论文部分内容阅读
In case you missed it， a video last week showed a miniature horse eating a bowl of carrots—from a high chair1. A high chair. Yes， really.
Some people were appalled， some were amused， some simply couldn’t believe that someone， somewhere put a horse in a high chair.
But perhaps it shouldn’t be all that surprising—it might seem absurd， but it might also be the logical extension of the growing trend of treating animals as human and treating pets as children， equivalent to the toddler2 who eats from the same chair.
Examples of this attitude are everywhere， and range from the innocent to the near-insane. Some people dress up their pets for Halloween， throw them birthday parties3， or create social media accounts for them. There are now five-star cat resorts， offering spa services， fine dining， and four-poster beds4. Yoga studios now offer“doga”5 classes to teach downward dog—to dogs. Fancy boutiques sell designer pet panties and bikinis， and doctors will perform cosmetic surgery in case your pet needs a facelift.
Should any of this cause concern？ Should we just smile and nod when people call their pets their kids and treat them as such？ Should we shrug off the Facebook page “Animals are People Too” and “My Child has Four Paws” bumper stickers？6
No. Because animals aren’t people. And pets aren’t children.
Pointing out basic biological realities shouldn’t trigger outrage or offense， but when it comes to pets today， it often does.
There seems to be confusion about the difference between pets and children and an increasingly large group of people who genuinely believe that having a pet is the same thing as being a parent. They adopt the language of parenthood with their pets， calling themselves “mommy” or “daddy” when talking to their “fur kid7，” “baby，” “or “child，” for example.
Of course， it’s one thing to use such language lightly， as an innocent expression of love or a reflection of the great joy and deep bonds that pets， like children， can create.
It’s quite another to use this language literally8.
Words matter. Using inaccurate labels for things doesn’t just blur the very real lines between pets and people； it can lead to dangerous delusions9. What if a woman starts thinking she knows what a mom of two kids is going through because she’s a “mom” to two cats？ What if a man believes having a baby won’t be much different than being a “dad” to a dog？ Misnaming isn’t just silly linguistics if it triggers a retreat from reality. Every pet has or had its own parent—another cat or dog that would have fed， nurtured， and raised its offspring， teaching it to survive as a wild creature in the animal kingdom.
When people adopt pets， we tame what’s wild， teaching it how to survive in the human realm—how to pee in the right place and not drink from the toilet. We don’t parent animals， we humanize them.
It’s the irony at the heart of pet-people relationships： often， our love for animals stems from their differences from us， yet once we have them， we treat them like they’re people. Sometimes， this spirals out of control， leading to creepy industries like pet cosmetic surgery.10 But we can’t call our role with pets “parenting” when we do the opposite of what a pet’s parent would do.
Nonetheless， “pet parents” point out that they do everything real parents do—feed， bathe， cuddle11， clean up， care for， and love. Indeed， all these actions constitute part of the rituals and routines of true parenthood. But only in part， and with far lower stakes12.
One does not， and cannot， teach character and morality to cats and dogs， yet that’s the most important job of a parent. Having a child means preparing another mind and soul for adulthood and independence. Having a pet means keeping an animal obedient and dependent so it never leaves the way a child will.
Pets and children serve different roles， occupying different places in the lives of humans. Ignoring or actively denying these fundamental differences benefits neither creatures nor people.
Calling a pet a child， or yourself its parent， ultimately reflects a misunderstanding of what animals are and what parenting is. We can call pets“pets” without loving them any less. We need not conflate13 animals and people in order to love either. After all， we might think forcing horses into human high chairs shows the horse and the world how much we love it， but in the world of horses （and of any animal）， it only shows how much we don’t.
