Opinion: Another viewpoint: Trying for more animal-friendly turns of phrase

“Don’t you have bigger fish to fry?”

That was the typical, not exactly enlightened, response after People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals shook up the Twitterverse with our list of animal-friendly phrases to use in place of common anti-animal idioms.

For example, instead of “kill two birds with one stone,” why not try “feed two birds with one scone?” And for “don’t let the cat out of the bag,” how about “don’t spill the beans?”

Although PETA has long argued for an end to anti-animal language, this issue made headlines recently after Swansea University’s Shareena Z. Hamzah wrote a blog for The Conversation suggesting that the growing number of vegans will cause some meaty expressions (e.g., “bring home the bacon”) to be phased out of common usage (we suggest substituting “bring home the bagels”).

It makes sense. Once I understood that chickens, pigs, cows and all other animals feel pain, experience fear and value their own lives, just like humans, I banned dead animal parts from my life. So, of course, I also banned animal-unfriendly phrases from my vocabulary.

But you don’t have to be a vegan to get why this matters. Research has shown that language shapes the way we think and behave. Like many people of color, I have felt the sting of thoughtless language. And I know that racist, sexist and homophobic language goes hand-in-hand with old prejudices and stereotypes about members of other groups who are perceived as somehow being “different” — and less important.

Sure, your feline friend may not personally take offense at a phrase like “there’s more than one way to skin a cat,” but the underlying attitude that trivializes cruelty to animals or degrades and belittles them does have a real impact on their lives.

When we call someone a “pig” as a slur, for example, we’re insulting pigs and ignoring that they’re smart and loyal animals who lead complex, social lives. When we say that someone is being used “as a guinea pig,” we’re glossing over the horrific violence — including being intentionally infected with diseases, force-fed with chemicals, blinded, burned and mutilated — inflicted on billions of animals in laboratories every year.

We have to move beyond the disconnect that allows us to think of other animals as little more than cutlets or coats. They’re not objects to be used by us; they’re individuals, just like us. Their lives are as important to them as ours are to us.

They love their families and look out for their friends, use tools and reasoning to solve problems as they go about their day, and want to live their lives in peace.

Humans and other animals may be different in some unimportant ways, but we’re exactly the same in the ways that truly matter.

As our understanding of animals evolves, so should our language.

So while some people mocked PETA’s suggestion to “bring home the bagels,” I hope others will stop to consider why animal advocates might not love a phrase like “bring home the bacon.” (And if you don’t know why, it’s because farmed pigs endure miserable lives before they become bacon; mother pigs, for example, have no choice but to breathe in the ammonia fumes from their own waste, which collects in troughs beneath their pens, and are kept in farrowing crates so small that they can never even turn around to nuzzle their young.)

Times change, but change happens only when enough people rise up against cruelty and injustice of all stripes, when we break free of all our old prejudices and see ourselves in everyone else — with no exceptions.

It’s not a competition — men against women, people of color against whites, humans against other animals, “us” against “them” — and never has been. Let’s open our hearts and remember that we’re all in this together.

We can start by minding our language.

Zachary Toliver is an online news content producer for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.