All Discussions Tagged 'speciesism' - Animal Rights Zone2024-03-29T14:39:41Zhttp://arzone.ning.com/forum/topic/listForTag?tag=speciesism&feed=yes&xn_auth=noARZone Total Liberation Interview 14 ~ Carol J. Adamstag:arzone.ning.com,2018-05-10:4715978:Topic:1706152018-05-10T00:39:53.579ZAnimal Rights Zonehttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/admin
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In this interview we were thrilled to welcome our special guest, Carol J. Adams.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Carol is the author of more than 20 books, including the ground breaking The Sexual Politics of Meat now in a 25th anniversary edition. Burger, just released in Bloomsbury’s Object Lessons Series and the forthcoming Protest Kitchen: Fight Injustice, Save the Planet, and Fuel Your Resistance One Meal at a Time. She is also the author of…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In this interview we were thrilled to welcome our special guest, Carol J. Adams.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Carol is the author of more than 20 books, including the ground breaking The Sexual Politics of Meat now in a 25th anniversary edition. Burger, just released in Bloomsbury’s Object Lessons Series and the forthcoming Protest Kitchen: Fight Injustice, Save the Planet, and Fuel Your Resistance One Meal at a Time. She is also the author of over 100 articles on the topics of vegetarianism and veganism, animal advocacy, domestic violence and sexual abuse, with a focus on the interconnections between forms of violence against humans and against other animals.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Carol has been an inspiring leader of the animal movement for decades, is highly respected for her work and has been a mentor to countless other advocates. <span>To read Carol's article on DxE that was discussed in the interview, please <a href="http://caroljadams.com/carol-adams-blog/why-i-am-boycotting-events-if-dxe-is-also-an-invited-speaker" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE.</a></span></span></p>
<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">To listen to this interview please <span style="font-size: 18pt;"><a href="https://ia601507.us.archive.org/15/items/ARZoneTotalLiberationInterview14CarolAdams/ARZone%20Total%20Liberation%20Interview%2014%20~%20Carol%20Adams.mp3" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE</a></span> or use the player below.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"><iframe width="100%" height="200" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/441864045&color=%23748cb4&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&show_teaser=true"></iframe>
</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"><strong><font face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">Please also visit <a href="http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/arzone-animal-rights-zone/id555064645" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this webpage to subscribe using iTunes</a>, and please remember to <a href="http://arzone.ning.com/page/podcasts" target="_blank" rel="noopener">visit the podcast page</a> to view a complete listing of all ARZone podcasts.</font></strong></span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038400860?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="500" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038400860?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="500" class="align-center"/></a></span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">******* </span></p> ARZone Intersectionality Interview 24 - Christopher Sebastiantag:arzone.ning.com,2017-03-08:4715978:Topic:1618292017-03-08T22:13:49.112ZAnimal Rights Zonehttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/admin
<p><span class="font-size-4" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">Episode 24 features long time vegan and pro-intersectionality justice advocate, Christopher Sebastian.<br></br><br></br></span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;">Sebastian is a long time vegan and social justice advocate. He focuses on examining the complex relationships between speciesism, racism, and queer oppression, and he organises discussions relative to exploring the…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-4">Episode 24 features long time vegan and pro-intersectionality justice advocate, Christopher Sebastian.<br/><br/></span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;">Sebastian is a long time vegan and social justice advocate. He focuses on examining the complex relationships between speciesism, racism, and queer oppression, and he organises discussions relative to exploring the intersectionality of veganism and other movements for social justice.<br/><br/></span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;">Sebastian is speaking at the Brighton Vegfest this weekend.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><strong><span class="font-size-4"><font face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><br/>Please click <a href="https://ia801508.us.archive.org/4/items/ARZoneIntersectionalityInterview24Sebastian2017/ARZone%20Intersectionality%20Interview%2024%20Sebastian%202017.mp3" target="_blank">H E R E</a>, to listen, or visit <a href="http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/arzone-animal-rights-zone/id555064645" target="_blank">this webpage to subscribe using iTunes</a>, and please remember to <a href="http://arzone.ning.com/page/podcasts" target="_blank">visit the podcast page</a> to view a complete listing of all ARZone podcasts.</font></span></strong></p>
<p></p>
<p><strong><span class="font-size-4"><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3807311634?profile=original" target="_self"><font face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3807311634?profile=original" width="336" class="align-center"/></font></a></span></strong></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-4"> </span></p> Christopher Sebastian ~ Queering Animal Liberation: Why Animal Rights is a Queer Issuetag:arzone.ning.com,2016-11-03:4715978:Topic:1599492016-11-03T21:25:18.645ZAnimal Rights Zonehttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/admin
<p style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-7" style="font-family: impact, chicago;">Queering Animal Liberation: Why Animal Rights is a Queer Issue</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-4" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">Christopher Sebastian</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">In this talk, from Vegfest UK London 2016, as part of the first Pro-Intersectionality Vegan…</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: impact, chicago;" class="font-size-7">Queering Animal Liberation: Why Animal Rights is a Queer Issue</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-4">Christopher Sebastian</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">In this talk, from Vegfest UK London 2016, as part of the first Pro-Intersectionality Vegan Conference ever held, Christopher Sebastian - ARZone podcast presenter, staff writer at Vegan Publishers, part-time lecturer on speciesism at Columbia University, and social media manager of Peace Advocacy Network, covers a broad overview of the multiple connections between animal liberation and queer liberation from an American queer black perspective.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/SkRke88QKPs?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">For more from Vegfest UK London 2016, see their Youtube channel <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCM50WjJjvG4OSFyY0aO4WZw" target="_blank">HERE</a>, and for more from Sebastian, see his ARZone intersectionality Interviews <a href="http://arzone.ning.com/page/arzone-intersectionality-interviews" target="_self">HERE.</a></span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;">****************</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;">******</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038398868?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038398868?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-center"/></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-4">***********</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-4"> </span></p> A Few Thoughts on the Animal Rights Movementtag:arzone.ning.com,2016-04-20:4715978:Topic:1540092016-04-20T22:34:57.592ZAnimal Rights Zonehttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/admin
