Colorado Fisherman Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/04/29/animal-academics-using-the-word-pet-insults-your-pet-er-companion/

Here's a frightening thought: The cat ladies are right. Kitties (and their doggie counterparts) are companions, not pets, and calling them otherwise is just plain offensive.

According to a report published in the Journal of Animal Ethics, using "derogatory" terms such as "critters," "beasts," and — you guessed it — "pets" when referring to animals of any kind can affect the way they are treated.

In other words, a note for animal caretakers (don't even mutter the word "owners" — that's even worse than "pets") everywhere: You're doing it wrong.

We know what you're thinking: What kind of far-out piece of academic research are you alluding to here? But in all seriousness, researchers from the Oxford Center for Animal Ethics, along with the University of Illinois and Penn State University, suggest that using these words to describe animals degrades the relationship that exists between humans and these... friends. (Is that term allowed? We just don't know anymore!). Instead of referring to animals as "wild" and "vermin," which dates back to times when animals were treated unkindly, we should be cultivating a language that shows mutually respectful relationships between humans and the animals that live among us.


"Our existing language about animals is the language of past thought – and the crucial point is that the past is littered with derogatory terminology," the report states. "We shall not be able to think clearly unless we discipline ourselves to use less than partial adjectives in our exploration of animals and our moral relations with them."

So there you have it. Your cat or dog is now your companion, the rats you see on the subway are "free-living" and those pesky pigeons? You know, they're just free-roaming, ready to fly at your face at any moment.

But for what it's worth, we're pretty sure that you dog doesn't mind being called a "pet" just as long as you keep up with the tasty food, belly scratches and long walks around the neighborhood.

I'd like to be my usual self here, and I'm going to connect this story with another one.


Cass Sunstein
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Sunstein#Animal_rights

Some of Sunstein's work has addressed the question of animal rights, as he co-authored a book dealing with the subject, has written papers on it, and was an invited speaker at "FACING ANIMALS," an event at Harvard University described as "a groundbreaking panel on animals in ethics and the law."[18] “Every reasonable person believes in animal rights,” he says, continuing that "we might conclude that certain practices cannot be defended and should not be allowed to continue, if, in practice, mere regulation will inevitably be insufficient—and if, in practice, mere regulation will ensure that the level of animal suffering will remain very high." [19]

Sunstein's views on animal rights generated controversy when Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) blocked his appointment to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs by Obama. Chambliss objected to the introduction of Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, a volume edited by Sunstein and his then-partner Martha Nussbaum. On page 11 of the introduction, during a philosophical discussion about whether animals should be thought of as owned by humans, Sunstein notes that personhood need not be conferred upon an animal in order to grant it various legal protections against abuse or cruelty, even including legal standing for suit. For example, under current law, if someone saw their neighbor beating a dog, they currently cannot sue for animal cruelty because they do not have legal standing to do so. Sunstein suggests that granting standing to animals, actionable by other parties, could decrease animal cruelty by increasing the likelihood that animal abuse will be punished.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,503 Posts
Sunstein is a stupid scab on American soil and needs to be buried with his companions in a shallow grave under the chicken yard like all pets are
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
coloradojaguar said:
Sunstein is a stupid scab on American soil and needs to be buried with his companions in a shallow grave under the chicken yard like all pets are
You must be a racist, because the only reason you don't agree with him is because he isn't the shade of white you'd like him to be :D :D :D :D ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,503 Posts
Mexican Barney Frank said:
coloradojaguar said:
Sunstein is a stupid scab on American soil and needs to be buried with his companions in a shallow grave under the chicken yard like all pets are
You must be a racist, because the only reason you don't agree with him is because he isn't the shade of white you'd like him to be :D :D :D :D ;)
Nope just a well informed Conservative
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
coloradojaguar said:
Mexican Barney Frank said:
coloradojaguar said:
Sunstein is a stupid scab on American soil and needs to be buried with his companions in a shallow grave under the chicken yard like all pets are
You must be a racist, because the only reason you don't agree with him is because he isn't the shade of white you'd like him to be :D :D :D :D ;)
Nope just a well informed Conservative
Just to clarify, I was making a funny :D :D :D
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top