The answer
No. At Zeus's handover, with four resident dogs in the house, the trainer says avoiding the other dog is fine, "they don't have to be his best friend no they just need to not get in the fight", and then the hard half: "neutrality is required that's not optional he's not allowed to go after him". For Kodak and Rocko, two dogs who have to share a home, the owners are told before the first shared walk: best friends maybe, "peaceful coexistence required". Roman's trainer tells his owners he may never turn into a stereotypical golden retriever, "that's okay" - but if there is another dog, or one gets loose, calling him off is not optional. Kelton gives Sofia's family the same promise in Spanish: he does not know whether she can be social with every dog, but he knows she can be neutral. Christian gives Apollo's owners the household version: dogs who live together should pass each other and not worry about each other; poking at an unwilling dog is how accidents happen.
The September 2026 sessions repeat the standard and add its reason. On an off-leash walk with Bandit the trainer says 'we just need neutrality and we need the ability to stop a behavior but we don't need you know friendly towards all dogs', and 'not every dog can get there'. Kelton (Reaper's trainer) explains why the line is drawn at neutrality: 'i can guarantee neutrality i can't guarantee like yay happiness', because non-neutral behaviour can be penalised and neutral behaviour rewarded. He also widens the word: 'maybe neutrality is the wrong term but like lawful responses are required', so wariness and avoidance pass. When Reaper sees a dog about 15 feet away, looks at his handler and steers clear, the trainer calls it 'the correct answer'. Kelton narrates Sofia's passes in Spanish the same way: 'Vigilante sí, pero reactivo no' (watchful yes, reactive no). The standard reaches past dogs too: with a household cat, Hattie's minimum is to leave the cat alone, not to cuddle with it ('that's not required').
Three refinements make the standard usable. First, neutrality is per category: Dutchess's trainer warns that being neutral to people says nothing about dogs, geese or random things in the air. Second, the goal is scoped to the dogs that matter: Zeus's target was named before any test as four specific dogs at one address. Third, the finish line is a decision rather than a command: Dutchess looks, thinks about it, and declines before her handler does anything - "I didn't have to hit anything there though" - and Sofia's trainer tells her family that looking is not a problem, acting is.
Stormie's trainer describes cueing "let's go" at every dog until she predicts it, which looks like indifference though, he says, a whole thought process is going on. Sofia's family is told the opposite of the ordinary owner move: do not distract her with commands when a dog appears - let her decide, then give consequences.
Said on film: all of the above. Inferred: that the per-category, household-scoped and self-correcting versions are one standard seen from three sides.
The standard is applied to a friendly dog as well as a reactive one: Simba's trainer calls 'public neutrality' the main job with retrievers - don't run up to a person, an animal or a vehicle - and builds it the installed-prediction way, a 'let's go' every time the dog sees somebody, which he prefers to collaring each approach because that leaves 'too much room for confusion' (watch 10:34; watch 19:05). For a nervous dog and people, Ozzy's trainer states the people version in the same shape as the dog version: he 'doesn't have to be in love with the idea of people', he has to know how not to freak out (watch 24:22). And Max's trainer describes the handler's part - not caring, not looking, 'it's just a dog, we see those every day' (watch 08:23).
Angier K9 is a family-owned, play-based Board & Train serving Angier, Raleigh and the Triangle, with three full owner lessons.
What to do
Set the goal as coexistence, not friendship, and write down which dogs it applies to - by name if they live with you. Let your dog look; what you act on is going after the other dog. Do not flood her with commands to distract her when a dog appears; let her make the choice and follow through on it. Keep people, familiar dogs, strange dogs and wildlife as separate lines in your notes, because good with one says nothing about the others. At home, do not let one dog keep poking at another who does not want it. And notice the quiet passes - a dog who does nothing is doing the thing you trained.
