The Animal In Y-ewwww!

As an student of Literature and linguistics, I've had the concept of 'connotation' shoved down my throat since the day I first stepped into Parlin. Simply put, the term 'connotation' refers to the internalized mental image or list of words and emotions that a listener gets when hearing a word. For example, if I were to describe the Grand Canyon as "glorious landscape chiseled marvelously into the Arizona earth " , you would probably imagine it in a specific way, much different than if I were to describe it as a "deep, rusted cleft, gouged violently into an otherwise peaceful landscape". Every word carries with it a certain meaning. This idea of connotation can apply pretty easily to animal related words as well. Referring to certain animals, or events involving them, can be a useful linguistic tool to describe people or things in a hauntingly accurate manner.

For example, if I had a nickel for every time I heard someone described as a "cow" or a "pig", I wouldn't have to desperately be looking for a job right now. These animal-specific images carry with them explicit negative connotations that testify to our natural specieist tendencies. Joan Dunayer asks, "Why does metaphorical reference to the cow connote these traits while reference to the bull does not?" (786). As a culture, it seems that we have pre-labelled specific animals with specific traits. Rabbits are quick, turtles slow. Lions are proud. Mice are quiet. This is just something we have done in order to substitute our normal every day adjectives with colorful and exciting images. Unfortunately, some of these substitutions serve as reminders of our lack of respect, or our explicit disrespect for certain animals. Or do they? Dunayer essentially claims that by using animals to define humans (or specifically women), is disrespectful to women as a collective. By this token, could you argue that we are being equally disrespectful to the animals by associating them so willingly to cookie-cutter stereotypes?



When I grew up, I was taught by my mom not to tell random fat people that they were fat, or to tell bald people that they were bald, etc. I'm not questioning this courtesy, because I think social politeness and respect is fundamental to our success as a community, but should be held to the same standard when we are talking about animals? When I say someone eats like a cow, there is no question that I am being demeaning (sometimes humorously) to the person, but I am also being disrespectful of the cow (by human definition). Obviously, we don't care that cows are fat. I don't see a fat cow, and think to myself "Wow! That cow eats waaaaaay too much food. Gross!" That being said though, by calling someone a cow, we project their bovine-tendencies on others in a negative manner. We don't tell people they are cows because we thing that their eating habits are healthy. Does this offend cows at all? I really don't think they do.



Derrida defines one of the key characteristics of mankind is his knowledge and shame of being naked. We wear clothes to hide ourselves. Animals, on the other hand, don't give rat's hindquarters (see above paragraph) about being bare. "The property unique to animals and what in the final analysis distinguishes them from man, is their being naked without knowing it". So the question is this: when I'm in the room with a smelly friend John and my dog Pickles, and I tell my friend that he stinks like a dog, am I offending John AND Pickles? I'm going to have to say no.


And there is my daily dose of incoherence for the day.
Cheers!