What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

PETA's Suggestion For Language - Your Take? (1 Viewer)

What's your take?

  • Completely Agree With This

    Votes: 3 3.7%
  • Mostly Agree With This

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • On The Fence

    Votes: 4 4.9%
  • Mostly Disagree With This

    Votes: 7 8.6%
  • Completely Disagree With This

    Votes: 67 82.7%

  • Total voters
    81

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
See PETAs suggestions here.

Words matter, and as our understanding of social justice evolves, our language evolves along with it. Here’s how to remove speciesism from your daily conversations.
Assuming this is not a joke or publicity stunt, what's your take on this?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does something happen to the actual test tube when you're using it for testing? 

Why would I feed a fed horse? Its already eaten, do they want it to get fat and suffer from effects of obesity? 

These people are painfully stupid. 

 
How about There's more than one way to skin a cat?  That always seemed like a really cruel expression.  And I don't like cats. 

Assuming the twitter link is what the OP posted.  A lot of sites are blocked from me at work.

 
The comments are amazing, as one would expect.

First response is a zoomed in picture of a plate full of steak tips :lmao:

 
How about There's more than one way to skin a cat?  That always seemed like a really cruel expression.  And I don't like cats. 

Assuming the twitter link is what the OP posted.  A lot of sites are blocked from me at work.
What's funny is I think this is totally ridiculous and I voted for the 'Completely disagree...' option.  If they had included 'many ways to skin a cat...' I would have moved my option to 'Mostly Disagree...'  

I'm not a cat person, but that one has always bothered me.

 
i  do believe in speciesism, but none of this really resonates with me.   If this is a one-off awareness thing, then ok, but hopefully this is not an ongoing campaign as it seems like a waste of time.

 
Words matter if the object can differentiate between the words.  This is SJW gone mad.  What offense are they attempting to correct?  Is anyone less likely to literally grab a bull by the horns if you instead say, "take a flower by the thorns?"  Nope.  

 
See PETAs suggestions here.

Assuming this is not a joke or publicity stunt, what's your take on this?
I'm not sure if either "joke" or "publicity stunt" are exactly correct, but that's my take - essentially a combination of the two.  It seems PETA does stuff like this every once in a while to generate some buzz. Its obviously not serious, and yet is very effective in getting people riled up an talking about PETA.

 
Why would I feed a fed horse? Its already eaten, do they want it to get fat and suffer from effects of obesity?
That's.... that's why it works as a substitute for beating the horse that is already dead?  

I don't know if the :whoosh:  belongs to you or me here though... :oldunsure:
Definitely him.

I think what PETA is doing/saying is ridiculous, but I see what they did there.  I don't think EP did.

 
LINK

They really make their case more and more ridiculous saying crap like this.  Hyperbole much?

Mmmmmmm, bacon. . . .

NEW YORK (CNN) — Meat-based idioms, like "flogging a dead horse" or "taking the bull by the horns," can be compared with homophobic and racist language, according to animal rights organization PETA.

"Just as it became unacceptable to use racist, homophobic, or ableist language, phrases that trivialize cruelty to animals will vanish as more people begin to appreciate animals for who they are and start 'bringing home the bagels' instead of the bacon," PETA said on Twitter.

The group took to Twitter Tuesday, offering a graphic showing some possible alternatives to meat-related expressions.

Instead of "kill two birds with one stone" say "feed two birds with one scone," and instead of "being the guinea pig," say "be the test tube," PETA said.

"Words matter, and as our understanding of social justice evolves, our language evolves along with it," it added.

The comparison with racism and homophobia was met with anger on Twitter, with some arguing that PETA was trivializing race and gender issues.

Others said the animal rights organization was giving vegetarians and vegans a bad name.

PETA's tweet comes after a UK-based academic argued last month that an increased awareness of vegan issues may lead to new modes of expression.

"Metaphors involving meat could gain an increased intensity if the killing of animals for food becomes less socially acceptable," Shareena Z. Hamzah of Swansea University wrote in the Conversation.

"If veganism forces us to confront the realities of food's origins, then this increased awareness will undoubtedly be reflected in our language and our literature."

The legal system is already getting to grips with the subject. It was announced this week that a British employment tribunal will decide whether ethical veganism is a "philosophical belief" that should be afforded the same protections as religion.

 
If their assumption is all living things are equal than it makes sense. I don’t really buy into this but it’s true that changing language is important to changing action/culture and Im all for people eating less meat.

 
At this point it's easier to just point out what doesn't offend some people(sorry if that offends anybody person)

 
This is sort of Orwellian and is the classic example of that word in our language. 

What do they call that kind of word -- Orwellian -- anyway? Antonomasia?  

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top