Slog Comments


Comments (19) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
internet_jen 1
I am okay with both.
Posted by internet_jen on April 2, 2012 at 12:41 PM · Report this
ScrawnyKayaker 2
Which is it, dog or cat? That's going to affect my vote.
Posted by ScrawnyKayaker on April 2, 2012 at 12:42 PM · Report this
balderdash 3
I always thought "food baby" was bulging bellyfat, but I still thought it was a gross, stupid phrase.

Fur baby is a little eye-rolling but not extraordinarily offensive.
Posted by balderdash on April 2, 2012 at 12:46 PM · Report this
pfffter 4
Anything having to do with babies is automatically more repellant than anything else.
Posted by pfffter on April 2, 2012 at 12:47 PM · Report this
Where's the option for BOTH?
Posted by MLM on April 2, 2012 at 12:50 PM · Report this
leek 6
Option 3, the misspelling of "repellent."

Posted by leek on April 2, 2012 at 12:53 PM · Report this
pfffter 7
Both spellings are accepted, smartypants.…
Posted by pfffter on April 2, 2012 at 12:57 PM · Report this
David Schmader 8
6: Gah! Sorry, thanks, fixed.

Also, I cannot believe so many people are getting this one wrong.
Posted by David Schmader on April 2, 2012 at 12:57 PM · Report this
wisepunk 9
@8 you saw my facebook post from the weekend, didn't you?
Posted by wisepunk on April 2, 2012 at 12:59 PM · Report this
leek 10
pfff, ONLY BY LOSERS. Including the dictionary people, apparently.
Posted by leek on April 2, 2012 at 1:04 PM · Report this
Matt from Denver 11
Poo is more repellent than pets. What can we say?

Also, @ 7 is right. Spellcheck recognizes both spellings of "repellant" (but curiously it doesn't recognize "spellcheck").
Posted by Matt from Denver on April 2, 2012 at 1:31 PM · Report this
Badger 12
Food babies end up getting flushed away, but fur babies get dragged around by people who expect the rest of us to respect and adore their "kids".

Fur babies are the worst!
Posted by Badger on April 2, 2012 at 1:31 PM · Report this
venomlash 13
Of course, babyfur is far more repellent than either. Don't believe it? Google that word and you WILL habeeb it. Twinkie house!
Posted by venomlash on April 2, 2012 at 1:32 PM · Report this
thatsnotright 14
Both are lingusitic monsters.

Food baby is a horrible, twee euphemism. Any parent who uses it when talking to their child should be reported to CPS for stunting the emotional growth of their offspring.

Any adult using it is infantile.

Fur baby is just slightly less horrible because it doesn't euphemise a bodily function but anyone using it should have to wear doll clothes 24/7.
Posted by thatsnotright on April 2, 2012 at 1:33 PM · Report this
Stiny 15
I thought food baby referred to belly fat, or alternatively to the noticable abdominal distension that occurs when thin people eat a large meal.

No matter the meaning, it's still distasteful.
Posted by Stiny on April 2, 2012 at 2:11 PM · Report this
rinohog 16
Fur babies are what we call the clumps of fur the dog produces that get stuck under the furniture.
Posted by rinohog on April 2, 2012 at 3:01 PM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 17
Never heard either of them before.

But anyone who ever uses the expression "pet parent" receives, and deserves, eternal scorn.
Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 2, 2012 at 3:08 PM · Report this
Zebes 18
Food baby is physically repulsive; fur baby is psychologically repulsive. The utterance of either lessens the speaker and all who hear them.
Posted by Zebes on April 2, 2012 at 3:19 PM · Report this
I'd never read the term food baby before, and I sincerely wish that I could unread it.
Posted by Joe Glibmoron on April 2, 2012 at 7:21 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Commenting on this item is available only to registered commenters.