TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › The Cat Lounge › "Pets" or "Companion Animals"?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Pets" or "Companion Animals"?

post #1 of 18
5/8/11 at 7:11am
Thread Starter 
I was reading an article in Newsday this morning.

It stated that we should not call our pets "pets" anymore.. it's "companion animals"

and we are no longer "owners".. we are "human caregivers".

And we should refrain from using "beast", "Critters", and "wild animals". We should also refrain from using phrases such as "drunk as a skunk" and "eat like a pig".

the journalist says these words and phrases are derogatory in the sense it belittles them and our relations to them.

I am personally not sure what to make of this. I already call Monet my companion, not a pet. but I think this article itself is a bit far-fetched. what do you guys think?

I'd post this in the IMO thread, but I don't have access to that yet.
Reply
post #2 of 18
5/8/11 at 7:29am
I think the journalist has a kind attitude and respect for animals and appreciate his/her opinion, but I don't think it matters what we call them. I think it matters that we love them and care for them.

Oh, I call mine "honey kitty" and "snookims."
Reply
post #3 of 18
5/8/11 at 8:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockcat View Post
Oh, I call mine "honey kitty" and "snookims."
by my side KING MILKY is he!......need to say anymore?.......
Reply
post #4 of 18
5/8/11 at 8:55am
What we call them doesn't impact how families care for them. In a poll last year, 50% of people with cats felt they're as much a part of the family as any human member is.

The "lexicon" discussions/arguments/whatever you want to call them usually originate from animal rights organizations (like PETA). It only makes a difference when certain terms get written into LAWS. And legally the difference between an "owner" and a "care giver" is an important one, as stealing someone's possession can be prosecuted - but as a care giver, you can be declared incompentent.

So call me old fashioned or politically incorrect, but I own my pets, and they're my companions. I also consider them and treat them like my children.
Reply
post #5 of 18
5/8/11 at 9:35am
My 2 are my 4-footed daughters! Now if I could only claim them on my taxes!
Reply
post #6 of 18
5/8/11 at 9:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catkiki View Post
Now if I could only claim them on my taxes!

I asked my tax preparer one year if I could claim my cats as dependants: he just looked at me as if I was nuts.

If the writer of that article ever heard what I call my furkids when I'm ticked off at them, he/she would probably have a conniption.

Seriously, I don't think it matters how you refer to the furkids. What matters is how you treat them.
Reply
post #7 of 18
5/8/11 at 9:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittKatt View Post
I don't think it matters how you refer to the furkids. What matters is how you treat them.

I agree 100 percent. From the beginning I've always said I'm the 'owner'

Quote:
Originally Posted by KittKatt View Post

I asked my tax preparer one year if I could claim my cats as dependants: he just looked at me as if I was nuts.
Well it costs nothing to ask, so might as well try right?
Reply
post #8 of 18
5/8/11 at 10:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittKatt View Post

I asked my tax preparer one year if I could claim my cats as dependants: he just looked at me as if I was nuts.

If the writer of that article ever heard what I call my furkids when I'm ticked off at them, he/she would probably have a conniption.

Seriously, I don't think it matters how you refer to the furkids. What matters is how you treat them.
I needed that today!!!!!!!!!! You made me laugh . Claim them as dependent's, let's see, that is $2,400 per cat (is that the going rate?) Wow that would be a miracle.

On the subject, I still call my pets "pets". Although Larry says, Perkins and Perla are not pets, because they don't like to be pet !! And I guess I still consider myself an "owner", but really and truly, WHO OWNS WHO HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think my cats own me, that's for sure
Reply
post #9 of 18
5/8/11 at 10:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feralvr View Post
I needed that today!!!!!!!!!! You made me laugh . Claim them as dependent's, let's see, that is $2,400 per cat (is that the going rate?) Wow that would be a miracle.
I keep telling Randall that we'd be rich by now if we could claim the furkids as dependents. Can you imagine how much you'd get back for eleven cats? I'd be able to move to a tropical island and drink margaritas in the beach all day long!