What the trainers say
that they don't have to be his best friend no they just need to not get in the fight
right but it's not required but neutrality is required that's not optional he's not allowed to go after him right
right we would rather them ignore right then then get fixated and go after them so like avoidance is a lawful choice that's acceptable
and then the main problem is that he needs to get along with with all four of the dogs, the other dogs that live where he lives when he goes home.
best friends maybe who knows doesn't need to happen yeah peaceful coexistence required yeah required they need to be able to be around each other peacefully and not do that kind of stuff because that that's when you get something that escalates
i see that uh that worst case scenario is obviously possible it's definitely going to happen um and then the best case scenario i don't really have that much control over um but i can definitely set up the best possible chance for it
romans never like oh i want to be best buds with all the dogs right turns into like your stereotypical like golden retriever that might not ever be roman right yeah that's okay yeah that's fine right
But the good thing is, is like, it doesn't have to ever happen.
basically yeah none of it can be optional because if it's optional then you might you then you don't get it when you need it the most
pero yo sé que ella puede ser neutral cuando hay otros perros por ejemplo cuando hay uno allá o
no es malo, puede ver, eso no es un problema, ver, solamente ver, mirar no es un problema,
Well done, Sofia. There is no reactivity here. He was very, very calm.
he'll just like keep moving you know which is what we want he doesn't have to
it's like passing by like they exist together but they kind of pass each other and like they
that it irritates them right because like most likely nothing happened but
doesn't mean there's going to be neutrality associated to other dogs or other geese or random just crap in in the in the air, right?
But in the same breath, they need to know they can't go and run up to people.
she thought about it. Again, I didn't have to hit anything there though. The biggest thing is that she's correcting herself.
go and then she immediately unfixates and follows along and it's the same thing with the dogs if i say let's go every single time we walk by a dog her brain starts to go well every time we walk by a dog he says let's go i'm going to predict it this time and so it just looks like a seamless i don't care about the dog okay right
even if he's looking kind of hard as long as he doesn't do anything you're good right you can let him look
you don't want to hit the e-collar every time they see a dog because what does the dog learn especially if they have nervous like slight nervous tendencies like her they can build an aversion
we just need neutrality and we need the ability to stop a behavior but we don't need you know friendly towards all dogs right not not every dog is going to get there um not every dog needs to get there and not every dog can get there
but we can definitely get one of them because of one of them i can guarantee the other one i can't guarantee right um i can guarantee neutrality i can't guarantee like yay happiness
reason i can guarantee neutrality is because i can penalize non-neutral and reward neutrality
we don't need that but neutrality is required um or maybe maybe neutrality is the wrong term but like lawful responses are required
looking for we're looking for any lawful response and avoidance is lawful that's an acceptable more response for him to give
Tú puedes ver que ella puede, no ladra, no hace nada y no está asustada, no está sorpresada, está contenta. Vigilante sí, pero reactivo no.
right because it's like what's the end outcome that's required um not oh they're best friends now they like to cuddle together
How it looks, dog by dog
Zeus
The case where the rule is stated as a rule, repeatedly, at a handover to a household of four other dogs. Avoidance is fine; they do not have to be friends; they must not fight; neutrality is not optional. The goal was scoped before any testing to four named dogs at one address - two small ones he had no trouble with, two bigger, younger, more playful ones he had gone after - which is what made the case finishable. At the staged meeting with the business's tester dog, ignoring is preferred to fixating and avoidance is called a lawful choice.
On film
and then the main problem is that he needs to get along with with all four of the dogs, the other dogs that live where he lives when he goes home.
that they don't have to be his best friend no they just need to not get in the fight
right but it's not required but neutrality is required that's not optional he's not allowed to go after him right
right we would rather them ignore right then then get fixated and go after them so like avoidance is a lawful choice that's acceptable
Dutchess
The dog on whom the standard gets its two refinements. Neutrality is per category: neutral to people does not mean neutral to dogs, geese or things in the air - her people-neutrality is finished and her dog-neutrality is the open question, and the trainer says plainly that it matters because she has already been dangerous with dogs. And neutral has two sides with people: not frightened of them, and not running up to them. The finish line is narrated three times in one park session with the handler's inaction as the evidence - she thought about it and corrected herself. A second session gives the intermediate step that makes progress countable: still fixated, still staring, but no lunge and no tension on the leash.
On film
doesn't mean there's going to be neutrality associated to other dogs or other geese or random just crap in in the in the air, right?
she thought about it. Again, I didn't have to hit anything there though. The biggest thing is that she's correcting herself.
she did stare but we sat there and she i did no pulling on my leash at all it was really good
yeah I I didn't have to do anything. She automatically just kind of backed
Kodak
With Rocko, a pair who must share one household. The standard is set with the owners before the risky part: best friends maybe, peaceful coexistence required, because engagement is where escalation starts. In a separate session the trainer draws the line between what he can promise and what he can only make likely: the worst case is possible, the best case he cannot control, but he can set up the best chance for it. At the owner lesson he lays out both outcomes - friends, or two dogs who leave each other alone. These are the trainer's expectations for this pair, not a general guarantee.
