no more pets

victor steinbok aardvark66 at GMAIL.COM
Tue May 10 04:34:24 UTC 2011

I see... but you may continue to refer to your sex slaves as your "pets".

Actually, "companion animal" is quite distinct from "pet". The ideas is that
these animals perform either a therapeutic or assisting function, e.g.,
"guide dogs" for the blind. I am not sure that this is where the CNN story
was going--but if they weren't aiming there, they are idiots.


On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 11:27 PM, David Barnhart <dbarnhart at>wrote:

> I just saw a little story on CNN about the political incorrectness of the
> term _pet_ meaning an animal kept as a companion.
> My cat is still the family pet.  We didn't get her at a _pet shop_.  We do
> not engage a _pet sitter_ to do _pet sitting_ who would keep her bowl full
> of _pet food_.  She does not seem to need _pet therapy_ at the direction of
> a _pet therapist_.  Nor will she go to a _pet cemetery_.  Nor would we
> replace her with a _pet rock_.  Somehow _companion_ doesn't seem to fit as
> neatly.

The American Dialect Society -

More information about the Ads-l mailing list