Quote:
but really and truly, WHO OWNS WHO HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think my cats own me, that's for sure

You got that right!! Just who bosses whom around? I don't see any of my cats serving me fancy meals, scrubbing out my toilet, or catering to my every whim!
Reply
post #10 of 18
5/8/11 at 11:24am
True love and respect isn't in the name given to them, calling them pets or compaions, it is in the daily care given to them over their lifetime. Some get it, some don't, despite most everyone claiming to "love their pets so much".
Reply
post #11 of 18
5/8/11 at 12:02pm
I believe the author is onto something, but doesn't quite take it far enough.

IMO they should be referred to not as "pets" but as "masters or furlords", and we are not "owners" but "field-hands or concierge" to more properly reflect the working relationship.
Reply
post #12 of 18
5/8/11 at 12:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco View Post
I was reading an article in Newsday this morning.

It stated that we should not call our pets "pets" anymore.. it's "companion animals"

and we are no longer "owners".. we are "human caregivers".
More semantic games here but I think the phrase they have coined is "human carers" . Even more unwieldy and sterile.

Which is sad because when PETA argues for these silly euphemisms it does nothing for the people who really need to hear it and undermines the credibility among animal lovers of the hugely worthwhile campaigns that they do carry out (except being against TNR - that I don't agree with).
Reply
post #13 of 18
5/8/11 at 12:30pm
Off hand I don't really remember how I typically refer to my kitties.

I know I've used terms such as:

cats
pets
kids
babies

Either way no matter what I use, they are members of my family...my kids. I even tell my brother that he is their uncle! He thinks I'm crazy. And I am. I'm a lady crazy about cats, so I am a "crazy cat lady!"
Reply
post #14 of 18
5/8/11 at 12:51pm
I think the writer of the article has too much time on hs hands. The problem with his vision is that not all dogs, cats, ferrets, etc are pets, some actually work for a living, and allow the owner/caregiver to claim food, lodging, vet expenses on tax forms, either as an individual or a company. I can even claim a portion of the cat food I buy on taxes as the barn cats are working cats, as can most farmers; also included in the tax write-offs is food for livestock guardian dogs, farm dogs in general (provided you have a real farm that is your livelihood, not some acreage that you lovingly refer to as the farm). I also, at times, have been able to claim horse feed and equipment as said horses were making money.

People like the reporter, while probably nice, well-intentioned persons , are looking with tunnel vision at one aspect of cats and dogs, etc. and not at the whole picture.
Reply
post #15 of 18
5/11/11 at 2:08pm
http://blogs.discovery.com/daily_tre...pet-label.html


This story was also on the news the other night. I think its absolutely ridiculous...I could see it if the animals understood the difference between "pet" and "human companion" but they don't. So how is it demeaning or derogatory?
No matter what I refer to the animals I look after as, I still love and care for them the same.

How do they arrive at such conclusions anyway? Did they take a survey on a large group of animals, that the public doesn't know about, that can talk? Did they put a bunch of animals in a room, call them "pets" vs "companions" and note their reactions?

Animal control stated on the news they will no longer be using the term pets. So people are taking this seriously. Its so strange.
Reply
post #16 of 18
5/11/11 at 2:16pm
Gee, I don't use either one. I call mine either "the tribe" or "the gang".
Reply
post #17 of 18
5/11/11 at 2:34pm
A rose by any other name...

It doesn't matter what name you give a thing, only if the name has a positive or negative connotation, and that's all up to how people treat it. Besides, I'm pretty sure I use the term "fluffbutt" to describe my cats more than "pet".

Pretty soon these PC guys will demand I call my domestic cats "domestic partners".
Reply
post #18 of 18
5/11/11 at 7:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDG View Post
What we call them doesn't impact how families care for them. In a poll last year, 50% of people with cats felt they're as much a part of the family as any human member is.

The "lexicon" discussions/arguments/whatever you want to call them usually originate from animal rights organizations (like PETA). It only makes a difference when certain terms get written into LAWS. And legally the difference between an "owner" and a "care giver" is an important one, as stealing someone's possession can be prosecuted - but as a care giver, you can be declared incompentent.

So call me old fashioned or politically incorrect, but I own my pets, and they're my companions. I also consider them and treat them like my children.
My response to this thread in the Cat Lounge "Pets" or companion animals?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Cat Lounge
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › The Cat Lounge › "Pets" or "Companion Animals"?