On film
best friends maybe who knows doesn't need to happen yeah peaceful coexistence required yeah required they need to be able to be around each other peacefully and not do that kind of stuff because that that's when you get something that escalates
i see that uh that worst case scenario is obviously possible it's definitely going to happen um and then the best case scenario i don't really have that much control over um but i can definitely set up the best possible chance for it
one option is it's always possible they could end up being best friends i don't know right um or it could be that they tolerate each other like as long as they leave each other alone
Rocko
Kodak's housemate, in the same owner lesson. The owners are told they can let him look - even hard - as long as he does nothing, and to let him make the bad decision once rather than pre-empting it.
On film
even if he's looking kind of hard as long as he doesn't do anything you're good right you can let him look
if he does make bad decisions one let him
Roman
A dog-reactive dog on a rural property full of dogs, reactive mostly through the kennel fence and on leash. At the evaluation the trainer tells the owners he may never become the stereotypical golden retriever who wants to be best buds with every dog, and that is fine - it does not have to happen. What is required is the other half: in a situation with another dog, including one that gets loose, he cannot react, and so the recall and call-off cannot be optional. At the second visit the trainer narrows the problem to a sliver - leash reactivity, barrier aggression, and frustration at dogs he cannot reach - and argues for forbidding that sliver while allowing everything else.
On film
romans never like oh i want to be best buds with all the dogs right turns into like your stereotypical like golden retriever that might not ever be roman right yeah that's okay yeah that's fine right
But the good thing is, is like, it doesn't have to ever happen.
basically yeah none of it can be optional because if it's optional then you might you then you don't get it when you need it the most
this is fine this is fine this is fine this little sliver right here don't do that dude
Sofia
Sofia's family listed being near other dogs as their top priority. At her first owner lesson, in Spanish, Kelton tells them he does not know whether she can be social with every dog but that she can be neutral, including in the same room as another dog, and that what matters most is that they know how to follow through when she shows something. He then turns the usual owner move on its head: when a dog appears, people call the dog's name and ask for sits so she does not see it - that does not work. Looking is not a problem; acting is. On a walk days earlier a man and his dog pass and she stays calm - the trainer's first recorded neutral pass for her. A second dog, if the family wants one, is best added during the program so the introduction can be supervised. In the September 2026 outings Kelton narrates each pass to the family in Spanish against the same standard: 'No ladra, no está ladrando, no está reactivo, ni nada' (she isn't barking, isn't reactive, nothing at all); 'Vigilante sí, pero reactivo no' (watchful yes, reactive no); after a walk past many dogs, 'Estaba mirando solo. Nada malo' (she was only looking; nothing bad). At the second lesson (25 Sep) he tells them she may avoid other dogs - 'no hay malo en evitar los otros perros', there is nothing wrong with avoiding them - and that what matters is that she can walk without thinking of attacking.
On film
pero yo sé que ella puede ser neutral cuando hay otros perros por ejemplo cuando hay uno allá o
no es malo, puede ver, eso no es un problema, ver, solamente ver, mirar no es un problema,
estamos distraendo eso no funciona no funciona
Well done, Sofia. There is no reactivity here. He was very, very calm.
No ladra, no está ladrando, no está reactivo, ni nada.
Tú puedes ver que ella puede, no ladra, no hace nada y no está asustada, no está sorpresada, está contenta. Vigilante sí, pero reactivo no.
Bien hecho, Sofía. No ha hecho nada. Estaba mirando solo. Nada malo.
que ella puede caminar sin pensar en atacar o hacer algo malo con los otros perros.
Puede evitar, no hay malo en evitar los otros perros.
Apollo (the Bully)
Christian's version, for a formerly nervous dog and a household with a second big dog, Zeus, kept outside behind a gate. With people the goal is the same shape: he does not have to be best friends with everybody, he just must not freak out. With the household dog, Christian describes the picture he wants between dogs who live together - they exist together and pass each other without worrying about each other - and names how it goes wrong: one dog keeps poking at another who does not want it, until one day the other loses it. The reintroduction to Zeus is to be done through the gate first.
On film
he'll just like keep moving you know which is what we want he doesn't have to
it's like passing by like they exist together but they kind of pass each other and like they
that it irritates them right because like most likely nothing happened but
yet that's the future of that relationship between the big dog we'll have to do it between the gate
Stormie
The dog whose file explains how the finished look is often built. Cue "let's go" at every single dog until she predicts the cue; what an onlooker then sees is a dog who does not care about the dog. In a later lesson the trainer adds that it looks like indifference but psychologically there is a whole thought process going on - the honest account of much public neutrality.