<p style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-7" style="font-family: impact, chicago;">A Few Thoughts on the Animal Rights Movement</span> <br></br><span class="font-size-4" style="font-family: 'arial black', 'avant garde';">Written by Kevin Watkinson<br></br><br></br></span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038388561?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-right" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038388561?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="250"></img></a> It seems fair to say…</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: impact, chicago;" class="font-size-7">A Few Thoughts on the Animal Rights Movement</span> <br/><span style="font-family: 'arial black', 'avant garde';" class="font-size-4">Written by Kevin Watkinson<br/><br/></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038388561?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="250" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038388561?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="250" class="align-right"/></a>It seems fair to say that <a href="http://www.tomregan.info" target="_blank">Tom Regan</a> has made a profound contribution to the modern animal rights movement, and in this television <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74BrTufO06s" target="_blank">interview</a> with William Friday, Regan offers a broad introduction to animal rights theory. In more recent times it has been interesting to examine how this view of <a href="http://www.cultureandanimals.org/pop1.html#top" target="_blank">intrinsic rights</a> is represented within the ‘animal rights movement’ itself, and it appears these views have become marginalised in favour of a utilitarian approach (generally regarded as harm reduction) where veganism has been presented as one option among many that could effectively address our responsibilities to non-human animals. This approach has also tended to include a discussion of animal welfare in a way that is underpinned by collaborative efforts with the animal industry, rather than in regard to genuine caregiving or help for non-human animals (Lee Hall considers differences in welfare between ‘authentic welfare’ and ‘a term that deceives’).<br/><br/></span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">One group in particular that has appeared in the ‘animal rights movement’ are the ‘effective altruists’; and a common claim of this group is that they wish to reduce animal suffering on as wide a scale as possible. However, in practice this often results in violating the rights of one group or individual, in favour of others, in the name of effectiveness. Decisions taken as to which violations are more acceptable than others often seem to be centred upon the position of human domination, and could be attributed to a continuation of our culturally indoctrinated speciesism. In this way we could say their approach is inherently </span><a href="http://animalethics.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/tom-regan-on-utilitarianism.html" target="_blank" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">speciesist</a><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">, because they choose not to argue from a position of the individual rights of others, but from their own position of domination.<br/><br/></span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">One of the central tenets of veganism</span> <a href="https://network23.org/orcasandanimals/2016/04/19/a-few-thoughts-on-the-animal-rights-movement/#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">[1]</a><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;"> itself is that it opposes animal exploitation, therefore it fits neatly into a *justice for all* approach where there is an anti-speciesist foundation, this is because we need to incorporate anti-speciesism in a similar way to how we need to incorporate anti-racism and anti-sexism into our justice approach. Adopting this perspective legitimises animal rights as part of an intersectional justice movement. It would seem the minimum we need to do here for non-human animals is that we refrain from either reinforcing or offering reassurance to people in their exploitation of animals, whilst presenting veganism as the basis of our anti-speciesist approach.<br/><br/></span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">In a recent </span><a href="http://veganpublishers.com/multimedia-archive/motivational-methods/" target="_blank" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">book</a><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;"> Casey Taft outlined how we can advocate effectively for animals in ways that are consistent with veganism and animal rights; and Bob Torres wrote about how we also need to be critical of the structure of ‘animal rights’ organisations because their desire for mainstream success progressed in a way that perpetuated mainstream oppressions (for instance racism and sexism). Indeed, the quest for positive news stories facilitated a false narrative that effectively limited, ignored or dismissed criticism from justice advocates (often under the guise of being ‘divisive’). This issue has spilled over into ‘animal rights’ conferences that have frequently been organised to cater to a specific agenda rather than as an opportunity to present a broad number of perspectives *from* an animal rights position.<br/><br/></span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038396005?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="250" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038396005?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="250" class="align-right"/></a>Since the inception of the modern animal rights movement it appears as if core values have become marginalised, as it is probably fair to say the initial intention was to help people bring animal rights and vegan ideas into practice through support and education (Donald Watson considered this ‘ripening’), engaging in awareness raising activities and to help non-human animals where possible. The issue of marginalisation has appeared two-fold, on the one hand there is the </span><a href="https://network23.org/orcasandanimals/2016/03/25/a-few-thoughts-on-elitism-in-the-animal-movement/" target="_blank" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">professionalisation</a><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;"> of the movement which has acted to diminish grassroots advocacy, and on the other, the ‘abolitionist’ bogeymen (not without foundation) that have allowed people to conveniently sidestep questions from a rights perspective that legitimately challenged their position.<br/><br/></span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">As the animal rights movement presently stands it could justifiably be described as confusing, and this has caused ‘conflict’ within the movement itself. The animal rights movement has ceded space and hasn’t in turn compensated by either creating new spaces or maintaining space for the expression of rights based ideas. Where utilitarians have attempted to mitigate conflict they have generally privileged their own approach (hypocritical) and marginalised animal rights views (hypercritical). As part of this </span><a href="https://network23.org/orcasandanimals/2016/02/02/tolerance-division-and-appropriation-strategy-for-a-mainstream-monoculture/" target="_blank" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">process</a> <span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">there have also been attempts to silence animal rights advocates through accusations of ‘policing’, ‘shaming’, and by the construction of false ideas that suggest we are ‘all heading in the same direction’, a misnomer designed to present all ideas as similar enough to be compatible, or that it is our responsibility to back down from a rights based position because it suits the ‘mainstream’ movement for that to happen. This dominant position within the animal rights movement seems to overlook the necessity for a certain degree of ‘conflict’/ debate / discussion / reflexivity that helps to maintain a functional movement.