"Put down" or "put to sleep"? Killing animals

[Carol]

Alex Hogan wrote:
>
> "Put to sleep" is a ridiculous term meant to make it "OK" to kill
animals. They just go to sleep. Yeah, right. They are killed. Rather
nastily. Go to your local pound if you do not know what goes on there.
They should have happy lives, not a doomed future. Get your animals
spayed and neutered before they create more little lives that have to
be snuffed out. And if you want a pet, get one from a shelter, they
are so thrilled and happy to be with someone who wants them! They are
the best! Especially cats. Sorry, my personal love of kitties is a bit
much.

Carol responds:

of course, "put to sleep" is a euphemism, but there's no need for
young people like the woman I'm talking about to get upset and correct
their elders for using a term that they were brought up with. ("Pass
away" is a euphemism, too, but I don't correct people for using it
even though I see it as hiding from the truth that the person in
question died.) It was the young woman's rudeness in correcting me
that disturbed me, not her preferred term, "put down," which I at that
point (some years ago) had never heard.

I have also been "corrected" by my juniors for using "Xerox" as a verb
meaning "to photocopy" and "Kleenex" to mean "tissue." Sorry. These
are terms that are familiar to me and were not considered incorrect
when I learned to use them, and I'm not going to stop using them just
because some kid corrects me. (Other terms, such as "Indian giver,"
which were in common use when I was a child, I have, of course,
stopped using.) At least my generation (or those of my acquaintance)
doesn't go around using four-letter words in every other sentence as
many (not all) younger people do.

It seems to me that politeness--explaining why a certain term might be
preferable to another term--is always better than confrontation. And I
sincerely hope that the young woman in question is not so
confrontational and sanctimonious with her employers, who are likely
to be about a generation older, or she'll soon be out of a job.

When I was young, I was sure, despite my inexperience, that "old"
people didn't know anything, either. Now that I'm no longer young, I
understand that my elders, being human, were right on some counts and
wrong on others. I also understand that language changes with each
generation, whether I want it to or not.

You have every right to consider "put to sleep" an inaccurate and
overly euphemistic expression, as did the young woman in question. It
was her utter disrespect, her rudeness, her assumption that she was
right and that my old-fashioned diction could not possibly have any
justification and that I did not even deserve to be heard, that I
found both offensive and disturbing.

And, just as you find "put to sleep" disturbing, I find "wifebeater"
disturbing. How strange that the various generations all understand
the importance of language but can't agree on what is and isn't
acceptable. It would be nice if everyone--young, middle-aged, and
old--listened to what the others had to say and came to some sort of
compromise. But a knee-jerk reaction and confrontation and the refusal
to listen (and I'm talking about the young woman referred to in my
post, not you) is not going to work. Rather than listening to what
that young woman had to say and perhaps agreeing that she had a point,
I would happily have slapped her for her rudeness and inappropriate
condescenscion, and I was quite happy never to have to see her or
speak with her again. 

Carol, wishing that common courtesy was still common!