When Silence Becomes Complicity: Choosing Welfare Over Politics in the Equestrian World
- hayley jonker
- Feb 23
- 5 min read
Updated: Feb 28
The Image We Don’t Want to See
In equestrian sport, horses, who cannot speak, rely entirely on human advocacy. And too often, silence wins.
Recently, I felt this tension around the symposium. Officials and professionals hesitated. Not because education lacked value. But because politics makes people cautious.
Do I align with progress?
Or do I align with power?
This isn’t just about events. It’s about a deeper pattern in equestrian culture:
When doing what is right feels socially risky, many people default to what is normal.
But welfare cannot depend on convenience.
Why Speaking Up Feels So Hard
If we want change, we need to understand the human nervous system.
When people feel their freedom or competence is threatened, they instinctively resist.
If you say: “That’s harsh.” Or “That’s unfair to the horse.”
The brain hears just hears “You are incompetent.”
Defensiveness activates, learning shuts down. This is not malice.
Most riders see themselves as ethical and caring. When confronted with the possibility that their behaviour may harm a horse, it creates psychological discomfort.
To reduce that discomfort, people often:
Justify the behaviour
Blame the horse
Dismiss the concern
Attack the messenger
Unless we give them a way to change without losing identity.
This is where advocacy often fails.
What Equine Learning Theory Actually Tells Us
If we are going to advocate properly, we must be technically correct.
Horses learn primarily through:
Negative Reinforcement
Pressure is applied → removed when correct response occurs. The release is the reinforcer.
If:
The timing is unclear
Pressure escalates too quickly
The release is inconsistent
The horse becomes confused or tense.
Escalation is often not defiance.
It is a learning breakdown.
Punishment and Its Side Effects
Behavioural science consistently shows punishment:
Suppresses behaviour temporarily
Increases stress hormones
Reduces trust
Can lead to learned helplessness
What looks like “obedience” can sometimes be shutdown.
This matters deeply in competitive environments where tension is rewarded.
Where I See This Most Clearly
I see it in first lessons. Clients often arrive expecting that I want them to “make” the horse go. They brace for escalation. They assume the whip is the next step.
In that moment, I have to advocate for the horse, not emotionally, not dramatically, but structurally.
We are not building responsiveness through force. We are building clarity through timing.
When riders experience how light a horse can become when the nervous system feels safe, something shifts.
The Real Problem: Identity, Not Information
Most welfare conversations fail because they attack identity.
People defend:
Their status
Their reputation
Their tradition
Their belonging
Politics protects hierarchy.
Welfare protects horses.
And hierarchy feels safer, because its normalised.
How to Advocate Without Triggering Defensiveness
This is where psychology and learning theory intersect.
If we want horses protected, we must speak in ways that cannot easily be dismissed.
Lead With Observation, Not Judgment
Instead of: “You’re pushing him over threshold.”
Try: “I wonder if he might still be in sympathetic mode there. When horses are above threshold, they can perform, but the learning quality tends to drop."
Anchor to Learning Theory
Instead of moral language, use mechanics: “If the release isn’t clear, he may not know which response earned it.”
Now the discussion is technical.
It becomes difficult to fight science.
Align With Shared Goals
Performance and welfare are not opposites.
“If we reduce escalation, you’ll likely get more consistency and less resistance in the test.”
When welfare improves results, resistance drops.
Ask Before Advising
Research in Motivational Interviewing shows people change more when they articulate insight themselves.
“What do you feel happening in his back when that aid comes in?”
Questions open doors. Statements close them.
Regulate Yourself First
Advocacy without nervous system regulation becomes confrontation.
If you are activated:
Your tone sharpens.
Their amygdala activates.
Learning shuts down.
Calm is strategic.
What Happens If We Stay Silent?
Silence reinforces:
Tension as normal.
Escalation as necessary.
Compliance as proof of correctness.
Politics as priority.
Horses absorb the cost.
Not immediately. But cumulatively.
In their joints. In their nervous systems. In their behaviour. In their welfare.
The Proactive Shift
So what do we do?
We choose to become technically educated and emotionally regulated advocates.
We:
Study learning theory deeply.
Understand biomechanics thoroughly.
Practice regulated communication.
Model better alternatives.
Accept temporary discomfort for long-term integrity.
You do not need to be the loudest voice.
You need to be the most grounded one.
Every time you are presented with a choice:
Do what is normal? Or do what is right?
Ask yourself:
If this horse could speak, would they thank me for staying quiet?
Welfare does not require aggression.
It requires clarity, education, and courage.
And courage, in equestrian culture, often looks like calm persistence.
Brehm, J. W. (1966). A Theory of Psychological Reactance. Academic Press.(Foundational theory explaining why people resist when they feel their freedom is threatened.)
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press.(Explains identity protection and justification when behaviour conflicts with self-image.)
Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2013). Motivational Interviewing: Helping People Change (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.(Research-backed communication model reducing defensiveness and increasing openness to change.)
Stone, D., Patton, B., & Heen, S. (2010). Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most. Penguin Books.(Framework for navigating high-identity conversations.)
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence. Bantam Books.(Neuroscience of emotional regulation and its impact on communication.)
McGreevy, P., & McLean, A. (2010). Equitation Science. Wiley-Blackwell.(Core text on learning theory in horse training, negative reinforcement, timing, clarity.)
McLean, A. N., & McGreevy, P. D. (2007). The role of learning theory in horse training. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 108(1–2), 1–15.(Explains misuse of pressure, confusion, and escalation.)
McGreevy, P. D., & McLean, A. N. (2009). Punishment in horse training and the concept of ethical equitation. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 4(5), 193–197.(Discusses risks and welfare concerns of punishment-based methods.)
Sankey, C., et al. (2010). Reinforcement as a mediator of the perception of humans by horses. Animal Cognition, 13, 753–764.(Shows positive reinforcement improves horse–human relationship and emotional state.)
Seligman, M. E. P. (1967). Learned helplessness. Annual Review of Medicine, 23, 407–412.(Foundational work on learned helplessness — applicable to shutdown responses.)
Hausberger, M., Roche, H., Henry, S., & Visser, E. K. (2008). A review of the human–horse relationship. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 109(1), 1–24.(Explores how training methods affect equine emotional states.)
Visser, E. K., et al. (2002). Heart rate and behavioural responses during training in young horses. Physiology & Behavior, 76(3), 413–424.(Physiological stress responses during training methods.)
von Borstel, U. U., et al. (2009). Fear reactions in trained and untrained horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 118(3–4), 171–177.(Relates training pressure and stress reactivity.)
Christensen, J. W., Zharkikh, T., Antoine, A., & Malmkvist, J. (2011). Reinforcement methods affect behaviour and stress. Animal, 5(5), 747–755.(Training method impact on welfare.)
International Society for Equitation Science (ISES). (Position statements on humane horse training and learning theory.)(Useful for ethical authority.)
FEI Code of Conduct for the Welfare of the Horse.(For linking politics vs. welfare in competition contexts.)
Comments