<br/><br/></span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">As a result it appears useful to refer to the ‘animal movement’ instead of the ‘animal rights movement’ when encompassing the various groups involved, whilst being mindful of different descriptors such as reducetarian and flexitarian to explain utilitarian preferences, and how these approaches have necessarily diminished vegan advocacy. We ought to allow space for people to discuss animal rights ideas without disruptive accusations such as ‘sounding like an abolitionist’ or not being ‘effective, pragmatic or strategic’ because activists are simply unwilling to reassure people over their animal consumption. The actual animal rights movement itself has stagnated under the weight of ‘effective’ utilitarian ideas, which when closely examined have little in common with either veganism or animal rights.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"> </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><br/>References</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><a href="http://dysophia.org.uk/from-animals-to-anarchism-open-letter-3/" target="_blank">From Animals to Anarchism</a>, by Kevin Watkinson and Donal O’Driscoll (2014)</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><a href="https://www.akpress.org/makingakillingakpress.html" target="_blank">Making a Killing</a>: The Political Economy of Animal Rights, by Bob Torres (2007)</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><a href="http://veganpublishers.com/multimedia-archive/motivational-methods/" target="_blank">Motivational Methods for Vegan Advocacy</a>: A Clinical Psychology Perspective, by Casey Taft (2016)</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><a href="https://veganplace.wordpress.com/on-their-own-terms/" target="_blank">On Their Own Terms</a>: Animal Liberation for the 21st Century, by Lee Hall (2016)</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"> </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><a href="https://network23.org/orcasandanimals/2016/04/19/a-few-thoughts-on-the-animal-rights-movement/#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">[1]</a> The Vegan Society definition* and not a dietary misrepresentation some people seem to prefer.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">*<em>“A philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals</em>.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"> </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Thanks to the people who have contributed to this piece in a variety of ways.<br/><br/><br/></span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038391505?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="150" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038391505?profile=RESIZE_180x180" width="150" class="align-left"/></a><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Kevin Watkinson is a vegan animal rights advocate in the UK, who maintains a successful blog titled Orcas and Animals. Kevin is also a moderator and administrator of ARZone </span></span></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">*******</span></span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p> Peter Singer: On Racism, Animal Rights and Human Rightstag:arzone.ning.com,2015-06-02:4715978:Topic:1500572015-06-02T22:18:02.499ZCarolyn Baileyhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/CarolynBailey
<h1 class="headline" style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-7" style="color: #000000; font-family: impact, chicago;"><strong>Peter Singer: On Racism, Animal Rights and Human Rights</strong></span></h1>
<div class="subhead-items"><div id="byline" style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">By GEORGE YANCY and PETER SINGER<br></br> <br></br> <br></br></span> <em style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">This is…</em></div>
</div>
<h1 class="headline" style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #000000; font-family: impact, chicago;" class="font-size-7"><strong>Peter Singer: On Racism, Animal Rights and Human Rights</strong></span></h1>
<div class="subhead-items"><div id="byline" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">By GEORGE YANCY and PETER SINGER<br/> <br/> <br/></span> <em style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">This is the 12th in a series of interviews with philosophers on race that George Yancy is conducting for The Stone. This week’s conversation is with Peter Singer, a professor of bioethics at Princeton University. He is the author of numerous books, including, most recently, “<a href="http://www.mostgoodyoucando.com/" target="_blank">The Most Good You Can Do</a>.” <br/> <br/></em></div>
</div>
<div class="article-body"><p class="p-block a-ok"></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>George Yancy:</strong> You have popularized the concept of speciesism, which, I believe was first used by the animal activist Richard Ryder. Briefly, define that term and how do you see it as similar to or different from racism?<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>Peter Singer: </strong>Speciesism is an attitude of bias against a being because of the species to which it belongs. Typically, humans show speciesism when they give less weight to the interests of nonhuman animals than they give to the similar interests of human beings. Note the requirement that the interests in question be “similar.” It’s not speciesism to say that normal humans have an interest in continuing to live that is different from the interests that nonhuman animals have. One might, for instance, argue that a being with the ability to think of itself as existing over time, and therefore to plan its life, and to work for future achievements, has a greater interest in continuing to live than a being who lacks such capacities.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">On that basis, one might argue that to kill a normal human being who wants to go on living is more seriously wrong than killing a nonhuman animal. Whether this claim is or is not sound, it is not speciesist. But given that some human beings – most obviously, those with profound intellectual impairment – lack this capacity, or have it to a lower degree than some nonhuman animals, it would be speciesist to claim that it is <em>always</em> more seriously wrong to kill a member of the species <em>Homo sapiens </em>than it is to kill a nonhuman animal.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>G.Y.:</strong> While I think that it is ethically important to discuss the issue of failing to extend to other (nonhuman) animals the principle of equality, we continue to fail miserably in the ways in which we extend that principle to black people, the disabled, women and others, here in the United States and around the world. What is it that motivates the failure or the refusal to extend this principle to other human beings in ethically robust ways? I’m especially thinking here in terms of the reality of racism.</span></p>
<p class="p-block"></p>
<div class="span-image type-image related-asset p-block"><div class="imageholder proportion-image spanTouchstate"><div class="spacer"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><a href="http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/opinionator/2015/05/27/peter-singer-on-speciesism-and-racism/?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad&_r=1&referrer=#modal-lightbox" target="_blank"><img src="http://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/05/27/opinion/27stone/27stone-articleLarge.jpg?width=500" width="500" class="align-center"/></a></span></div>
</div>
<div class="image-caption"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><br/> <br/></span></div>
