Adopting

[Ann]

I could invite him to come live here in Virginia. Some legislators are trying to change the name of the Sea of Japan to avoid offending Koreans.

And back we come to the lunacy of PC!!!

Sophie, I think your editor and mine should meet. The verboten terms for animals might be applied to both of them!

 

[Greenepony]

Talking about writing and semantics. I had an unpleasant chat with one of my editors about the use of the term WWI. He declared it was an Americanism which was offensive to true members of the commonwealth because the US was late for both wars!

"True Members of the Commonwealth"? What does that mean?

US Navy Historians use WWI and WWII but I guess they really wouldn't care if it were an Americanism. Two people I've worked with in the same command are from the UK (Welsh and the other just identified as British) and they used WWI and WWII in conversation and formal reports.
For all my program's focus on "don't offend anyone with your text!" I haven't heard anything about those titles being offensive. I may poke around and see if anyone has heard anything about this.

 

[Caro]

My feeling is we should be encouraging people who make responsible choices about breeding dogs. To rely solely on rescue dogs and mutts to fill the demand for dogs we end up with issues of supply and the encouragement of indiscriminate breeding and puppy farms. You'll also see a decline in certain types of dogs. Certain breeds are much more likely to jump fences or not to be desexed. Over here you'd end up with a dominance of ACD, BC and Staffy crosses, and of course the poodle crosses from puppy farms. There should always be a place for both rescue and responsible breeders.

Talking about writing and semantics. I had an unpleasant chat with one of my editors about the use of the term WWI. He declared it was an Americanism which was offensive to true members of the commonwealth because the US was late for both wars!

Your editor is correct. WWI is an Americanism. I did a PhD in military history, wrote academic articles and taught at the military academy for some years (until history lecturing became an unviable occupation). It is a bit silly saying it is offensive, but he's right that we don't use that abbreviation in the Commonwealth, we also don't use the spelling "defense". The appropriate reference is First World War and Second World War, and of course 'defence'. You may see WWI and WWII written in books designed for the US market but otherwise it is avoided, if you want your writing to be accepted in military history spheres it's better to avoid those abbreviations. Happy for you to PM me if you have any other questions re military history.

 

[lasheltie]

Rescue, adopt, rehome are all sort of interchanged terms. I do sheltie rescue & work with other rescues, shelters & owners. The terms can be confusing. I am sharing my 2 cents thoughts on the topic.

First off I want to say I am not anti breeder. There is a place for good breeders that want to raise dogs that are healthy & a good personality.They ensure that quality dogs are being born & will take care that they go to good homes. I am against the person that has a couple of dogs, breeds them for extra money & let's them go home with anyone with enough cash. Those people are a nuisance to breeders & animal groups alike.

To me someone who gets a dog from a no kill shelter or rescue has "adopted" them. They fill out an adoption application & go through a screening process similar to a human adoption. The dog needs a home but isn't in danger of being out to sleep if not quickly adopted.

Someone who gets a dog from an owner unable to care for the dog is usually said to have gotten a dog that was "rehomed". Sometimes they're free & sometimes there is a fee to cover expenses such as shots, spay/neuter & microchipping.

A "rescue" is a dog taken from a situation of immediate need. If you save a dog on the side of the road, you've rescued it. If the dog is at a kill shelter & someone adopts it or a rescue pulls it then it is a rescue dog. Dogs taken from puppy mills by a shelter, humane society or 501 (c)3 rescue are rescued. A person that buys a dog from the puppy mill is not technically rescuing even though their motives might be the same. Puppy mill breeders don't care why someone buys their dog, they just want the money (in most cases).

Anyone that gives a loving home to a dog deserves to be thanked. People that ensure their dogs have been spayed/neutered & kept in good vet health are helping to make sure that there is 1 less animal to worry about. Rescue groups & shelters are overloaded & underfunded. Thanks to wonderful people like the ones here there is hope that things can get better.

 

[Greenepony]

You may see WWI and WWII written in books designed for the US market but otherwise it is avoided, if you want your writing to be accepted in military history spheres it's better to avoid those abbreviations.

Just to clarify (and I don't know what labgirl meant) when I wrote WWI/WWII, I was just using shorthand. I wouldn't use either in formal writings, I would actually say "World War One/Two". I thought she meant the title of "World War One", as opposed to another title of some sort. Just to avoid any confusion
(now I want to go find a book NHHC published to see if they do, I was always taught never to use abbreviations in academic work)

 

[Mom2Melli]

So the matter was using the abbreviation WWI and WWII rather than naming them the First World War and the Second World War? Huh.

 

[Mignarda]

care to elaborate on this??? I (as a purebred breeder) see it as quite the opposite as there is soo much legislation out and coming out it is nearly impossible for us to continue on as a breeder and many people who have been breeding for 30+ years have decided in the last few months to just throw their hands up and walk away do to the frustration and legal issues.

I simply meant that it's something of a paradox to want to neuter all dogs and then insist that it's somehow immoral to purchase, or even desire, anything other than a "rescue" dog. Taken to its logical extreme, it would mean that there would ultimately be no more dogs to rescue.

You're correct that there's too much legislation, but we live in a culture where unfortunately people tend to go overboard on everything that's perceived to be good.

 

[labgirl]

Your editor is correct. WWI is an Americanism. I did a PhD in military history, wrote academic articles and taught at the military academy for some years (until history lecturing became an unviable occupation). It is a bit silly saying it is offensive, but he's right that we don't use that abbreviation in the Commonwealth, we also don't use the spelling "defense". The appropriate reference is First World War and Second World War, and of course 'defence'. You may see WWI and WWII written in books designed for the US market but otherwise it is avoided, if you want your writing to be accepted in military history spheres it's better to avoid those abbreviations. Happy for you to PM me if you have any other questions re military history.

Thank you Caro, I appreciate the clarification. I believe he was against the term 'World War One' whether abbreviated or not. In contrast the publishers I write for (The History Press and Fonthill Media) both have no problems with WWI abbreviated or not. I think what really got me was his anti America comments. I do some work in the education system and WWI/II are frequently used without comment. However with the anniversary of the Great War coming up people seem to have become highly sensitive to terminology.

I had relatives in both wars, some never made it back. A cousin went to America in 1938 and when the US entered the war she joined the American army. I have lovely photos of her in uniform and in Berlin with a GI. I have no idea of what she did sadly.

 

[Caro]

Taken to its logical extreme, it would mean that there would ultimately be no more dogs to rescue.

Wouldn't that be a wonderful thing.

Thank you Caro, I appreciate the clarification. I believe he was against the term 'World War One' whether abbreviated or not. In contrast the publishers I write for (The History Press and Fonthill Media) both have no problems with WWI abbreviated or not. I think what really got me was his anti America comments.

It's a respect thing I believe. We've always used First and Second WW, the diggers themselves used that term so historians retain that wording. I think some people are sensitive to the Americanisation of the English language.

 

[Mignarda]

It's a respect thing I believe. We've always used First and Second WW, the diggers themselves used that term so historians retain that wording. I think some people are sensitive to the Americanisation of the English language.

But nobody objected when it was Dane-ified and French-ified!