你可能错过了上周的视频，在视频中一匹迷你马在高脚椅上吃一碗胡萝卜。是的，你没看错，就是高脚椅。
有些人对此感到震惊，有些人以此为乐，还有些人根本不敢相信居然有人会让一匹马坐在高脚椅上。
但也許用不着那么大惊小怪的，虽然可能看起来很荒谬，但这也许是人们越来越将动物视作自己同类和将宠物视作孩子（即坐在高脚椅上吃饭的幼儿）的必然结果。
有这种态度的人随处可见，程度从天真单纯到接近疯狂。一些人为万圣节的到来特意打扮自己的宠物，在家为它们举办生日聚会，或者为它们创建社交账号。现在还有五星级猫咪度假村，提供水疗、美食甚至四柱床。瑜伽馆目前开始提供“狗瑜伽”课程来教导狗狗下犬式。高档时髦的精品店售卖设计师专为宠物制作的内裤和比基尼。如果您的宠物需要做个美容拉皮的话，医生将对其进行整容手术。
任何一种这类现象是否值得引起关注呢？当人们把宠物当孩子养的时候，我们是否应该仅仅微笑着默许？我们又是否应该对脸书上那些“动物也是人”的页面和“我的宝宝有四个爪”等汽车保险杠贴纸视而不见呢？
不能。因为动物不是人，且宠物也不是孩子。 如果只是从基本的生物学層面上指出这个事实，应该不会引起愤怒或者攻击，但现在要涉及宠物，这就难免了。
宠物和孩子这两者之间的区别似乎出现了混淆，那些真心相信养宠物和做父母是一回事的人开始越来越多。他们在与自己的宠物说话的时候，会采用父母的口吻。比如，当他们和自己的“毛孩子”、“宝贝”或“孩子”交流的时候，会称自己是“妈咪”或“爹地”。
当然，一方面来说，少量地使用这种称呼也无伤大雅，只作为单纯的爱的表达，反映出宠物能够像孩子一样带给人巨大快乐，并能与人维系很深的情感。
但如果仅照字面意思使用，那就另当别论了。
用词极为重要。贴上不正确的标签不仅仅会模糊了人与动物之间的真实界线，还可能导致危险的错觉。试想如果一个女人仅仅因为自己是两只猫的“妈妈”，便认为可以做好两个孩子的母亲呢？如果一个男人认为养一个孩子和当一条狗的“爸爸”没什么区别呢？如果称谓不当会使人们脱离现实，这就不仅仅是一个愚蠢的语言学问题了。
每只宠物都有或曾经有自己的父母——另一只猫或狗，它们会喂养、抚育自己的后代，教导它如何在动物界中作为野生动物去生存。
而当人类开始养宠物时，便开始驯服它们，教它们如何在人类社会中生存：在正确的地方撒尿以及不去喝马桶水。我们所做的并不是成为他们的父母，而是教化他们。
宠物与人类关系的核心是讽刺的：通常，我们对动物的爱源于它们与我们自身的差异性，可一旦养了宠物，我们却像对人一样对待它们。有时，这种现象离谱得失去控制，以致出现类似于宠物整形这样令人毛骨悚然的行业。我们不能在做了与宠物真正的父母截然相反的事之后，还自称是“宠物的父母”。
尽管如此，“宠物父母”指出，他们所做的一切都与其真正的父母并无二致：喂养、洗澡、拥抱、清理、照顾和宠爱（它们）。没错，所有这些行为都是真正的父母日常所做的一部分，但这只占一部分，而且风险要小得多。
人不会，也不能教给猫和狗以人格和道德，但这却是作为父母最重要的工作。养孩子意味着要为他们以后的成年和独立培养出合格的头脑和心灵。养宠物意味着让动物保持顺从和依赖，这样它才永远不会像孩子一样离家远走。
宠物和孩子在人们的生活中扮演着不同的角色，占据着不同的地位。无视或者强烈否认两者间的基本差别，对宠物和人都没有好处。
把宠物当孩子，或者把自己当作它的父母，最终反映了这些人对动物和父母角色的错误理解。把宠物称为“宠物”，我们对它们的爱也不会减少半分。我们也不必为了爱就去混淆动物和人的界限。毕竟，我们很可能会认为让一匹马坐在人类的高脚椅上是为了让它和全世界都知道我们有多爱它，但从马（或者其他动物）的角度来看，我们恰恰传达了一个相反的事实——我们有多不爱它。
1. high chair： 小孩子吃饭坐的高脚椅。
2. toddler： 学步的小孩。
3. throw a party： （尤指在自己家里）举行聚会。
4. four-poster bed： （老式可带拉帘的）四根帷柱的床。
5. doga： 狗瑜伽，是主人与宠物狗一起参加的瑜伽课，旨在通过一定的姿势和按摩方式来改善狗的各项机能，加强狗与主人的关系。
6. shrug off： 对……不予理睬，对……不屑一顾；bumper sticker： 保险杠贴纸。
7. fur kid： 被主人当孩子对待的宠物。
8. literally： 照字面义地。
9. delusion： 妄想，错觉。
10. spiral： 不断恶化；creepy： 可怕的。
11. cuddle： 拥抱，依偎。
12. stake： 利害关系。
13. conflate： 混合，混淆。
Some people were appalled， some were amused， some simply couldn’t believe that someone， somewhere put a horse in a high chair.