</div>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>P.S.: </strong>Although it is true, of course, that we have not overcome racism, sexism or discrimination against people with disabilities, there is at least widespread acceptance that such discrimination is wrong, and there are laws that seek to prevent it. With speciesism, we are very far from reaching that point. If we were to compare attitudes about speciesism today with past racist attitudes, we would have to say that we are back in the days in which the slave trade was still legal, although under challenge by some enlightened voices.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Why do racism, sexism and discrimination against people with disabilities still exist, despite the widespread acceptance that they are wrong? There are several reasons, but surely one is that many people act unthinkingly on the basis of their emotional impulses, without reflecting on the ethics of what they are doing. That, of course, invites us to discuss why some people have these negative emotional impulses toward people of other races, and that in turn leads to the old debate whether such prejudices are innate or are learned from one’s culture and environment. There is evidence that even babies are attracted to faces that look more like those of the people they see around them all the time, so there could be an evolved innate element, but culture certainly plays a very significant role.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>G.Y.: </strong>Having referenced the slave trade, I think that it is important to keep in mind that it was partly constituted by a white racist ideology that held that Africans were sub-persons. There was also the European notion that nonwhites were incapable of planning their own lives and had to be paternalistically ruled over. As a white Australian, are there parallels in terms of how the indigenous people of Australia have been treated, especially in terms of sub-personhood, and paternalism?<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>P.S.: </strong>Yes, unfortunately there are parallels. The early European settlers regarded the indigenous people as an inferior race, living a miserable existence. Because the indigenous people were nomadic, they were regarded as having no ownership of their land, which in British colonial law therefore belonged to nobody – the legal term was <em>terra nullius</em> – and so, very conveniently, could be occupied by Europeans. In some cases, when indigenous people killed cattle that were grazing on their traditional lands, Europeans went out in “shooting parties,” killing them indiscriminately, as they would animals. Some of the Europeans justified this on the grounds that the indigenous people, like animals, had no souls. Although such killings were never permitted in law, enforcement was another matter.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">When the Commonwealth of Australia was formed from the separate colonies in 1901, indigenous people were not able to vote, nor were they included in the census. Voting rights were achieved in stages over the next 60 years. The <em>terra nullius </em>doctrine was only overturned by the High Court of Australia in 1992 and indigenous communities then became able to claim rights over traditional land still in the possession of the government.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Australian government policy toward indigenous people became more benevolent, but it remained paternalistic until well into the 20th century, and some argue, to the present day. Restrictions on the sale of alcohol in Australia’s Northern Territory, where many indigenous people live, can be seen as evidence that paternalism still prevails, even though the restrictions do not, on their face, take into account the race of the person purchasing alcohol. Against that, it has to be said, many self-governing indigenous communities, acutely aware of the devastation that alcohol has caused to their people, restrict its use in the areas under their control. Indeed, some indigenous leaders have themselves promoted a swing back to more paternalistic policies.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>G.Y.: </strong>Yet, it seems to me that the issue of alcohol abuse would perhaps not exist had indigenous people in Australia not been subjected to forms of oppression and marginalization in the first place. This is not to deny choice, but to acknowledge that structural forms of oppression, poverty and marginalization should be taken into account. Native Americans and First Nations people in Alaska also have huge problems with alcoholism. Some indigenous people in Australia are even sniffing petrol, which has it own specific devastating consequences. In what ways do you think that the alcoholism and the substance abuse described above are linked to these larger structural issues that disproportionately impact indigenous people?<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>P.S.: </strong>You are correct that the situation of Australia’s indigenous people is in some respects similar to that of Native Americans and First Nations in Alaska, or for that matter in Canada too. The destruction of indigenous culture, and of the way of life that for thousands of years gave meaning and a social structure to the lives of indigenous people obviously play a role in leading some of them to drink or try to get high on petrol fumes. Indigenous Australians receive housing, health care and sufficient income to meet their needs, but what has been taken away can never be restored. The problem goes so deep – and is now often compounded, as we have been saying, with alcohol and petrol abuse, which in turn lead to domestic violence and serious health damage – that it is hard to know how the situation can be turned around.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>G.Y.:</strong> Above, you mentioned “emotional impulses,” but don’t you think that white racism is also based upon institutional structures? Racist practices are expressed systemically through banks, education, the prison industrial complex, health care, etc that just need to keep functioning to continue privileging and empowering some (white people) and oppressing and degrading others (black people). Historically, the concept of institutional racism was systematically deployed during the Black Power Movement in the 1960s and was popularized by Stokely Carmichael (later known as Kwame Touré) and Charles V. Hamilton.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>P.S.: </strong>What you are here referring to as “the institutional system” includes distinct sectors of society, and each of these sectors has its own divisions and subdivisions. The extent to which they are racist will vary, and it would take detailed evidence and analysis to demonstrate that each of these sectors, and each of its divisions and subdivisions, involves or expresses racist practices. So all I can say, without getting into all the detailed evidence that would be needed to consider each sector and then build back to an overall picture, is that where there is institutional racism, it can take the place of racist emotional impulses. Often, however, there will be racist emotional attitudes as well, and they will then support the institutional structures, making them more difficult to change.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>G.Y.: </strong>And, in turn, can we say that institutional structures can instill and support certain racist emotional impulses?<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>P.S.: </strong>Yes. Where racist institutional structures continue to exist, they will provide a specific channel for racist feelings and attitudes, and in some situations, will serve to legitimate and reinforce them. But we cannot say how important this is without first determining which institutional structures are still racist, and to what extent and in what ways they are racist.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>G.Y.: </strong>There is, however, data that shows that black people suffer disproportionately with respect to bank lending practices, quality of education, quality of health care, arrest rates for nonviolent drug offenses. However, returning to what you said earlier, do you think that racism is innate or cultural? Even if there appears to be a proclivity toward a kind of xenophobic tribalism expressed within the human species, racism seems to be of a different order, yes?<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>P.S.: </strong>Racism is certainly different from xenophobia, or tribalism. Racism develops its own ideology and, as you pointed out, institutional structures. But if by “a different order” you mean that racism and xenophobic tribalism have distinct origins, I am not sure about that. It’s possible that xenophobia is the underlying impulse that, in different cultures, expresses itself in varying forms, and racism is one of those forms.