tension. Why travel in either ditch when there is a perfectly good road where both horse and human can enjoy the journey? That road is only available to those who care about living in the truth and viewing all issues with honesty. Honest questions deserve honest answers.

I know a farrier who is willing to slap a horse with a rasp, kick him in the belly, or use a war bridle on him. Yet the horses in his clientele are not afraid of him and actually seem to like him. He is physically confrontational in the face of defiance or aggression but he does it in a way that does not attack the horse’s person. The horses seem to understand that this farrier likes them but does not like the behavior. They relax because he clearly answers all their questions. It has nothing to do with being rough or gentle. It has to do with clarity. A clear-headed horse is calm, trusting, respectful and obedient. If a horse’s mind is cluttered with fear, defiance or confusion, it will take a clear-headed human to clearly answer all the questions that horse has.

That will not be easy if both horse and human are traveling in a ditch. If you are tired of the ditch, the road awaits your discovery. Your horses have been suggesting it for a long time. When shameful dishonesty characterizes our philosophies, our horses are the losers and so are we.

Warren Bengston