Archive for the 'Language' Category

Defending the orca

My thoughts and prayers are with the friends and family of Dawn Brancheau, the trainer who was killed by one of her charges at Sea World in Orlando yesterday.

I saw more than one person on Twitter either say or retweet something like “what part of ‘killer whale’ don’t you understand?  Duh!”  Well, that is a poor response to a complex situation.

We’re talking about what is essentially the largest member of the dolphin family, and even though it is the prevailing term, “killer whale” is a really bad name for it.

In the wild, the animal is no more a threat to people than any other cetacean.  Do you worry about dolphins and sperm whales coming to get you?  I’ve preferred and used the term orca for a long time.  People still know what I mean, and I’m not perpetuating a myth.

That is not to say that orcas haven’t occasionally attacked and killed people before, but it invariably happens in captivity.  Why is that?

Well, it’s highly likely that orcas have considerable intellect.  It’s pretty clear that their play is complex.  Their communication may rise to the level of language, and there is even evidence for reasoning skills.  Moreover, they form tight and stable family units.  I suppose that could be argued away as instinct, but I could as easily argue for a basis for real emotion.

Now I’m not much on a lot of the “animal rights” prattle.  I believe the human race has many legitimate uses for many different animals, and I don’t give them a second thought.  But does that extend to an orca (literally) jumping through hoops?

I’m terribly hazy on that.

I don’t find it far-fetched to consider that a captive orca could be aware of his situation to a much larger degree than nearly any other animal would be.  What if he can remember what it is to swim freely, and realize day after day that he’s still denied it?  What if he can remember friends and family, and contemplate the futility of hoping he’ll see them again?

Couldn’t it be an intelligent creature who accommodates confinement as best it can (and mathematically, that must be pretty well), but is still capable of “snapping”?  This article quotes a marine biologist who says it may well be the end result of chronic neurosis, and honestly, I find that a persuasive notion.

I don’t know for sure.  You don’t either.  But I’m confident such is a lot closer to the truth than “duh, it’s a killer whale.”

“The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal.”

Today, dear readers, I invite you to enjoy one of my favorite short stories:  Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. If you have read it already, please reread it.  (It’ll be good again.  I promise.)

It will take you 10 or 15 minutes at the most, but it will stay with you for the rest of your life.  It’s here.  Enjoy.

I hope you’re having a good weekend.

Meow, meow, meow, meow…

So have you encountered the uproar over chef Beppe Begazzi’s recent comments on the Italian version of Ready Steady CookHe recommended cat as a “succulent dish,” offering casserole preparation tips and what-not.  A bunch of humorless malcontents with miserable lives flooded the station with complaints, the station told Begazzi to apologize, he refused, and now he’s suspended indefinitely.

I hope he never apologizes.

I’m never going to be a “cat person.”  Still, I love my cat more than I ever thought I would love a cat.  I was horribly bothered when he went walkabout.  I still think of that a couple of times a week and consider how glad I am that he’s home.

But, dig:  he’s a little mammal, and mammals are edible.  That he’s of a species helpful to civilization and useful for companionship doesn’t preclude that species’ use for food (see also horse and dog).

Taboos against such are purely cultural, and therefore awfully hazy under any objective scrutiny.  There’s nothing any more inherently wrong with slaughtering, dressing, cooking, and eating a cat than there is with doing so with a cow or a pig.

And, um, oh yeah:  it was a joke.

This excessive reaction is from all of the same folks who went into sustained shrieking hysterics over Bonsai Kitten—in fact, the folks who made that site funny in the first place.  They’re the same kinds of people I hoped to rile with a stand-up bit I once wrote about delegging cats:

  • Do you take the rears and put a wheel on his tummy, or do you take the fronts and put a wheel on his chin?
  • Or do you take all of them?  “Stay.”  Heh.
  • It’s kind of a ripoff if you have him declawed and then delegged, isn’t it?

Sick?  Yeah, a bit.  Funny?  Yeah, to an awful lot of us.  Relax and try to keep a sense of proportion, cat people.  Or how about putting all of that energy into stopping human trafficking?

Remembering the language of car sales

I used to sell cars.  I’ve written of it a time or two, though not in a long while.  There were about 20 months between when my life as a college student ended and my life as a technical writer began, and for some of those months I sold Acuras.