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>G.Y.: </strong>Yes. I think that racism may very well have its roots in a kind of xenophobic tribalism, but white racism expresses itself in all sorts of perverse ways and is perhaps motivated from psychic needs/places that transcend xenophobic tribalism.</span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong><br/> P.S.: </strong>Maybe. We have strong hierarchical tendencies. We like to think that there is always someone below us, and for many people, having power over others seems, regrettably, to reaffirm their sense of self-importance and thus to make them feel good. That may be a psychic need that finds an outlet in racism. For some people, it also finds an outlet in the abuse of animals. In particular, jobs in factory farms and poultry processing plants are poorly paid, high pressure and low status. That may be why, year after year, undercover investigators in factory farms and slaughterhouses continue to find evidence of <a href="https://www.mercyforanimals.org/investigations.aspx" target="_blank">the most atrocious abuse</a>, like workers bashing pigs with steel pipes, or <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/20/business/kfc-supplier-accused-of-animal-cruelty.html" target="_blank">using live chickens as footballs</a>.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>G.Y.: </strong>To what extent do you think that biases against nonhuman animals are grounded within a certain unethical stewardship toward nature itself? Do you think that this is a specifically Western approach to nature where nature is conceived as an “object” over which we ought to have absolute control? Certainly, Francis Bacon seems to have had this idea. Of course, then there was René Descartes, who argued that nonhuman animals are mere machines.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>P.S.: </strong>It is true that Western thinking emphasizes the gulf between humans and nature, and also between humans and animals, to a far greater extent than Eastern thinking, or the thinking that is characteristic of indigenous peoples. Yet it is also true that the treatment of both animals and nature is, today, generally worse in the East than in the West. Every visitor to Beijing has breathed in evidence of what China has allowed its industries to do to the air. Laws protecting the welfare of animals in Europe are far in advance of those in Eastern countries, including those with strong Buddhist traditions like Japan and Thailand. China still doesn’t even have a national animal welfare law. So if the domination of nature and of animals was originally a Western idea, the sad fact is that it is being taken up avidly in the East, precisely at the time when it is being vigorously challenged in the West.<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>G.Y.: </strong>Today black people are still fighting to be recognized as fully human, to assert that our lives matter. Historically, we have often been compared to nonhuman animals. On various occasions, President Obama has been depicted as a monkey. Obviously, this image is meant to degrade, and can only be understood against the backdrop of black people in the United State fighting against a reduction of our humanity. How can black people, on the one hand, reject the reduction of, say, Obama to a monkey, and yet be against speciesism?<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>P.S.: </strong>I don’t see any problem in opposing both racism and speciesism, indeed, to me the greater intellectual difficulty lies in trying to reject one form of prejudice and oppression while accepting and even practicing the other. And here we should again mention another of these deeply rooted, widespread forms of prejudice and oppression, sexism. If we think that simply being a member of the species <em>Homo sapiens </em>justifies us in giving more weight to the interests of members of our own species than we give to members of other species, what are we to say to the racists or sexists who make the same claim on behalf of their race or sex?</span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">The more perceptive social critics recognize that these are all aspects of the same phenomenon. The African-American comedian Dick Gregory, who worked with Martin Luther King as a civil rights activist, has written that when he looks at circus animals, <a href="http://www.peta.org/living/entertainment/dick-gregory-circuses" target="_blank">he thinks of slavery</a>: “Animals in circuses represent the domination and oppression we have fought against for so long. They wear the same chains and shackles.” (Alice Walker, the African-American author of “The Color Purple<em>,” </em>also has a memorable quote: “The animals of the world exist for their own reasons. They were not made for humans any more than black people were made for white, or women were created for men.”<br/> <br/></span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong>G.Y.: </strong>Given that we have not even figured out how to treat those of our own species with dignity and respect, as someone who continues to fight against speciesism, do you have thoughts on how we might effectively dismantle racism?</span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong><br/> P.S.: </strong>With all of these “isms” – racism, sexism and speciesism – I’m an optimist about making progress, but a pessimist about achieving complete success any time soon. I’m encouraged by the facts compiled by Steven Pinker in “The Better Angels of Our Nature.” Pinker draws on and completes the argument of my own work, “The Expanding Circle.”</span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">I do believe that we are slowly expanding the circle of our moral concern. Pinker provides evidence for the claim that, notwithstanding the media headlines, we are living in less violent and more enlightened times than any previous century. This will surely help marginalized, disempowered and oppressed groups. We can hope to isolate and reduce the impact of racism and sexism, but eliminating them altogether is going to be a long struggle. With speciesism, unfortunately, we still have much further to go, because it remains the mainstream view.</span></p>
<p class="p-block a-ok" style="text-align: center;"><strong> </strong><em>This interview was conducted by email and edited. Previous interviews in this series (with Linda Martin Alcoff, Judith Butler, Noam Chomsky, Charles Mills, Falguni A. Sheth and others) can be found <a href="http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/tag/philosophers-on-race/" target="_blank">here</a>.</em></p>
<p class="p-block" style="text-align: center;"><em>George Yancy is a professor of philosophy at Duquesne University. He has written, edited and co-edited numerous books, including “Black Bodies, White Gazes,” “Look, a White!” and “Pursuing Trayvon Martin,” co-edited with Janine Jones.</em></p>
<p class="p-block" style="text-align: center;"><em>Follow The New York Times Opinion section on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/nytopinion" target="_blank">Facebook</a> and on <a href="https://www.twitter.com/nytpolitics" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, and sign up for the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/newsletters/opiniontoday/" target="_blank">Opinion Today newsletter</a>.</em></p>
<p class="p-block" style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p class="p-block" style="text-align: center;"><em><span class="font-size-3">This interview was originally published at the <a href="http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/opinionator/2015/05/27/peter-singer-on-speciesism-and-racism/?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad&_r=1&referrer=" target="_blank">NY Times blog</a></span><br/> <br/> <span class="font-size-3"><a href="http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/opinionator/2015/05/27/peter-singer-on-speciesism-and-racism/?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad&_r=1&referrer=">http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/opinionator/2015/05/27/peter-singer-on-speciesism-and-racism/?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad&_r=1&referrer=</a></span><br/></em></p>
