The Evolution of Join Up: Moving Beyond Tradition in Two Parts
Part One:
The Join Up Paradox: When 'Willing' Partnership Isn't So Willing
By Nancy K. Camp
Peggy Cummings has a wonderful way of making us pause and examine the terms we throw around in the horse world. She's constantly sparking new ways of thinking about old concepts. It made me rethink something we assume we know: what we actually mean when we say a horse has "joined up.”
For those unfamiliar with the term, join up represents a psychological shift where the horse decides that being with the human is preferable to being away from them. The term, popularized by renowned horse trainer Monty Roberts, aims to create a willing partnership rather than submission through dominance. But does it really achieve this goal?
Part One:
The Join Up Paradox: When 'Willing' Partnership Isn't So Willing
By Nancy K. Camp
Peggy Cummings has a wonderful way of making us pause and examine the terms we throw around in the horse world. She's constantly sparking new ways of thinking about old concepts. It made me rethink something we assume we know: what we actually mean when we say a horse has "joined up.”
For those unfamiliar with the term, join up represents a psychological shift where the horse decides that being with the human is preferable to being away from them. The term, popularized by renowned horse trainer Monty Roberts, aims to create a willing partnership rather than submission through dominance. But does it really achieve this goal?
The Traditional Framework
The theory behind join up draws from observations of natural herd behavior. Wild horses are social animals with complex hierarchies. Herd leaders—typically alpha mares—employ body language and spatial positioning to direct other horses' movements. According to natural horsemanship theory, horses that challenge leadership or display problematic behaviors may face temporary exclusion from the herd's protection, creating motivation for behavioral change.
Their method of achieving join up relies on a basic principle of horse behavior: horses naturally move away from pressure and find relief when it's released. Join up takes this concept further by using psychological rather than physical pressure, and they begin by controlling the horse's movement through body language and positioning, noting that horses will respond by fleeing, fighting, or finally choosing to submit and join up.
A Critical Gap in Understanding
But here's where things get complicated. Modern animal behavior science identifies stress responses as fight, flight, or freeze—with "fawn" (appeasement behaviors) sometimes added as a fourth option. The freeze response is what happens when an animal feels they can't escape and can't fight—they shut down. This raises a troubling question: how can we tell the difference between a horse that's genuinely choosing to connect and one that's simply frozen in a stress response?
The freeze response manifests as:
Reconsidering "Willing Submission"
When you compare these freeze behaviors to what we celebrate in traditional join up, the overlap is unsettling. Given these characteristics, we must question whether traditional interpretations of "willing submission" or "choosing to join" are accurate. Consider these possibilities:
These distinctions matter profoundly. Horses in freeze mode may appear "well-trained" but lack the genuine engagement that characterizes true partnership. Without this awareness, we risk building relationships on compliance rather than genuine connection—achieving the appearance of join up while missing its essence entirely.
Genuine "joining" occurs when horses exist in a calm, curious state—the same emotional condition necessary for any authentic learning. This reframing opens doors to exploring methods that prioritize the horse's emotional well-being and genuine choice rather than interpreting compliance as connection.
The Critical Difference: Submission vs. Connection
Contemporary equine behaviorists and trauma-informed trainers increasingly recognize that apparent "submission" often masks a freeze response. Authentic connection emerges when horses have choices, not when someone systematically eliminates their options until compliance becomes their only viable strategy.
Think about it this way: true partnership requires both parties to have the freedom to say no. When we remove that freedom—even gently—we're not creating connection; we're manufacturing compliance.
The Path Forward
How do we move forward with this understanding? It's important to note that the effectiveness of any training method depends on the trainer's skill and sensitivity in recognizing the subtle differences between communication and stress-inducing pressure. Many accomplished natural horsemanship practitioners develop this discernment through years of experience and observation. However, this level of nuanced awareness can be challenging to teach and learn, which may explain why results vary so widely among practitioners.
Understanding traditional frameworks provides valuable context for exploring evolved approaches to join up. While the fundamental goal of creating willing partnership remains worthy, ongoing discussions about the most effective and ethical methods continue to advance our understanding.
The beauty of horsemanship lies in its continuous evolution as we deepen our knowledge of equine psychology, learning theory, and interspecies communication. The traditional join up method represents one important chapter in this ongoing story of human-horse partnership—but it need not be the final word.
