Euphemism

[thedarkages]

I have just read a Web page from an animal shelter, in which the word "die" is replaced by "cross the Rainbow Bridge." Although the effect is supposed to be generally spiritual and positive, we must remember that the shelter is responsible for assisting many of God's wee creatures in "crossing the Rainbow Bridge," whether by gas or lethal injection.

I wonder whether this locution owes anything to Janine Duvitski's "Jane" character on "Waiting For God."

Comments

[pocketnaomi.livejournal.com]

The Rainbow Bridge story is a piece of nice sap about animals that was written about fifteen years back. It's got something of a cult following online. I don't know where the story idea came from, but the phrase comes from the story, it's not an independent euphamism.

Having had to make the decision to ask a vet to kill humanely a couple of my pets who were suffering and not going to get well, I perhaps have a more mixed view of the process than you seem to. I've also worked at a no-kill shelter and appreciate them, but I don't hold the process against anyone -- only the reasons. Killing a healthy, non-dangerous animal because you have too many of them is at very least morally dubious, though I can understand the pressures that lead to it. Killing a vicious/dangerous dog, or an incurably sick and suffering animal who doesn't understand why the world hurts so much is an act of moral necessity.

Non-Euphemism

[thedarkages]

I have now viewed this gooey narrative, and I now understand that it is not merely a euphemism, but a way of life for the grieving pet owner. Admittedly, it is of the same emotional fabric as Jonathan Livingston Seagull, but it does have a purpose.

I was thinking of animals who were killed because of their superfluity. I have no difficulty with having an pet in agony put out of its suffering, or with the destruction of a truly dangerous dog.

Re: Non-Euphemism

[pocketnaomi.livejournal.com]

I agree with you about the Rainbow Bridge story. But it seems to make some people feel better. And a lot of good goes on under its umbrella -- there are several grief-support organizations which draw on it. I've posted a memorial on a related site. It helps a bit.

Killing animals which are healthy but unlikely to be adopted, or just too damn many of them, is an awful thing and I agree with you that sugarcoating the fact to oneself is an act of moral cowardice. But until we can shut down the puppy mills and get people to neuter their pets early, I don't know what else there is to do. Refuse them at the shelter for lack of space and they go onto the streets, where most of them die early and nastily anyway and some of the rest turn dangerous from fear and hunger. Take them in and don't funnel them out again by way of the crematorium, and you get swamped almost instantly.