<p class="p-block" style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p class="p-block" style="text-align: center;"><em><span class="font-size-3">***</span></em></p>
<p class="p-block" style="text-align: center;"></p>
</div> Distanced From Death: Animal Cruelty at the Abattoirtag:arzone.ning.com,2013-08-09:4715978:Topic:1360052013-08-09T03:54:50.721ZCarolyn Baileyhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/CarolynBailey
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 24pt; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">Distanced from death: animal cruelty at the abattoir</span></p>
<div class="headline_area"><p style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">Written by <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/nik-taylor-4588048.html" target="_blank">NIK TAYLOR…</a></span></p>
<br></br>
<p></p>
</div>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 24pt; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">Distanced from death: animal cruelty at the abattoir</span></p>
<div class="headline_area"><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Written by <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/nik-taylor-4588048.html" target="_blank">NIK TAYLOR</a></span></p>
<br/>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><strong><em>Violence towards animals facing death in abattoirs has horrified many. But what damage does the daily management of death inflict on slaughterhouse workers? asks <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/nik-taylor-4588048.html" target="_blank">Nik Taylor.</a></em></strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038401071?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="300" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038401071?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300" class="align-right"/></a>The recent expose of <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3720275.htm" target="_blank">cruelty to turkeys</a> in a Sydney slaughterhouse comes on the back of similar reports of animal abuse in other Australian slaughterhouses and has people asking questions about the nature of slaughterhouse work – is there something about it that predisposes workers towards cruel and callous treatment of animals, and possibly of other humans too? Slaughterhouse work, which can involve killing up to 10,000 animals per hour (or three per second), is hard, dirty and often dangerous. High levels of worker dissatisfaction, racism and sexism are <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/16/us/slaughterhouse-some-things-never-die-who-kills-who-cuts-who-bosses-can-depend.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm" target="_blank">well-documented</a> facets of life for slaughterhouse workers. Less considered, however, are the kinds of damage the daily management of death might inflict on workers.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Humans have different, and often conflicting, attitudes to animals depending on the function of the animal in question. For instance, most of the 63 per cent of Australians who live with pets consider them to be family members, yet at the same time we live in a culture where we see animals as commodities to be <a href="http://www.lanternbooks.com/detail.html?id=9781590564233" target="_blank">disposed of at will</a> when deemed necessary. This has shocking consequences - millions of pets destroyed worldwide; around 45,000 cats and dogs are euthanised per year in Australia by the RSPCA alone.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">The ultimate disposable animals, though, are those destined to be food on our plates and the volume at which we consume them is shocking - annual numbers of animals killed for food currently stand at around 10 billion a year in the US; 9 million in Australia, and 900 million in the UK, and these statistics are likely to be lower than the reality as they are collated in ways which don't account for all species (e.g. marine life). Surely this shows, at a societal level, a deeply embedded disregard for other animals. At the very least it demonstrates a belief that humans can, and should, use other species for their own 'needs'.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">In many cases the callous disregard some slaughterhouse workers show toward the animals they deal with is an extension of this attitude. Animals destined for slaughter are reconfigured as meat long before they enter the slaughterhouse. This makes what happens in a slaughterhouse palatable - for workers and for general society too. In other words, slaughterhouse workers manage their work by distancing themselves from the animals they kill. They make use of technical and economic language to describe the animals and the practices of killing them - dead chickens is not a term used, instead, reference is made to whole bird products; parts of cows become 'pieces of beef'; the act of killing becomes one of 'processing', and so on. These distancing techniques are based on a need to no longer see the animal as a whole, sentient, being, and to remove any sense of the animal as worthy and thus remove any empathy the worker might have with them. We know that reduced empathy - the ability to recognise the feelings of others - can lead to callous attitudes and violent behaviour and that assuming another being is worthless can lead to a lack of moral concern, so it's no surprise that some slaughterhouse workers are casually cruel to the animals they process. That this spills over into violence and cruelty is not surprising; rather, that we don't see more instances of such behaviour is the surprise. There's a clear, and urgent need, then to address cruelty in slaughterhouses - for the animals and the humans involved. Education, training and awareness, perhaps under the auspices of Occupational Health and Safety, will be a start as will the installation of CCTV in all slaughterhouses but we also need to look at the tougher issues.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Research tells us that some slaughterhouse workers are more prone to violence than members of the general population and it also tells us that communities where slaughterhouses are located experience higher levels of crime and deviance. These are uncomfortable facts as they point to a need to consider the way we manage our relationships with other species and, like anything that makes us uncomfortable, we sweep it under the carpet. With slaughterhouses this occurs literally as we relegate them spatially to the edges of society; it is their very invisibility which makes them palatable. Sadly, this also means those who work there are often ignored and/or reviled, or in the current case, blamed and pathologised when it comes to instances of cruelty to animals. The reality is that in a world where animals are considered inferior and to exist primarily for human needs/gain, cruel and abusive behaviour toward them is the norm rather than the exception. Recognising the mechanisms whereby this occurs throughout our societies and cultures is the only way to end abusive behaviour towards other creatures, both within and without the slaughterhouse.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Source: </span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4588016.html" target="_blank"><img width="430" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3807311783?profile=RESIZE_480x480" width="430" class="align-center"/></a></span></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><em><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038420769?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038420769?profile=original" width="100" class="align-left"/></a>Nik Taylor is Senior Lecturer in Sociology at Flinders University in South Australia, the Managing Editor of Society & Animals and a charter scholar of the Animals and Society Institute. View her full profile <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/nik-taylor-4588048.html" target="_blank">here</a>.</em></span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"></p>
</div> Do white supremacy and patriarchy hurt animals?tag:arzone.ning.com,2013-07-19:4715978:Topic:1338182013-07-19T13:57:45.503ZAnastasia Yarbroughhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/AnastasiaYarbrough
