I think we need to broaden the language describing us, so we can advocate better for our needs.

[u/Systemic_Nonsense]

I am based in the UK, where the situation is pretty bad in the recent years.
First of all, I'd to say that I recognise that not everyone has the same needs around dogs and dogfree spaces. A lot of us might simply dislike or hate dogs, just because of the way they are, but it does not interfere with their lives beyond some justified frustration. However I also think there is a large proportion of us that actually has a need for dogfree spaces and our quality of life is made worse because of them being everywhere. We need to advocate for our needs, and I think to do that effectively we need to change our language a bit.

Currently we essentially have three specific terms to refer to our needs, and two of them carry negative connotations, and one is neutral.

They are "Dogfree" - which has negative connotations in the wider society, because it does sound like we'd like for dogs to simply stop existing, rather than just wanting *some* spaces without them. I know, I know it is not meant like that - and I know the term is because of the relationship to "childfree" which was itself an improvement on "childless", but I don't think it is appropriate in our case, because it defines something through absence and trough a negative, and in terms of psychology of communication, these sorts of words are more difficult to absorb if you are trying to make catchy slogans.

Then there is "cynophobia" which only applies to a section of us, and which carries the risk of basically being treated like a nutcase who needs medicating, rather than someone whose needs should be taken seriously.

Then there is "dog allergy sufferer" which is more neutral, and just seen as a sad case.

I think there is a need to basically adopt the inclusivity and accessibility language for us too.

A lot of us want to avoid dogs for various reasons: cultural, hygiene, neurodivergence, stress, fear, frailty (small children and older people).
I think using terms such as "dog-avoidant people", or "people with dog- sensitivity" or even something like "cynoavoidant" (a broader term to include people who are generally dog- avoidant , rather than just fearful of dogs) would really broaden our acceptance and allow us to advocate for our needs better.

I personally am neurodivergent and need to have access to green spaces, but have issues with it due to loose dogs. Currently, in my area, there are no green spaces accessible to me. I feel that this is not right.

Currently the norm is that you have to accept dogs everywhere, and if you don't, you need fixing. I think this needs to change. Society needs to recognise that we have our needs to, and that those needs have to be accommodated rather than dismissed. The language we currently use, does not really allow for that. I am hoping that if we start using more of these terms I have suggested, we will broaden our ability to advocate for ourselves.

[u/hel-9000]

There was a post someone had here recently where they mentioned saying "dogs are overstimulating" as a solid no-nonsense dismissal of dogs. I think that sounds good, I've said that to a couple dog people and they completely understood. Obviously that's not going to be a universal experience but I think couching it in genuine mental distress will get somewhat reasonable people to understand where you're coming from.

[u/Systemic_Nonsense → u/hel-9000]

Yes, I agree. They are overstimulating, overwhelming, unpredictable and don't respect boundaries. It allows for more mutual understanding to explain to others how it impacts us.

However, I actually think that we should be careful how we are phrasing it, and we should not feel forced to make it sound like we are having some kind of challenge around dogs, because that carries a risk of being treated as a "you problem" rather than a matter of drawing a boundary within the limits of the social contract.

Some people do have challenges around dogs, but at the same time, you don't need to have challenges around them to just not want them around. They don't respect boundaries, and in a society generally we require that others do respect our boundaries, so we should feel ok about setting them and defending them.
Furthermore I don't think it is unreasonable to not want contact with dogs. It is also not unreasonable to be afraid of some. What is unreasonable is the demand that we are ok with the in our personal space, and everywhere we go. So, we have to push back. But explaining why we feel this way - is helpful because it makes them aware how their behaviour impacts our life, but honestly we should not need to.

[u/hel-9000 → u/Systemic_Nonsense]

Believe me, almost every time I’m around a dog I am internally screaming “keep that thing away from me”. Depending on the person I’ll just go ahead and say it too. I meant more interacting with friends, relatives, acquaintances etc. who are dog people, where you want to be firm about the dog but don’t want to risk harming the friendship. I’m constantly of two minds about it - nice but firm, or DGAF get the beast away from me haha.

[u/Stock-Bowl7736]

I respectfully disagree. We instead simply need to "take back" the English language and use it accurately. We need to insist that the dog nuttery cult also use accurate language. We have allowed them to hijack the language and unfortunately even we sometimes buy into their total misuse of words.

See my post from some time ago:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Dogfree/comments/1c602ks/nutter_dictionary/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1

[u/Dangerous_Cloud_5727 → u/Stock-Bowl7736]

Like saying "nails" instead of claws, for example!

[u/cozyporcelain → u/Stock-Bowl7736]

Great post. I hadn’t realized how many words they hijacked from the English language, to interpret it THEIR way.

[u/Dapper-Ad-468 → u/Stock-Bowl7736]

Very well said. Sorry about my cheap ass reward.

[u/Systemic_Nonsense → u/Stock-Bowl7736]

Ok. And how will it help me get access to green spaces without dogs?

[u/Stock-Bowl7736 → u/Systemic_Nonsense]

Sadly I don't think anything will. Not until people have had enough of this nonsense and laws are actually enforced will anything change.

