Our Choice of Words Matters
Opinion
When advocates refer to an animal as “it” instead of “he” or “she,” we reinforce the perception that animals are objects, not living beings. Why do we do that? Bad habit? Because we don’t know the sex? Because that’s what the media does?
How can we expect others to regard an animal as “someone” (who deserves to be treated kindly) as opposed to “something” (which can be discarded) when we ourselves describe animals as inanimate objects?
The burden is on us to use every opportunity we can find in our daily lives to use “he” or “she” or “him” or her” when referring to an animal. Let’s lead by example.
We definitely should refer to the animal as “he” or “she”. If you don’t know the animal’s gender, You could say “he or she”.
I met a woman in Pathmark a while back. She said that instead of marking a package as “chicken”, or “beef”, etc. they should mark the package – “a chicken” or “a cow”.
We need to also move away for using the word “animal.” Humans are animals, too, so we should be using “human” and “non-human.”
Thank you for bringing attention to the misuse of the term “euthanasia,” which has become a synonym for killing animals by whatever means. Many people in the animal advocacy movement (and elsewhere) are not aware that the term euthanasia means “good death,” and not just “death” or “killing.” Thus we often here people say that an animal was “humanely euthanized.” I trace the degradation of the term euthanasia to the animal “production” veterinary/animal sciences/laboratory industrial complex, which routinely calls all kinds of horrible methods of killing institutionalized animals “euthanasia.”
Words and language matter!!! Thank you, Donny, for bringing this to the attention of the subscribers/readers of Their Turn! It is so important because every word is attached to a mental image and carries a subliminal message. Just yesterday something along these same lines was sent out to animal activists! Looks like synchronicity! Great minds think alike!
“Those of us who have devoted our lives to advocating for animals do so because we have long recognized their sentience and vulnerability; their intelligence, capacity for love and devotion; and their need for protection from those who would use, abuse and exploit them. We live in a greedy, narcissistic society that has “commodified” living beings, who are capable of suffering, feeling pain and a broad range of emotions, so that people can continue to exploit and kill them, whether for profit or convenience. They are worthy individuals in their own right, deserving of dignity, respect and admiration for their natural beauty and innate abilities, which in so many instances, surpass our own. One day, in a more evolved world, society will view our present-day treatment of animals in the same way we now view human sacrifice, slavery, the abuse of children and the elderly……with disgust and disbelief!
It’s time to tell it like it is!
For starters, as people who care about animals, we should no longer use the language of the oppressors and exploiters by referring to a dog, a cat, any animal, as “it” or “that” (instead of “who”), and especially when we know HE is a male, that SHE is a female; it only serves to reinforce the concept of animals as “things”. It’s time for the concept of animals as “inanimate property” to be swept into the dustbin of history! And Harvard attorney/author/activist of the Non-Human Rights Project, Steven Wise, is pressing this case for chimpanzees (as well as other primates, elephants, dolphins etc) in court, as we speak.
Quoting activist Sue Verner we should also:
“1. Stop referring to animal control facilities as “shelters.” A “shelter” is what the American Red Cross sets up after a natural disaster. It is a place where one can find safe refuge for as long as it takes to find a more permanent place to be. “Animal control facilities,” on the other hand, are places where animals are taken to be killed. Most government-run agencies that handle animals are, in fact, animal control facilities and should be referred to as such. Calling them “shelters” leads people to believe that they are safe places for animals.
2. Stop referring to killing in animal control facilities (ACFs) as “euthanasia.” “Euthanasia” is the merciful killing of an animal (or person) who is suffering and who has no hope of survival. What happens in ACFs is killing. Almost every single animal killed in an ACF was perfectly healthy and adoptable before he/she was killed. Using the term “euthanasia” leads people to believe that it is humane and “the best we could do.” This is patently untrue.
3. Teach people to realize that ACF workers are employed for the sole reason to control animals – hence, the name of the facility. The government that runs each ACF wants animals controlled: off other people’s property, not posing any type of threat (disease, injury, etc.) to anyone, etc. Those workers are there to enforce the local laws; it is not necessarily their mission to save animal lives.
4. We who know what really goes on must stop using language that allows the general public to believe that animal control workers are all kind-hearted people who work at ACF so they can save the doggies and the kitties. Some are; most are not. Until an ACF has a director whose personal mission in life is to save lives, an ACF will remain an ACF. The unsuspecting public needs to know this.
If you aren’t already familiar with the No-Kill Revolution, please investigate this site: http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/ ”
It’s time to tell it like it is!