Next month’s post will share an abundance of information about training your eye to spot signs of connection and when it is not happening. And, even more exciting, we will delve into an alternative process of Matching Steps to psychologically connect with our horses, unlocking a new level of understanding and partnership.
Join the conversation! Comment below.
The theory behind join up draws from observations of natural herd behavior. Wild horses are social animals with complex hierarchies. Herd leaders—typically alpha mares—employ body language and spatial positioning to direct other horses' movements. According to natural horsemanship theory, horses that challenge leadership or display problematic behaviors may face temporary exclusion from the herd's protection, creating motivation for behavioral change.
Their method of achieving join up relies on a basic principle of horse behavior: horses naturally move away from pressure and find relief when it's released. Join up takes this concept further by using psychological rather than physical pressure, and they begin by controlling the horse's movement through body language and positioning, noting that horses will respond by fleeing, fighting, or finally choosing to submit and join up.
A Critical Gap in Understanding
But here's where things get complicated. Modern animal behavior science identifies stress responses as fight, flight, or freeze—with "fawn" (appeasement behaviors) sometimes added as a fourth option. The freeze response is what happens when an animal feels they can't escape and can't fight—they shut down. This raises a troubling question: how can we tell the difference between a horse that's genuinely choosing to connect and one that's simply frozen in a stress response?
The freeze response manifests as:
- Behavioral shutdown: The horse becomes very still, almost statue-like
- Hypervigilance: Alert but immobile, often with tense muscles
- Learned helplessness: The horse stops trying to escape or resist
- Dissociation: Mentally "checking out" while remaining physically present
Reconsidering "Willing Submission"
When you compare these freeze behaviors to what we celebrate in traditional join up, the overlap is unsettling. Given these characteristics, we must question whether traditional interpretations of "willing submission" or "choosing to join" are accurate. Consider these possibilities:
- A horse stopping in a round pen might be experiencing a freeze response rather than "deciding to negotiate."
- The coveted "licking and chewing" behavior might show stress processing rather than relaxation.
- Approach and following behaviors could signal appeasement instead of genuine connection.
- Compliance might reflect learned helplessness rather than an authentic partnership.
These distinctions matter profoundly. Horses in freeze mode may appear "well-trained" but lack the genuine engagement that characterizes true partnership. Without this awareness, we risk building relationships on compliance rather than genuine connection—achieving the appearance of join up while missing its essence entirely.
Genuine "joining" occurs when horses exist in a calm, curious state—the same emotional condition necessary for any authentic learning. This reframing opens doors to exploring methods that prioritize the horse's emotional well-being and genuine choice rather than interpreting compliance as connection.
The Critical Difference: Submission vs. Connection
Contemporary equine behaviorists and trauma-informed trainers increasingly recognize that apparent "submission" often masks a freeze response. Authentic connection emerges when horses have choices, not when someone systematically eliminates their options until compliance becomes their only viable strategy.
Think about it this way: true partnership requires both parties to have the freedom to say no. When we remove that freedom—even gently—we're not creating connection; we're manufacturing compliance.
The Path Forward
How do we move forward with this understanding? It's important to note that the effectiveness of any training method depends on the trainer's skill and sensitivity in recognizing the subtle differences between communication and stress-inducing pressure. Many accomplished natural horsemanship practitioners develop this discernment through years of experience and observation. However, this level of nuanced awareness can be challenging to teach and learn, which may explain why results vary so widely among practitioners.
Understanding traditional frameworks provides valuable context for exploring evolved approaches to join up. While the fundamental goal of creating willing partnership remains worthy, ongoing discussions about the most effective and ethical methods continue to advance our understanding.
The beauty of horsemanship lies in its continuous evolution as we deepen our knowledge of equine psychology, learning theory, and interspecies communication. The traditional join up method represents one important chapter in this ongoing story of human-horse partnership—but it need not be the final word.
Next month’s post will share an abundance of information about training your eye to spot signs of connection and when it is not happening. And, even more exciting, we will delve into an alternative process of Matching Steps to psychologically connect with our horses, unlocking a new level of understanding and partnership.
Join the conversation! Comment below.
RSS Feed