On film
go and then she immediately unfixates and follows along and it's the same thing with the dogs if i say let's go every single time we walk by a dog her brain starts to go well every time we walk by a dog he says let's go i'm going to predict it this time and so it just looks like a seamless i don't care about the dog okay right
yeah you get the two in tandem with each other where she's now realized that her prediction was wrong she adjusts accordingly and then on top of that she's been conditioned every time we go by by the dog she's already ready for me to say it but it looks really like it when you watch it you're just like oh she doesn't care about the dog but like psychologically there's like a whole entire thought process going on there
Luna
The warning that governs how neutrality may be built: do not correct every sighting of a dog, because a dog with nervous tendencies concludes that all dogs are bad and you manufacture the aversion you were hired to remove. The same visible outcome - a dog who does nothing when another passes - can be built two ways, and only one is worth having.
On film
you don't want to hit the e-collar every time they see a dog because what does the dog learn especially if they have nervous like slight nervous tendencies like her they can build an aversion
Bandit
On an off-leash walk (28 Sep 2026) the trainer says Bandit behaves himself around dogs, pays attention, and can be told to knock it off, 'which is really all that's needed': neutrality and the ability to stop a behaviour, not friendliness to all dogs, which not every dog can reach. He adds that the program never sets out to change a dog's baseline temperament.
On film
And you can tell him to, like, knock it off, like I just did there, which is really all that's needed.
we just need neutrality and we need the ability to stop a behavior but we don't need you know friendly towards all dogs right not not every dog is going to get there um not every dog needs to get there and not every dog can get there
Bun
Narrating a solo session (29 Sep 2026), the trainer sums up the change in a dog who was very reactive at first: much chiller, much more confident, 'Much more neutral'. Passers-by get no greeting, and none is asked for.
Hattie
At the adopters' follow-up (22 Sep 2026) the standard is applied to the household cat. A dog and cat who cuddle would be great, the trainer says, 'but that's not required'; what is required is that the dog leaves the cat alone, the minimum standard, and that can be had by making it not worth it to do otherwise.
On film
right because it's like what's the end outcome that's required um not oh they're best friends now they like to cuddle together
her alone on the front porch and stuff like they were great yeah but that's not required
and that can be be had just by making it way not worth it to do it
Kane
Narrating a park session (21 Sep 2026), Kane's trainer reports progress on one of the family's main worries from the intake: his ability to walk past dogs neutrally, which they had already seen improve. The incident behind the worry is told in the session as the family reported it, and is not repeated here.
On film
big improvement on and that was his ability to walk by dogs neutrally
Mazi
On a downtown walk (25 Sep 2026) the trainer applies the standard to people: Mazi registers them and does not go after or interact with them, and acknowledging that they are there 'that's fine'.
On film
he didn't go out to them he like registered they were there but that was it
actively try to go after them interact with them apart from just kind of like acknowledging they're there that's fine
Reaper
Kelton (Reaper's trainer) states the standard more often than anyone in the September 2026 sessions. On a trail (16 Sep) a 'yay pet me' greeter is not his temperament and is not needed; what is required is a lawful response, and wariness is fine. In the owner session (19 Sep) neutrality is what can be guaranteed, because it can be enforced. On a bridge (25 Sep) 'avoidance is lawful'. By the in-program lesson (26 Sep) he may never be delighted by every person, but he is 'not like hunting them anymore', and on 29 Sep he looks at a dog, looks at his handler and steers clear: 'the correct answer'.
On film
we don't need that but neutrality is required um or maybe maybe neutrality is the wrong term but like lawful responses are required
reason i can guarantee neutrality is because i can penalize non-neutral and reward neutrality
looking for we're looking for any lawful response and avoidance is lawful that's an acceptable more response for him to give
he's there's still a little bit there yeah he might not never he might not ever be like like yay happy like with every person but he's not like hunting them anymore
There was another dog like probably 15 feet away and Reeper completely avoided the dog.
He like looked and then he looked at me like, uh, I don't think I'm supposed to do that.
Simba
The friendly-dog version of the standard: for retrievers, the trainer says, 'it's all about public neutrality' - don't get distracted and run up to a person, an animal or a vehicle. The tool is 'let's go' for anything the dog shouldn't run up to, given every time he sees somebody until seeing someone means turning back to the handler; the trainer prefers this to collaring each approach, which he says leaves too much room for confusion.