<p></p>
<p>I wanted to pose this question for people engaged in justice and compassion work for animals and who also think regularly about animal rights. So I've spent many years striving for animal liberation, trying to figure out what that means for animals on their terms. As a black woman with very little access to resources, it's been a struggle, to say the least. For the most part, racism and sexism are treated as outside events beyond the scope and concern of animal rights, but at the…</p>
<p></p>
<p>I wanted to pose this question for people engaged in justice and compassion work for animals and who also think regularly about animal rights. So I've spent many years striving for animal liberation, trying to figure out what that means for animals on their terms. As a black woman with very little access to resources, it's been a struggle, to say the least. For the most part, racism and sexism are treated as outside events beyond the scope and concern of animal rights, but at the same time, AR leaders refer to these institutions regularly as if 1. they are a thing of the past and 2. they give momentum to animal rights struggle. And since most of the leaders we tend to recognize and refer to in the AR movement are white men (not because there are no women leaders or that there are more men leaders than women), we allow them to get away with reproducing white supremacy and patriarchy over and over again "for the sake of the animals." But is it really benefiting animals for us to put up with and reinforce white supremacy and patriarchy as a means to "animal liberation"? Many activists don't think so, but where are they voices? Where are the conversations opening new spaces in this movement to challenge white supremacy and patriarchy? There's a growing number of folks under the umbrella of critical animal studies, but there are very very few doing organizing, activist work. When a handful of active white women and people of color mention this, whether it's in an online forum or at the AR Conference, we get other people, including other white women and persons of color, telling us that we're complainers and making a big deal out of everything and being too disruptive because the real issues are about the animals. But is this narrow view really all about the animals? Often what we think is human supremacy is really white supremacy and patriarchy unnamed and unchallenged. In this view, what makes a lone wolf leaving Yellowstone Park and Trayvon Martin all that different when both are gunned down without hesitation by white men for stepping out of place, when both receive no justice, and when both deaths don't nearly hold the same weight of loss in the public imagination because white supremacy and patriarchy teach us over and over that their lives (and those who look like them) don't really matter. Last night, I attended a talk by author and activist Chris Crass who just recently published a book titled <em>Toward Collective Liberation</em>. He emphasized as a white hetero middle-class male how it important it was for him to help others with similar backgrounds awaken to how racism and sexism, in particular, hurt white men and makes everybody's lives hell. In the animal rights movement, we do a lot of comparisons of speciesism to racism. But do we really know racism in our own lives, never mind at a systemic level, to compare? He emphasized how racism and this notion of white supremacy is so engrained in us that we don't realize how we're holding it up and keeping it going, how deluded working class white folks are in thinking that by investing in and protecting white supremacy, they will live well, be safe, and their children will have good futures. But before I go any further, I'm posing this question as a question of value. I have my own thoughts on this but I want to hear from other people first. Honestly, be honest, have you ever considered racism and sexism, in particular, enough to see how it harms animals? Do you care?</p> Getting [green?] Beef ~ Matthew Coletag:arzone.ning.com,2013-06-07:4715978:Topic:1306952013-06-07T01:29:08.158ZCarolyn Baileyhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/CarolynBailey
<p style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-4" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">Getting [green?] Beef?</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">A vegan response to The Ecologist magazine’s ‘Meat: Eco Villain or Victim of Spin?</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">Written by Matthew Cole…</span></p>
<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" class="font-size-4">Getting [green?] Beef?</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" class="font-size-3">A vegan response to The Ecologist magazine’s ‘Meat: Eco Villain or Victim of Spin?</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" class="font-size-3">Written by Matthew Cole</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-4"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;"><br/>Abstract:</span></span></strong></span> <span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;"> </span><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">Advocates of veganism frequently present their case holistically, outlining its benefits for</span> <span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">nonhuman and human animals and for our shared environment. However, a consistent feature of </span><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">‘mainstream’ public discourse on veganism is the tendency to fracture that holistic case. In </span><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">particular, the case for nonhuman animal liberation tends to be set aside, so as to clear the path</span> <span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">for a reassertion of anthropocentric values that, despite otherwise radical appearances, work to</span> <span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">re-entrench speciesist privilege. In this paper, I present a detailed case study of one high-profile </span><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">example of this process. In October 2008, the prestigious UK periodical, The Ecologist, published</span> <span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">an issue that focused on the issue of ‘meat’-eating. The contributing authors to the issue stressed</span> <span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">the anthropocentric benefits of a particular form of ‘meat’-eating, while simultaneously failing to</span> <span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">confront the holistic case for veganism.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" class="font-size-3"><br/></span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">Please click this link to view and read the .pdf: <span class="font-size-4"><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038401155?profile=original" target="_blank">Getting [green?] Beef</a></span></span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;">The index of ARZone's online library of academic papers is <span class="font-size-4"><a href="http://arzone.ning.com/page/academic-papers" target="_blank">here</a></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" class="font-size-3"> </span></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" class="font-size-3"><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038403439?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038403439?profile=original" width="276" class="align-center"/></a></span></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"> </span></p> ARZone Podcast 65: The Rise of the Eco-Ability Movementtag:arzone.ning.com,2013-03-29:4715978:Topic:1269152013-03-29T02:02:51.732ZAnimal Rights Zonehttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/admin
<p><span class="font-size-4"><font face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">ARZone is joined by five of the contributors to the recent book, "Earth, Animal and Disability Liberation: The Rise of the Eco-Ability Movement". In addition to two of the books editors, Judith K. C. Bentley and Anthony Nocella II, our conversation also includes contributing authors David Nibert, Norm Phelps and Kimberly Socha. Audio Podcast, approx 71 minutes.…</font></span></p>
