The term 'pets' to describe animals is insulting, according to academics editing the new Journal of Animal Ethics (I'm not sure if it is the animals themselves which feel insulted). The journal also objects to the terms wildlife, critters and beasts and does not like the humans who look after animals being called owners - it would prefer the term human carers. Instead, pets should be called companion animals, and animals in the wild should be called free-living, free-ranging or free-roaming because of the negative connotations of the word 'wild', which evokes images of uncivilised barbarity.
According to the academics, our terms for animals colours our judgement towards them and can affect the way we treat them. In addition, they do not like idioms in the language which make disparaging references to animals, such as 'as sly as a fox' or 'as drunk as a skunk'.
Here's one of the articles on the subject.
Wow! Just when you think you'd heard it all from the realm of political correctness.
No one has loved their animals more than I. One literally saved my life, but this is above and beyond. For me, "pet" expresses emotion for the animal;
"companion animal" does not.
I cannot help but wonder how many taxpayer Pounds and Dollars have been spent by Oxford and Illinois on this.
Still - an interesting post. Thanks.
Posted by: John | April 28, 2011 at 10:52 PM
Hi Susan,
There's a conversation in the animation film Rio (2011) between two blue macaws Blu and Jewel: Blu has grown up with humans, Jewel is a wi...er, free-roaming bird. Jewel calls Blue a "pet" and Blu swells with indignation - he's a "companion", he says.
It's weird in real life but it did make sense in that film!
Posted by: Shuchi | April 29, 2011 at 03:10 PM
Susan:
This falls under the category of "too, too precious!" Methinks these "academics" need to find real work, so that they can stop looking at their navels.
Posted by: marc leavitt | April 29, 2011 at 03:18 PM
My personal reaction is that these folks are crazy as loons and blind as bats. They make me mad as a hornet.
Posted by: R.M. Peoples | April 29, 2011 at 07:23 PM
Thank you all for your comments. Yes, I agree with you re preciousness, political correctness and craziness. Shuchi, thanks for the info about the new film. I wonder which came first - the film, or the Journal of Animal Ethics!
Posted by: Virtual Linguist | April 29, 2011 at 08:00 PM
Ok, here we go.
Dear animal activists,
My dog is a PET. P. E. T. Say it slowly with me. Pet. Ok, I'm looking at my dog and I just called her a pet. She's just panting happily and putting her head on my lap. They. Do. Not. Care. Whoever thought this up sincerely needs to get a life.
Ok, one more time for your benefit, PET.
Get over yourselves, this has got to be one of the most unnecessary and, for serious lack of a better word, stupid. Or, for you, unintelligent. Or would you prefer idiotic? Retarded? Whichever you like. You do NOT have the right to stop me from saying a three letter word. Get over yourself.
Sincerely... No, you don't even deserve that.
Posted by: Felipe Apolo | May 11, 2011 at 11:33 PM
Thanks for your comment, Felipe. I think most people would agree with you.
Posted by: Virtual Linguist | May 12, 2011 at 05:48 AM