draggonlaady: (Default)
[personal profile] draggonlaady
The editors of Journal of Animal Ethics would like you to know that “despite its prevalence, ‘pets’ is surely a derogatory term both of the animals concerned and their human carers.”

The highlight of the article, as far as I'm concerned: “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.”

Prejudgment? I suppose so, but it's an accurate judgment. Anybody who thinks that wild animals (yeah, I said it!) are civilized, restrained, courteous, and kind (or whatever the opposite of barbarous is) has obviously never seen a wild animal. How much kindness does the squirrel expect from the owl? How restrained do you think a moose typically is? For frack's sake, why don't these people go do something useful, like volunteer at a wildlife rescue and SEE some of the damn things, and maybe help them in a real, tangible way instead of hiding out in an ivory tower telling us to re-arrange our vocabulary?
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

draggonlaady: (Default)
draggonlaady

April 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
91011 12131415
1617181920 2122
23242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 8th, 2025 05:35 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios