On Being a “Good Dog”: Moral Expectations and the Human Gaze

Abstract

Dogs are undoubtedly loved, but they are also judged and morally evaluated in ways that often reflect human expectations more than canine needs. This study explores how cultural narratives and anthropocentric moral frameworks shape perceptions of canine behavior. Drawing on qualitative interviews with dog caregivers, it examines how obedience, loyalty, and disobedience are interpreted through human-centered moral lenses. Participants often ascribed intentions such as guilt or betrayal to their dogs, particularly when behavior deviated from expected norms. These interpretations legitimized corrective responses and reinforced training ideologies grounded in control. Yet participants also expressed deep emotional bonds with their dogs, revealing tension between care and coercion. Taking a critical perspective on the moral categorization of nonhuman animals, this study challenges normative constructions of “good dogs” and calls for a reevaluation of how moral expectations shape human-dog relationships. It advocates for a relational, dog-centered ethic that recognizes canine subjectivity and emotional agency.