It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Calling Animals 'Pets' Deemed 'Insulting'

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:35 AM
link   
Animal activist losers with way too much time on their hands.

web.orange.co.uk...

Pet owners should stop calling their animals "pets" because it's insulting, leading academics claim.

Domestic dogs, cats, and other creatures should instead be called "companion animals" while owners should be known as "human carers", they say.

The call comes from the Journal of Animal Ethics, a new academic publication, edited by the Rev Professor Andrew Linzey, director of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics.

In its first editorial, the journal also condemns the use of terms such as "critters" and "beasts", and even "wildlife" because it suggests "uncivilised".

It argues that "derogatory" language about animals can affect the way that they are treated.

"Despite its prevalence, 'pets' is surely a derogatory term both of the animals concerned and their human carers," the editorial claims.

"Again the word 'owners', whilst technically correct in law, harks back to a previous age when animals were regarded as just that: property, machines or things to use without moral constraint."

It goes on: "We invite authors to use the words 'free-living', 'free-ranging' or 'free-roaming' rather than 'wild animals'.

"For most, 'wildness' is synonymous with uncivilised, unrestrained, barbarous existence. There is an obvious prejudgment here that should be avoided."

Prof Linzey also hopes to see phrases such as "sly as a fox", "eat like a pig" or "drunk as a skunk" stamped out.



That dog are cat isn't your pet it's your companion. (sounds the sick kind of kinky)

So does that make a Penthouse Pet really become a Penthouse Companion.

Plus saying animals are civilised is ridiculous.

www.thefreedictionary.com...

Adj. 1. civilised - having a high state of culture and development both social and technological; "terrorist acts that shocked the civilized world"
civilized
educated - possessing an education (especially having more than average knowledge)
refined - (used of persons and their behavior) cultivated and genteel; "she was delicate and refined and unused to hardship"; "refined people with refined taste"
2. civilised - marked by refinement in taste and manners; "cultivated speech"; "cultured Bostonians"; "cultured tastes"; "a genteel old lady"; "polite society"
cultured, genteel, polite, civilized, cultivated
refined - (used of persons and their behavior) cultivated and genteel; "she was delicate and refined and unused to hardship"; "refined people with refined taste"


Can't say Fido liking his balls or Fluffy coughing up fur balls is "having a high state of culture and development".

Also wild animals is wrong, well they aren't bloody tame are they.

What a bunch of SMEG HEADS.




posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:42 AM
link   
reply to post by acrux
 





companion animals




Thanks for the read..



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:44 AM
link   
reply to post by acrux
 


As an animal lover (no, not in that way
) I can see what they're trying to say. However I think they are overreactive and are assuming everyone who uses the word "pet" is implying a negative connotation to the word. It seems they, the activists, are suggesting that "pet" means something that you dominate, own, control and allow no free will unto it.

I certainly don't. I might say that my dog is my "pet", I do not regard him as any less important than any human. While I know my dog is only "a dog" - he is far more than a "pet" to me and while I may care for many animals over my life, I will never think I "own" them. I merely help take care of them while they live in "my" non-animal world.

But you're right tho, OP. I think it's a bit too far and they have a long uphill struggle in getting the population of animal owners (is that pc?) to change their use of the word "pet".



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:49 AM
link   
Oh for #'s sake!

Those animals love us - they don't care what they are called - they only care for kindness and food.

Please tell me these people are not paid for that dumb research!



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:49 AM
link   
I too love animals but I don't think pet is derogatory or demeaning. I treat my dog and cat better than a human being and to be honest refer to them by their name but if someone said "do you have any pets?", I wouldn't shout "Its companion animal you facsist!"

Besides, I know that animals can understand us to some extent but I'm sure its not as complex as thinking about the political correctness of words.

