Birds, horses, cats, ...stones (?)

[KurtNYC]

A couple thread titles in GD got me thinking about some of the horrible expressions still in use:

"You can kill 2 birds with one stone."
"No sense in beating a dead horse."
"There's more than one way to skin a cat."

Attitudes toward animals have really changed since these expressions worked there way into our discourse (apparently). I mean, Wilma Flintstone may have used a baby elephant as a vacuum cleaner but times have changed.

They are weird when you look at them. And horrible really -- killing two birds just to show off? or as an example of efficiency perhaps (but there is no shortage of stones).

The 2nd one would not exactly get you a degree in Veterinary Science (or Humanities). What horrible behavior to embody in a phrase. And why does 'horse' sneak passed us in this? If it was any other animal I think it would be fresh enough that it would provoke the disgust that the phrase should be provoking.

And if the thought of skinning a cat is not horrific enough for you, how about the idea that there are multiple ways to do it ?! AND the phrase is used in the sense of 'I'm about to tell you something clever.'

Maybe it is time to set the metaphoric baby elephants free and avoid violence to animals in our speech.

[csziggy]

1. How about 101 uses for a dead cat?

"First published in 1981 (ISBN 0-517-54516-0), it was eventually republished in 20 countries and sold over 2 million copies.<1> It spawned two sequels, 101 More Uses of a Dead Cat and Uses of a Dead Cat in History, as well as calendars featuring the cartoons and even a book in response called The Cat's Revenge - More Than 101 Uses for Dead People. In 2006, a 25th anniversary edition of A Hundred and One Uses of a Dead Cat was published with a new foreword." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/101_Uses_for_a_Dead_Cat

A very funny book but how weird is that?

[NV Whino]

2. A thrush in the bush is worth two in the zoo.