On film
I'm just not, I don't necessarily want it to be, like, attacking off, so, let's go, so that's exactly how we fix it, though, it's a more natural thing, the whole theory here for a second is, I think, let's go, anything that you essentially don't want your dog to run up to, right, so, in this case, we're talking about, like, public neutrality, right, a lot of, it's, like, a big thing that I find with the retrievers, it's all about public neutrality, so, in that case, it's just don't get distracted and run up, like, into a person or an animal, vehicle, whatever, right, like, you can't just
first way which is the way I don't do it is where you you eat collar every time
they try to go up to a person but it is too much room for confusion with that
method excuse me so what uh what we do is we do let's go that way every time the dog sees somebody
he says he gets a condition where oh every time i see somebody um i end up having to like go back
Ozzy
The same standard applied to people, for a nervous small dog: nobody will force visitors on him, and he doesn't have to be in love with the idea of people; the goal is that he can tolerate someone in the living room - sit by his owner without freaking out, because nothing bad is going to happen.
On film
just that's a big thing like not being in love with the scenario but being like i'm not gonna
he doesn't have to be in love with the idea of people just get my goal is to have him like
love that somebody's in my living room i don't know i'd rather just be hanging out with mom but
i know how to not freak out i know how to just let him sit by me because i know nothing bad
Max
The handler's half of neutrality: the trainer tells Max's owner that when he sees a dog he simply doesn't care - doesn't look, keeps walking or waits for it to pass, and if Max looks just says 'it's just a dog, we see those every day'. Walking past barking kennel dogs daily is how Max got used to it.
On film
like when i see a dog i just don't care yeah i'm just like whatever and i don't even look at the
and i'm just like whatever right um but i just don't feel anything about it right i just go
it's just a dog we see those every day right exactly right yeah um because we do we see them
might be barking at us right like he has to walk past right so he's used to the idea of just walking
Peque (PK)
A store clip shows the finished picture: Peque is walked past another dog, and the trainer points out that it was the other dog pulling to get to her while she stayed with her handler.
On film
Good girl. So, I want you guys to notice, if you're watching, that that dog was pulling to go towards PK.
Zuri-chan
The staff dog as the model of the end state: dogs pass and Zuri 'ain't worried about no dogs' - she is busy sniffing and marking.
On film
She ain't worried about no dogs.
She's trying to sniff things and pee on things.
Why it works
The trainers give three connected reasons. First, engagement is where escalation starts, so the required floor is not engaging badly rather than engaging well (watch 11:05; watch 19:24, where persistent poking is how household accidents happen). Second, the dog is allowed to look and must be allowed to choose, because a dog who is distracted with commands never makes the decision the owner needs her to make; the choice is followed by a consequence (watch 07:45 and 10:03; watch 36:15). Third, the part that is required must be non-optional everywhere, which is why Roman's recall and call-off are the one non-negotiable (watch 06:53). A fourth reason is stated in September 2026: neutrality is the standard a trainer can promise, because it can be enforced - 'i can penalize non-neutral and reward neutrality' - whereas friendliness cannot be guaranteed (watch 49:32). Two routes to the same appearance are described: a dog who declines on her own (watch 11:23) and a dog who has learned to predict a cue at every dog (watch 13:08). And one boundary: correcting the sight of dogs rather than the behaviour risks teaching a nervous dog that dogs are dangerous (watch 34:29).
Inferred
Nobody compares the cued and uncued routes under matched conditions, and nothing on film tests how either holds when the owner stops cueing.
Where the trainers differ
What the finish line is: a decision the dog makes, or a prediction you install.
One view
A decision: she looks, thinks, and declines before the handler acts; and owners are told not to distract with commands.
On film
she thought about it. Again, I didn't have to hit anything there though. The biggest thing is that she's correcting herself.
estamos distraendo eso no funciona no funciona
He like looked and then he looked at me like, uh, I don't think I'm supposed to do that.
Another view
An installed prediction: cue 'let's go' at every dog until she expects it; the result looks like indifference.
On film
go and then she immediately unfixates and follows along and it's the same thing with the dogs if i say let's go every single time we walk by a dog her brain starts to go well every time we walk by a dog he says let's go i'm going to predict it this time and so it just looks like a seamless i don't care about the dog okay right
method excuse me so what uh what we do is we do let's go that way every time the dog sees somebody
How to read it
Same footage, different promises about life afterwards. The difference appears the day the handler stops cueing. Left open.