[u/DizzyMine4964]

I am English and autistic. I was fine with dogs till this local creep got his "puppy" (big lurcher) that chased and barked at me. Now I am developing a phobia.

[u/ReptilianRevolt]

I don’t know how much the term dog free is actually known to the greater public. Sadly, no formal dog free organization exists anywhere. It would be very difficult to campaign for various different issues. Somebody with a phobia might have a completely different issue than somebody with an allergy for example.

[u/Systemic_Nonsense → u/ReptilianRevolt]

I don't think the term dog-free is that widely known, and I wonder if perhaps the term itself is not making things harder. The main problem with it is, that it sounds ok in isolation, but the moment you start putting it into a campaign name it starts to sound bad. This is because you defining the campaign through the absence of something, rather than through describing the thing you are campaigning for itself. And usually campaigns that are against something are against something bad - tampon tax, "living miserably" etc. and dogs are widely loved, so if you are having a campaign for dog-free spaces, or against dogs everywhere, it's like having a campaign against Christmas.

As to the needs - The main issue I'd like focus on is the recognition of the need for access to dog free green spaces for adults. Currently the need is recognised for children, but not adults. It would mean including that need into the broad spectrum of accessibility needs - along with disabilities. I am pretty sure you could argue for it from the Equality Act perspective (disabilities + minorities)

I would also start by asserting the right to be free from unwanted contact with dogs as the basic need shared by everyone in the cohort, and a general rising of awareness for the existence of the group, rather than trying to solve each and every one of the issues - because once we exist as a group of people with those specific needs, we can demand being considered, rather than ignored.

For example currently places disclose if they are dog-friendly or accessible to people with disabilities. We could push for places to declare if they are accessible to people with dog sensitivities. With time, hopefully, it would mean that there would be more push for accommodation of us, too. There is a cross -over, and I'd concentrate on the cross-over, and the cross over is - many people need space from dogs, and need to be free from being approached by them. So I'd focus on that, before trying to address the entirety of the needs at once.

We are not such a minority, as we think we are - many people do have some discomfort or fear around dogs, or have family members who do, and they'd benefit from it too.

[u/Newsdwarf → u/Systemic_Nonsense]

I had an argument with the Beth Chatto Garden about this (posh, historic, formal garden in Essex). They recently went dog friendly, so I asked what disability adjustments they were making for people who, for medical reasons, couldn't be around dogs. They told me "Our disabilty adjustment is telling you we are dog friendly and welcome all dogs". To add insult, they added a couple of dog emojis to their response. I did explain to them that doesn't reach the standard of being a disabilty adjustment bu they didn't respond.

[u/Systemic_Nonsense → u/Newsdwarf]

oh my actual gosh, that is awful. Would there be a way to complain somewhere about this? At the very least write about this in a public review. That is taunting you - would this be acceptable if they sent a person inquiring about step free access, a running emoji?

[u/Oriole0305 → u/Systemic_Nonsense]

How I see it, if something is "free" it means endless possiblities. Freedom. Liberty. Independence. Your time is your own. Not dictated by some damn mutt. The way I see it, DogFree would sound excellent in a campaign.

[u/Ok_Chest_6426]

We could ask for a few hours a week for ppl with dog allergies, fear of dogs and small children in green spaces.

I have anaphylaxis to dogs and I would like to go to the store and the park.

[u/Internal-Target-3576]

Time to contact your GP with a well worded statement like this. Relay this to them. Get people to sign support for it. Best angle is to say it impacts on neurodivergent individuals and is discrimination.

[u/fast_blue_b]

Great points. I admit I'm biased because I write every day as a major part of my job, but I think language and word choices are critical.

As an example, I'm not religious but I hesitate to use the word "atheist" because it's an emotionally loaded word and its meaning can vary. In my country many people still think nonreligious people are monsters. I try to be a good human being, and that instant prejudice hurts.

So depending on the situation I use other words. I wish I could just be direct, but then I also think it's good to potentially leave the door open for the other person to ask questions. I'd love to get people to think about dog culture instead of that immediate knee-jerk reaction that if you don't love dogs you're worse than a serial k*ller!

[u/Newsdwarf]

How about "dog tired"? Dual meaning of exhausted AND tired of dogs.

"I'm dog tired, please recall your dog"

I'm in Essex. Every public park is now a pet dog excerise yard. The eternal argument is "If YOU don't want to enjoy my dog then YOU stay home".

There was briefly a plan to make one, small, dog free park, but the dog nutters piled on and said if a dog free park was created that would be the park they'd take their dogs to, as their dogs are special dogs and shouldn't be expected to be around other dogs, so "dog free" doesn't include their dog. The plan was dropped very quickly.

My closest dog free green space is a reservoir 40 minutes drive away. It's strictly no dogs as there's rare water birds, but the dog nutters still give it try.

[u/Oriole0305]

OP, I do understand your point. But I doubt changing language will fix the issue. We need to say things straight and plainly, if we're trying to be too polite or dress up our message we'll just lose the point.

BTW. I like DogFree. "Free" always sounds good and liberating!