Don’t get too excited by the title … it may have caught your attention but

please remember this is a website devoted to the dog fancy!

There have been people involved in the sport of dogs who have felt that

Variety competition, or more specifically Groups and Best in Show, was pointless,

their argument being that “you cannot compare dissimilar objects”. In truth, the point

of this level of competition is not direct comparison, but the comparison of each

individual dog against its particular Breed Standard, or the written description of

specific breed perfection.

However, there is another aspect of judging which involves judging the

“dissimilar” and which is maybe more complex – that of judging the two sexes of a

breed together. Do judges knowingly, or subconsciously, make allowances for the

different sexes when they judge? Certainly where Breed Standards are concerned,

most of them are of little help when it comes to evaluating dogs and bitches in the

show ring, giving direction as to differences based on gender.

In dogs there is nothing like the variation between the male and female of the

species as can be found in other forms of animals and birds. If dogs and bitches

were as different as, for example, cocks and hens, then judges would constantly be

faced with having to decide between very dissimilar objects. However, within the

limits imposed by Nature on sex variations in dogs there are more subtle differences.

Whilst most Breed Standards make allowances for differences in size and weight

between dogs and bitches, only a very small number suggest that there should be

any further differences between the male and female of the breed.

Often you will hear judges say “I do not object to a little length of back in a

bitch” or, “You cannot expect to have as big a head in a bitch as you would in a

male”, yet these opinions are not supported by any requirements of existing Breed

Standards. This kind of thinking suggests that if a bitch appears with an ultra-short

back, or an extremely large head (in breeds that call for these requirements), it would

be entitled to preference over a bitch that showed a normal sex variation from the

dog.

The vast majority of Breed Standards, in their omission of defined sexual

characteristics other than size, consequently suggest by inference that we should not

be seeking any difference whatsoever between the dog and the bitch. Furthermore,

remember that in most Standards the recommended minimum size for a male and

maximum size for a bitch will to some extent overlap.

However, just as there are so many things not detailed in Breed Standards,

yet assumed to be understood by the reader – for example which Standard tells us

that a dog should have two eyes and four legs ? – for breeds to survive and prosper,

males should exhibit some degree of masculinity and bitches a level of femininity.

However, this is where the issue becomes cloudy. Many people have a problem in

understanding the expressions “masculinity” and “femininity”, as they simply mistake

them for meaning big and small.

Yet masculine and feminine qualities have nothing to do with size. It is

possible to have a small dog that shows all the signs of masculinity in physical

qualities, plus the male characteristics of boldness, assertiveness and general

toughness. A bitch, on the other hand, can be physically big, but if she has feminine

lines, quality and expression, she could never be described as “doggy”.

Whilst there is generally some discrepancy in size between the dog and the

bitch, the variation is nothing like as marked in other forms of animal. Remember that

most of our breeds were developed to do a specific job, and any exaggerated

variation in size of either the male or female could result in an unsuitability to perform

their task.

Many Toy breeders will proudly tell you that they prefer to breed from bigger

“dual purpose” bitches, and use smaller, refined stud dogs, but history relates that

the size of a bitch does not necessarily guarantee the prevention of caesarean

sections when it comes to whelping. Some of the easiest-whelping Pekingese

bitches I have known were not huge; simply healthy, well-constructed animals who

came from generations of self-whelping bitches before them.

Whilst some breeders may hold this belief, and be convinced that it works for

them in practice, this is not good enough reason to justify when judging rewarding

bitches that lacked essential femininity.

Interestingly, Elizabeth Somerfield who was one of the pioneer Boxer

breeders in the UK, was often quoted as having said “the best brood bitch is one that

has the body of a truck-driver and the face of a lady”!

The judge faces a further dilemma when deciding between two sexes for Best

of Breed, as invariably the male will be exhibiting more coat, more substance, be

more extrovert and therefore be more likely to catch the eye of the group judge.

But is it really a better male specimen of the breed than the bitch is a female?

On many occasions when watching the competition for Best of Breed in a variety of

different breeds I have seen judges deliberating between a handsome testosterone-

fuelled male and an exquisitely feminine bitch who radiated not just type but intense

quality. Invariably the male gets the nod, and on some occasions the judge in

question has openly admitted afterwards that the male “would look better in the

group”. We need to remind ourselves of the wording on the award card … BEST OF

BREED, not BEST BET FOR THE GROUP! We live in an age where there is no

room for sex discrimination and that holds good in the dog show breed ring too.

No matter how you argue the semantics, a dog should look like a dog and a

bitch should look like a bitch. You should need to neither ask nor feel!

© ANDREW H. BRACE

(This article may not be reproduced in any form without the author’s

permission)