• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    27 months ago

    If you wouldn’t call a human being “it”, then you shouldn’t call a non-human animal “it”, either.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        17 months ago

        Calling non-human animals “it” has psychological effects that help distance us from the atrocities we commit on them. It primes our brain to see them as objects/commodities instead of individuals that deserve consideration.

        Think like a pet dog vs a farmed pig. The dog is called with pronouns like he/she/they while the pig is called it. The dog is loved as an individual, the pig is sent to a gas chamber with hundreds of others to be killed young and sold as commodity. If that were the dog who is referred to as an individual instead of an object, that would be considered abhorrent.

        The language isn’t the only contributing factor, but does play a part in us being able to look past some horrible things we do by priming our brains to see living beings as just objects instead of individuals.

        • @Telodzrum
          link
          17 months ago

          Oh, OK. We just disagree as to whether it’s a good thing or not.

    • Deme
      link
      fedilink
      37 months ago

      Funnily enough, in spoken Finnish “it” has all but replaced “they”.