How wide the goal is.
One view
As wide as it needs to be: she must be safe around all other dogs.
On film
The question is just like, you know, you got to make sure she's safe around all other dogs.
Another view
Exactly as wide as the household: four named dogs at one address; or, for Roman, not reacting if another dog is there or gets loose.
On film
and then the main problem is that he needs to get along with with all four of the dogs, the other dogs that live where he lives when he goes home.
How to read it
Both defensible; a family should be told which one it has bought.
Common owner mistakes
- Aiming at friendship. The deliverable is that they do not fight; play is a bonus.
On film
that they don't have to be his best friend no they just need to not get in the fight
Zeus · Watch at 37:54 ↗ - Distracting the dog with her name, 'look at me' and sits whenever a dog appears, so she never makes the choice.
On film
estamos distraendo eso no funciona no funciona
Sofia · Watch at 10:03 ↗ - Letting one household dog keep poking at another who does not want it.
On film
that it irritates them right because like most likely nothing happened but
Apollo (the Bully) · Watch at 19:24 ↗ - Correcting the sight of another dog rather than the behaviour.
On film
you don't want to hit the e-collar every time they see a dog because what does the dog learn especially if they have nervous like slight nervous tendencies like her they can build an aversion
Luna · Watch at 34:29 ↗ - Correcting while the dog is still on the other dog, which he may take out on that dog.
On film
you pull him away right the reason is that if you say uh-uh and tap the e-collar while he's still in that position all ramped up he will take that out on him potentially right that could happen
Zeus · Watch at 45:53 ↗ it's an escalation because that's what he's focused on so he can attribute it
Zeus · Watch at 30:39 ↗ - Assuming a dog who is excellent with people is neutral about anything else.
On film
doesn't mean there's going to be neutrality associated to other dogs or other geese or random just crap in in the in the air, right?
Dutchess · Watch at 13:13 ↗ - Leaving the call-off optional because the dog 'usually' comes.
On film
basically yeah none of it can be optional because if it's optional then you might you then you don't get it when you need it the most
Roman · Watch at 6:53 ↗
Questions owners ask
Will my dog ever be able to play with other dogs again?
The trainers do not promise it. For Kodak and Rocko the trainer lays out both outcomes - friends, or two dogs who leave each other alone - and says the best case is not in his control though he can set up the best chance. Roman's owners are told he may never be a dog who wants to be friends with every dog, and that is fine. What is promised is coexistence.
On film
one option is it's always possible they could end up being best friends i don't know right um or it could be that they tolerate each other like as long as they leave each other alone
romans never like oh i want to be best buds with all the dogs right turns into like your stereotypical like golden retriever that might not ever be roman right yeah that's okay yeah that's fine right
we just need neutrality and we need the ability to stop a behavior but we don't need you know friendly towards all dogs right not not every dog is going to get there
Is it a failure if my dog just avoids other dogs?
No. Zeus's trainer calls avoidance a lawful choice and prefers ignoring to fixating; at the handover, avoiding is explicitly fine.
On film
right we would rather them ignore right then then get fixated and go after them so like avoidance is a lawful choice that's acceptable
looking for we're looking for any lawful response and avoidance is lawful that's an acceptable more response for him to give
Puede evitar, no hay malo en evitar los otros perros.
When I see a dog coming, should I get my dog's attention so she doesn't notice it?
Sofia's family is told that this is what people do and that it does not work: she needs to be allowed to look and to make the decision herself, and the consequence comes after. Looking is not the problem; acting is.
On film
estamos distraendo eso no funciona no funciona
no es malo, puede ver, eso no es un problema, ver, solamente ver, mirar no es un problema,
My two dogs live together. What should that look like?
Christian's picture for Apollo's household: they exist together and pass each other without worrying about each other; if one wants to interact that is fine, but the other is not poked at until it loses patience. A dog with a history is reintroduced through a gate first.
On film
it's like passing by like they exist together but they kind of pass each other and like they
that it irritates them right because like most likely nothing happened but
My dog is brilliant with people. Why is he still terrible with dogs?
Dutchess's trainer says neutrality is per category: good with people says nothing about dogs, geese or moving things. Each is its own line of work.
On film
doesn't mean there's going to be neutrality associated to other dogs or other geese or random just crap in in the in the air, right?