But perhaps it shouldn’t be all that surprising—it might seem absurd， but it might also be the logical extension of the growing trend of treating animals as human and treating pets as children， equivalent to the toddler2 who eats from the same chair.
Examples of this attitude are everywhere， and range from the innocent to the near-insane. Some people dress up their pets for Halloween， throw them birthday parties3， or create social media accounts for them. There are now five-star cat resorts， offering spa services， fine dining， and four-poster beds4. Yoga studios now offer“doga”5 classes to teach downward dog—to dogs. Fancy boutiques sell designer pet panties and bikinis， and doctors will perform cosmetic surgery in case your pet needs a facelift.
Should any of this cause concern？ Should we just smile and nod when people call their pets their kids and treat them as such？ Should we shrug off the Facebook page “Animals are People Too” and “My Child has Four Paws” bumper stickers？6
No. Because animals aren’t people. And pets aren’t children.
Pointing out basic biological realities shouldn’t trigger outrage or offense， but when it comes to pets today， it often does.
There seems to be confusion about the difference between pets and children and an increasingly large group of people who genuinely believe that having a pet is the same thing as being a parent. They adopt the language of parenthood with their pets， calling themselves “mommy” or “daddy” when talking to their “fur kid7，” “baby，” “or “child，” for example.
Of course， it’s one thing to use such language lightly， as an innocent expression of love or a reflection of the great joy and deep bonds that pets， like children， can create.
It’s quite another to use this language literally8.
Words matter. Using inaccurate labels for things doesn’t just blur the very real lines between pets and people； it can lead to dangerous delusions9. What if a woman starts thinking she knows what a mom of two kids is going through because she’s a “mom” to two cats？ What if a man believes having a baby won’t be much different than being a “dad” to a dog？ Misnaming isn’t just silly linguistics if it triggers a retreat from reality. Every pet has or had its own parent—another cat or dog that would have fed， nurtured， and raised its offspring， teaching it to survive as a wild creature in the animal kingdom.
When people adopt pets， we tame what’s wild， teaching it how to survive in the human realm—how to pee in the right place and not drink from the toilet. We don’t parent animals， we humanize them.
It’s the irony at the heart of pet-people relationships： often， our love for animals stems from their differences from us， yet once we have them， we treat them like they’re people. Sometimes， this spirals out of control， leading to creepy industries like pet cosmetic surgery.10 But we can’t call our role with pets “parenting” when we do the opposite of what a pet’s parent would do.
Nonetheless， “pet parents” point out that they do everything real parents do—feed， bathe， cuddle11， clean up， care for， and love. Indeed， all these actions constitute part of the rituals and routines of true parenthood. But only in part， and with far lower stakes12.
One does not， and cannot， teach character and morality to cats and dogs， yet that’s the most important job of a parent. Having a child means preparing another mind and soul for adulthood and independence. Having a pet means keeping an animal obedient and dependent so it never leaves the way a child will.
Pets and children serve different roles， occupying different places in the lives of humans. Ignoring or actively denying these fundamental differences benefits neither creatures nor people.
Calling a pet a child， or yourself its parent， ultimately reflects a misunderstanding of what animals are and what parenting is. We can call pets“pets” without loving them any less. We need not conflate13 animals and people in order to love either. After all， we might think forcing horses into human high chairs shows the horse and the world how much we love it， but in the world of horses （and of any animal）， it only shows how much we don’t.
