Tch. No. Bread will be 'Raw toast'.

whoa you should be careful saying the word bread man.

and that's just stupid. a pet is a pet. a "human caregiver" to me sounds like someone who works at a retirement home or a rehab center

Sometimes I wonder if progress into the world is really progress, or taking a step back.

By the way, if someone says, "YOU CAN"T USE THAT WORK!" I'll smack them int he face and tell them to shove it.

god damn that article is utter bullshit.

. . . Companion Animal makes yot sound like you fuck the poor thing when you go home.
I'ma say that's demeaning to me!

Dumb was already changed to "mute".

Calling people fat/obese will be next on the list.

I may not be Australian, but I say, fuck what they say, we're not communists! We can say and do what we like!

That's one of the most ridiculous articles I've read, seriously that's just dumb as hell! xp

And here I thought the term was going to be "Fur person". That's just a new level of idiocy and really shows we as a race are just plain stupid. That and the fight over getting people to use those energy efficient light bulbs being a new way to take away our freedoms.

It's not a nuclear apocalypse we're afraid of, it's a redefinition armageddon.

It's 1984 all over again via "Newspeak"!..soon we won't be able to say "Free" as in "socially or politically free"..only as is "the dog is free of lice"..and that's Doubleplusungood!!!

It must be fun to pretend that will effect anything in any productive way. I can tell my cat gets totally peeved at being called a 'pussy' by the way she stares at me from the window.

Or maybe its cause I'm flailing my arms like an idiot...who knows?

I totally agree with ya, thats so stupid.

Stupidity, the silently loud killer.

I agree with the banning retard thing. But this is insane the pets dont give two shits about anything as long as their fed.

Look... the pure and simple fact of the thing is, is that no one has the right to ban a word, even if that word is vile, offensive, and horrible, because the minute someone has that kind of authority against the vilest of words, thats the same minute they can tell us what to say about anything. People shouldn't saycertain things that hurt people's feelings, but they do anyway. Thats like saying murder is illegal, so no one will ever do it. Banning the word pet is just stupid on the face of it because animals don't understand words, so they cannot be demeaned by them. If you say to a dog "You're ugly!" ini a loving tone, it will understand the love, and will become affectionate, simple as that. Dogs and cats and all our pets just wnat love, so lets drop the bullsh*t and just do what's right rather than forcing people to think of doing stupid things like banning words.

Nobody is taking it seriously - the only place you'll ever hear pets referred to as companion animals is in Animal Welfare, Captivity, Bioethics, Animal Ethics and Moral Philosophy in the context of debate on how animals should be treated. You can't hurt an animal by talking about them like this because they don't know what words mean unless they're conditioned to understand a given definition of it - Sit, Roll Over, Bad Dog, etc. Pet denotes animal as property but also as responsibility. It is a word ingrained into the language and it has no negative connotations. If the word were Slave-Animal or Serf, it would have different connotations. The word can't be taken away.

This isn't news, I'm afraid - this is a couple of guys crowing for attention for a cause that makes no sense and will never achieve anything. Its the kind of 'report' thats meant to get you seething with rage over breakfast in the morning - this is strictly class 3: Political Correctness Gone Mad. It'll never mean anything. I'm glad to see at least one person above agreed.

Also what the heck, man? You disagree with "dog shelter"? Dog Pounds DO have negative connotations thanks to, I don't know, an awful lot of cartoons. You tell someone you work at the Pound, they're not going to think "That guy likes animals and he's working in animal welfare to ease their lot.". They're going to think of the stereotype - a burly, animal-hating Irish Cop type with a net who throws animals into the back of a van and then into jail before they can be euthani- oh wait. Sorry, would we rather keep "destroyed" over "euthanized"? This language doesn't effect ANIMALS it effects US. Would you rather a humanitarian Refugee Camp got called a Concentration Camp?

Actually, I'm looking as this as "Oh dear god this is looking to set a precedent" sort of manner. If they can ban a word as small and as innocent as "pet", what other words will they ban? If this is a trend along the politically correctness rope, stuff like newspapers won't use the word "pet" or even allow it in classified ads, for example.

I am aware that words have negative connotations; hell even I don't like using some words. Of course I don't like them saying "destroy" dogs and cats. I have a right not to use them, and I also have the right to use some four letter words.

I think you should mention that in the journal then. Some people in the comments are taking it in the wrong context. (Some of them haven't even read the article, I bet.)

"This language doesn't effect ANIMALS it effects US"

The word is 'affect' not 'effect' :p

Who gives a shit, they've become entirely synonymous \o/

if you're uneducated sure, I can see how you would think that.

I am educated - I have a life sciences degree and we were taught to use the terms synonymously because it doesn't matter all that much. Starting sentences with capital letters was more of a big deal.

That is just bang out of order.

o look, cannon fodder for the annoying people, first person who goes "thats a bad word *snicker annoyingly*" gets a bat to the head, plus, what is so bad about pet, like Samael said, its ingrained in our society and there IS no bad connotations

If you take a bunny as a companion animal, if the fact that they can be logically impared ends it early you can just put it on some processed wheat product.

just wait until they ban the word "furry"

Oh calm yourself down Wontoon. You are starting to get all worked up. I wouldn't worry about it too much. You will always be everyone's favorite pet no matter what.

Oh brother....things like that are way too far..

The article said "consider" and you immediately wade in claiming "ban"

You're not being objective at all about the article and completely missed the point of it.

...

They pissed me off whe they banned death.

wow something is wrong with the american government? i live in uk so i'm not affected. 'yet'

The next dog on the street I see I'm going to call a pet.

I honestly can't believe that someone got offended for an animal. I mean, I understand that animals have emotions, but generally people aren't spitting out the word pet like bad medicine when they say it. I can't remember the last time I heard it used in a derogatory manner. Oh wait, yes I do. NEVER.

This is why I hate politics and a great deal of social bullshit.

Hint: the article never said to ban the word pet. Try reading it next time. It's about shifting attitudes away from treating pets as property and objects and towards them being treated better.

Yes, that's what I said when I used the word "property" since it's something that is owned. :)

I think you're exaggerating a bit too much. Implications don't necessarily lead to statements no matter how much it whispers "look over there."

Still, as someone working on an English Major, I can see hwo this is silly. It may be important to change the wording of a bill in order to prevent a negative light to be shined upon animal welfare, but the usage of the rejected words in the future should be a matter of context. Yes, there are certain words that imply a tone such as the dinstinction between "odor" and "aroma," but context is what is set in stone rather than a first impression of a skim.

Then again, what person doesn't take things too literially in wording these days? Word choice is a dying art.

If that actually happens, Then political correctness will destroy us all. The USA is ran by the people, for the people.

If we let political correctness destroy our spines, then Marxists will take over. We do have the first amendment after all... and the second if the Marxists shows up.

the next step will be calling our tvs game consoles and any other electronic stuff as personal electronic room enhancers or art as colored soul capturings