Race to the bottom: Challenging the language of horse racing

When we talk about horses, the words we choose matter. 

When picturing a horse, many people immediately think of a ‘racehorse’ – that’s how pervasive the racing industry’s narrative has been. 

But ‘racehorse’ is not an identity. They are individuals, mothers, friends, someone.  

With huge marketing budgets and ‘tradition’ on their side, the racing industry presents itself as one of prestige, care, and mutual partnership between horse and human. Terms like “well cared for” and “athlete” are repeated until they become unquestionable, reinforcing the idea that horses are willing participants rather than individuals coerced and controlled.  

The industry hides behind euphemisms, but we won’t let them: 

In the examples pictured above, see how the animal disappears? A mother becomes a “broodmare”, her stolen child is called a “weanling”.

During races, commentators use euphemisms like “encouraged” instead of whipped, and “pulled up” to hide the fact that a horse could not finish a race, rarely explaining why.

Beyond words, imagery is equally deceptive: green pastures, attentive grooms, and celebrated winners create a comforting story. By centring heritage, glamour, and tradition, the industry deliberately distracts you from the injuries, stress, and disposal of these beautiful animals. 

But forcing animals to race is not something to be admired. It should be scrutinised for the abuse it is – and then dismantled.