你可能错过了上周的视频，在视频中一匹迷你马在高脚椅上吃一碗胡萝卜。是的，你没看错，就是高脚椅。
有些人对此感到震惊，有些人以此为乐，还有些人根本不敢相信居然有人会让一匹马坐在高脚椅上。
但也許用不着那么大惊小怪的，虽然可能看起来很荒谬，但这也许是人们越来越将动物视作自己同类和将宠物视作孩子（即坐在高脚椅上吃饭的幼儿）的必然结果。
有这种态度的人随处可见，程度从天真单纯到接近疯狂。一些人为万圣节的到来特意打扮自己的宠物，在家为它们举办生日聚会，或者为它们创建社交账号。现在还有五星级猫咪度假村，提供水疗、美食甚至四柱床。瑜伽馆目前开始提供“狗瑜伽”课程来教导狗狗下犬式。高档时髦的精品店售卖设计师专为宠物制作的内裤和比基尼。如果您的宠物需要做个美容拉皮的话，医生将对其进行整容手术。
任何一种这类现象是否值得引起关注呢？当人们把宠物当孩子养的时候，我们是否应该仅仅微笑着默许？我们又是否应该对脸书上那些“动物也是人”的页面和“我的宝宝有四个爪”等汽车保险杠贴纸视而不见呢？
不能。因为动物不是人，且宠物也不是孩子。 如果只是从基本的生物学層面上指出这个事实，应该不会引起愤怒或者攻击，但现在要涉及宠物，这就难免了。
宠物和孩子这两者之间的区别似乎出现了混淆，那些真心相信养宠物和做父母是一回事的人开始越来越多。他们在与自己的宠物说话的时候，会采用父母的口吻。比如，当他们和自己的“毛孩子”、“宝贝”或“孩子”交流的时候，会称自己是“妈咪”或“爹地”。
当然，一方面来说，少量地使用这种称呼也无伤大雅，只作为单纯的爱的表达，反映出宠物能够像孩子一样带给人巨大快乐，并能与人维系很深的情感。
但如果仅照字面意思使用，那就另当别论了。
用词极为重要。贴上不正确的标签不仅仅会模糊了人与动物之间的真实界线，还可能导致危险的错觉。试想如果一个女人仅仅因为自己是两只猫的“妈妈”，便认为可以做好两个孩子的母亲呢？如果一个男人认为养一个孩子和当一条狗的“爸爸”没什么区别呢？如果称谓不当会使人们脱离现实，这就不仅仅是一个愚蠢的语言学问题了。
每只宠物都有或曾经有自己的父母——另一只猫或狗，它们会喂养、抚育自己的后代，教导它如何在动物界中作为野生动物去生存。
而当人类开始养宠物时，便开始驯服它们，教它们如何在人类社会中生存：在正确的地方撒尿以及不去喝马桶水。我们所做的并不是成为他们的父母，而是教化他们。
宠物与人类关系的核心是讽刺的：通常，我们对动物的爱源于它们与我们自身的差异性，可一旦养了宠物，我们却像对人一样对待它们。有时，这种现象离谱得失去控制，以致出现类似于宠物整形这样令人毛骨悚然的行业。我们不能在做了与宠物真正的父母截然相反的事之后，还自称是“宠物的父母”。
尽管如此，“宠物父母”指出，他们所做的一切都与其真正的父母并无二致：喂养、洗澡、拥抱、清理、照顾和宠爱（它们）。没错，所有这些行为都是真正的父母日常所做的一部分，但这只占一部分，而且风险要小得多。
人不会，也不能教给猫和狗以人格和道德，但这却是作为父母最重要的工作。养孩子意味着要为他们以后的成年和独立培养出合格的头脑和心灵。养宠物意味着让动物保持顺从和依赖，这样它才永远不会像孩子一样离家远走。
宠物和孩子在人们的生活中扮演着不同的角色，占据着不同的地位。无视或者强烈否认两者间的基本差别，对宠物和人都没有好处。
把宠物当孩子，或者把自己当作它的父母，最终反映了这些人对动物和父母角色的错误理解。把宠物称为“宠物”，我们对它们的爱也不会减少半分。我们也不必为了爱就去混淆动物和人的界限。毕竟，我们很可能会认为让一匹马坐在人类的高脚椅上是为了让它和全世界都知道我们有多爱它，但从马（或者其他动物）的角度来看，我们恰恰传达了一个相反的事实——我们有多不爱它。
1. high chair： 小孩子吃饭坐的高脚椅。
2. toddler： 学步的小孩。
3. throw a party： （尤指在自己家里）举行聚会。
4. four-poster bed： （老式可带拉帘的）四根帷柱的床。
5. doga： 狗瑜伽，是主人与宠物狗一起参加的瑜伽课，旨在通过一定的姿势和按摩方式来改善狗的各项机能，加强狗与主人的关系。
6. shrug off： 对……不予理睬，对……不屑一顾；bumper sticker： 保险杠贴纸。
7. fur kid： 被主人当孩子对待的宠物。
8. literally： 照字面义地。
9. delusion： 妄想，错觉。
10. spiral： 不断恶化；creepy： 可怕的。
11. cuddle： 拥抱，依偎。
12. stake： 利害关系。
13. conflate： 混合，混淆。