Its is a nice thought to have people think of animals on the same level as humans but I don't think changing a word will have much affect, there are a lot of animal abusers out there that need sorting out first.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:51 AM
link   
I'd really like to delve into this on a much deeper intellectual and emotional level right now but I really can't because I have to GO FEED MY PET! Since I buy it food, and clean up it's mess and keep a roof over it's head, and take it to the Vet, and scratch it behind it's ears RIGHT NOW because that's what it wants RIGHT NOW, then I'll call it my "pet" or anything I damn well please! And you know what? I don't think she minds one little bit! and if she's that much of an ingreat then she can go back to living on the street!



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Oh for crying out loud! I have several pets. I love them and care about them but they are pets. They are a part
of my family, but they are pets. PETS.

Besides, I just asked all my pets if they found the word PETS derogatory and not a single one of them said yes. They never even lifted an eyebrow



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Seems silly, but I can see where they're coming from with this. It's not going to effect the present generation, other than attracting derision, but as the new terminology becomes common usage new generations may see animals in a more compassionate way.

It's not about the animals feelings lol, but how they're treated.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:57 AM
link   
alot of companies and charities would have to change their titles, and the dictionary definition too lol how ridiculous.
Up north (england, not sure which area) people call you 'pet' "alright pet?" it's friendly/showing affection.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by acrux

In its first editorial, the journal also condemns the use of terms such as "critters" and "beasts", and even "wildlife" because it suggests "uncivilised".


And yet they have no problem with calling a female dog a bitch?

That word is derogatory when used towards a woman, and whenever I hear someone call their dog that,
it just bugs me, for some reason.


edit on 28-4-2011 by virraszto because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by virraszto
 
Asked your pets.

Thanks for the laugh.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyTrick
 


I think the term 'pet', as an expression of affection, came before its use as a term for companion animal.

Either that, or people think other people are their animals kept for amusement lol...


(pĕt)

1. An animal kept for amusement or companionship.
2. An object of the affections.
3. A person especially loved or indulged; a favorite: the teacher's pet.

www.answers.com...



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by virraszto

Originally posted by acrux



And yet they have no problem with calling a female dog a bitch?

That word is derogatory when used towards a woman, and whenever I hear someone call their dog that,
it just bugs me, for some reason.


edit on 28-4-2011 by virraszto because: (no reason given)


Lol i always feel odd about people calling dog's bitches its just not right. Makes me feel uncomfortable.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 05:10 AM
link   
Political correctness gone mad(der) lol.. but that said, i do agree really.. i never have liked the term pets for my beloved friends..i hold far more respect for them than most humans i have met in my life!
Thanks for sharing this OP, an artical that makes people think a bit about something they normally dont



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by acrux
Animal activist losers...
What a bunch of SMEG HEADS.



To be fair to all the other activists, this is really the idea of one individual, Andrew Linzey.
AW's Wikipedia Page

A few years ago he started an organisation that he called the
Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics

Doing a search, it seems that although this organisation (that only now managed to get a first journal printed) has more than one member, its really Andrew that is the driving force behind it.
So, now, worldwide condemmnation for one guy's mostly harmless ideas. Heaven knows what newspapers would be like if they printed the ideas 'published online' by some of the people here on ATS.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 05:23 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 
Point taken



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by acrux
 


Well I don't like to be politically correct and I don't think I will be changing what I call my dog. I say "This is my dog Pee Wee. No we didn't name him but the name suits him" hehehe. We paid a lot of money for him I will call him what I want! We take very good care of him, he is 9lbs and 3 oz. He is an American Hairless Terrier and we all love him. We've had him or 5 years now. Yes he has no hair due to the fact that my son has allergies. He's a cute little dude.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 05:29 AM
link   
I dont think pets is insulting in any way, it is a nice word. But he has a point about human carers vs. owners, IMHO. Just as you care about your children, but you do not own them, the relationship with animals should be similar, they are living beings, too.



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 05:33 AM
link   
In my hometown going back 20 years, we had the first lot of African immigrants/refugees move into our small town. They could not understand the concept of a pet. Animals were for food or profit only, not something to fuss over or pamper.
edit on 28-4-2011 by acrux because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2011 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Now I know why my pet turtle is always pissed off.
Thanks for the hilarious read.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join