I graduated from college in the spring of 1992, which made me one of the last to earn a degree with, essentially, no World Wide Web.  It was just barely there, and there was almost nothing on it.  Huge swaths of a college student’s life today bear no resemblance at all to the experience I had.

I bring that up because the timing of the rise of the Web had a lot to do with the way I was trained to sell cars, as well.  Buying and selling cars now is worlds apart from the way it was, even those 16 or 17 short years ago.  All of the information is available everywhere.  Margins have shrunk.  There are basically no bad new cars for sale.  There is still salesmanship, good and bad, to navigate, but the buyer has benefited from an information-generated power shift that is likely permanent.

But way back in the summer of 1993, when I sat for my sales training, I got it old-school and in-your-face from a grizzled veteran.  To be sure, I got a lot of valuable human relations training as well, but the way I was taught to sell cars was with time-honored, “classic” techniques—the “let me check with my boss” routine and what-not.  (I really did have to check with my boss, by the way.  In some ways, I was as much a pawn as you were.)

Mind, I have little doubt cars are still sold that way every hour of every day.  You have to be the car dick and fight with some people.  There’s a certain kind of 50-60ish jackass redneck who requires you to argue and raise hell, and if you don’t, he’ll go buy from someone who will.  I’m just saying it’s not the only way (or even the dominant way) it’s done anymore.

I got to chuckling today thinking about the euphemisms we used to employ.  We had a list of taboo words, and the words we were supposed to say instead.

  • We didn’t talk about a car’s price; we talked about its market value.
  • I would never ask you “what kind of payments can you afford?”  Rather, I would say “what type of monthly budget were you considering?”  (The right answer there, of course, is “I’m not thinking of payments; we’ll negotiate the bottom line.”)  If, instead, you named a number (as probably two-thirds of you did), then my immediate response would be “Up to what?”
  • We never “allowed” you a dollar amount on your trade-in.  Rather, “this is what we’re paying you for your car.”
  • I always talked to my boss, not my manager.  If I tell you I’m talking to my manager, you might think “well, I wonder who his manager is?”  Boss has a lot more finality to it.
  • The stereotype is “what do I have to do to get you in this car today?”  The reality was “you will own this car now when the figures are agreeable.  Is that correct, Mr. Prospect?”
  • It crawled into the official paperwork lingo, too.  What is a “capital cost reduction” on a lease agreement?  How about a “down payment”?

(And so forth.)

Once I was sharing some of this on a visit to my mother’s, and her husband cockily announced “you know, none of that stuff ever works on me.”  Well, of course not, man.  When I’m sitting here and laying it out point by point for you, it’s easy to say you wouldn’t be influenced by it.  It’s like the magician beginning the conversation by showing you the false floor in the cabinet, dig?

I’ll stop here for now, but I’ll have a post or two more on this soon.  Even though a lot of what I was taught seems a little antiquated and corny now, I also learned a lot of great things about understanding motivations, behavioral triggers, and so forth (that dovetailed nicely with my academic training, actually) that have remained valuable to me.

I have no desire to go back and do it again—it’s a stressful and brutally long-houred job, even when it’s going well—but I’m certain I’d be much better at it today than I was as a green-gilled 22-year-old.  (And I didn’t suck then, baby.  Heh.)

Tim Tebow and his mother advocate domestic violence!

The polarizing abortion commercial staring Tim Tebow and his mother aired early in the Super Bowl broadcast last night.  Backstory here.

Oh, but you know what?  Turned out the commercial was light, funny, and never mentioned anything any more controversial than “worry”:

So all of the intolerant liberals making somber proclamations and finger-wagging response videos and what-not were suddenly (and brilliantly) denied their backwater rubes shriekin’ hysterically ’bout Jeebus and murderin’ babies and stuff.

(I guess all of that must be at the link if you follow it.  Heh.)

Wow.  What should the tongue-clucking liberals do?  How can this error of overplay be mollified?  Drop this round of “dialogue,” and live to fight another day?  Reasoned rhetoric, maybe leaning a bit toward conciliatory?

Nope.  How about let’s find domestic abuse in that commercial?

“I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in [the Tim Tebow ad]. That’s what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don’t find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself.” – NOW president Terry O’Neill

Almost nothing is as reliably entertaining as the lunatic left.






WmWms is using WP-Gravatar