<blockquote><p></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span class="font-size-4"><font face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">ARZone is joined by five of the contributors to the recent book, "Earth, Animal and Disability Liberation: The Rise of the Eco-Ability Movement". In addition to two of the books editors, Judith K. C. Bentley and Anthony Nocella II, our conversation also includes contributing authors David Nibert, Norm Phelps and Kimberly Socha. Audio Podcast, approx 71 minutes.</font></span></p>
<blockquote><p><span class="font-size-4"><font face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">Please click <a href="http://archive.org/download/ARZonePodcast65EcoAbility/ArzonePodcast65-Eco-ability.mp3" target="_blank">H E R E</a>, or visit <a href="http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/arzone-animal-rights-zone/id555064645" target="_blank">this webpage to subscribe using iTunes</a>, and please remember to <a href="http://arzone.ning.com/page/podcasts" target="_blank">visit the podcast page</a> to view a complete listing of all ARZone podcasts.</font></span></p>
<p> </p>
</blockquote>
<p><span class="font-size-4"><font face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">Eco-ability, in the words of Dr. Nocella, refers to and examines the connections between "ecology, dis-ability, and animal advocacy, couched in terms of interlocking social constructions and the interwoven web of interdependent global life." In this conversation, we explore the role of language in oppression, what "othering" consists in, and how advocates for the oppressed can be more effective through an appreciation for intersectionality.</font></span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-4"><font face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">Please view the book on Amazon <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Earth-Animal-Disability-Liberation-Eco-Ability/dp/1433115077" target="_blank">here</a>.</font></span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-4"><font face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">Please learn about the 1st Annual Conference “Engaging with Eco-ability” that's being held at University of Binghamton, New York on April 27 and 28, 2013 by visiting the web <a href="http://ecoability.wordpress.com/2013/02/16/1st-annual-eco-ability-conference/" target="_blank">here</a> and sign up on Facebook <a href="https://www.facebook.com/events/449427888462807" target="_blank">here</a>.</font></span></p>
<div style="text-align: center;"><br/> <a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-d50LepGVEOU/UVT07vOi6MI/AAAAAAAAAKo/ImSQY95UjSw/s1600/Eco-Ability+Interview+ARZone.net.jpg"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-d50LepGVEOU/UVT07vOi6MI/AAAAAAAAAKo/ImSQY95UjSw/s320/Eco-Ability+Interview+ARZone.net.jpg" border="0"/></a></div> Unbridled Hypocrisy Over a Pie With Dead Horsetag:arzone.ning.com,2013-02-22:4715978:Topic:1237732013-02-22T03:20:17.698ZCarolyn Baileyhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/CarolynBailey
<div class="module-header"><h1 class="heading" style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-6" style="font-family: impact, chicago;">Unbridled hypocrisy over a pie with dead horse</span></h1>
<div class="article-info"><p class="byline" style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-3" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">Written by <a href="http://www.thepunch.com.au/author-bios/geoff-russell/">Geoff Russell…<br></br><br></br></a></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="module-header"><h1 class="heading" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: impact, chicago;" class="font-size-6">Unbridled hypocrisy over a pie with dead horse</span></h1>
<div class="article-info"><p class="byline" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Written by <a href="http://www.thepunch.com.au/author-bios/geoff-russell/">Geoff Russell<br/><br/></a></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="module-content"><p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><span>Where would we be without DNA testing? Otherwise who knows what might be lurking under your tomato sauce. Possibly dead cow, mad cow, lame horse or pickled panda. God forbid, it might even be tofu, tempeh or gluten.<br/></span><br/></span></p>
<p class="image"><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038381563?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="300" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038381563?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300" class="align-center"/></a></p>
<p class="image" style="text-align: center;"><span class="font-size-2" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;"> Black Caviar as both entrée and main…</span></p>
<p class="image" style="text-align: center;"></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Back in the early 1980s, long before cheap and easy DNA testing, Australia resorted to a Royal Commission into the meat industry to try and resolve the scandalous pollution of dead cattle with dead horse and dead kangaroo in domestic and export meat.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">The US recently had its “downer cattle” scandal and now Europe has had headline stories for a week over horse meat. Undercover cruelty footage in slaughterhouses and factory farms is pretty common everywhere and seems to disappear like sketches on a beach at low tide, but mislabel carcinogenic horse as carcinogenic beef and all hell breaks loose.</span></p>
<div id="more"><p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">It’s beyond me why people are surprised at dishonesty in an industry that thrives on killing and promotes a demonstrably carcinogenic product as healthy. But I confess it’s hard not too feel a little guilty pleasure when one kind of meat goes undetected in the mouths of gullible foodies who wax lyrical about flavour and texture but obviously can’t tell a cow from a neddy without a hundred thousand dollars worth of high tech DNA testing equipment and a helpful PhD to drive it all.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">What precisely is the problem? Is there really anybody out there who loves horses so much they won’t eat them, but is nevertheless happy to chow down on cattle meat? Do those people mind if other people eat horses? It would be logical for horse lovers to object to the constant churn of horses through the racing industry. This industry thrives on a rapid turnover. New horses spur hope in ever gullible investors who pay the bills in the hopes of being part of another Black Caviar. Slow but otherwise wonderful horses who could be loving companions for many years are readily disposed of once their losing streak outstrips investor patience.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">If you really have a soft spot for horses, you must not only hate eating them, but you must also loathe the horse racing industry with a passion. It’s not complicated.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">But is there any sign of a general loathing of the horse racing industry in Europe or locally? No. So what’s the problem? Fraud? Misrepresentation? I can understanding somebody who cared about their health or about animal welfare finding that their soy sausages were actually beef or horse or kangaroo or anything else equally carcinogenic and cruel. But finding out that your carcinogenic beef is actually carcinogenic horse or carcinogenic kangaroo? Methinks the fuss is rather exaggerated.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Why is it that you never hear of vegetable substitution rackets? Maybe your mushrooms are actually tomatoes imported cheaply from Turkey. Perhaps your pumpkins are really carrots from Canada or turnips from Tunisia. Maybe you paid for a kilo of peas but the packet was padded with beetroot.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Perhaps there is something intrinsically different about animal producers and plant producers. I don’t think it’s a matter of chance that bakers have enriched our language and culture with the “baker’s dozen” while butchers have instead given us “a thumb on the scales” and “sawdust mince”. Food poisoning and butchers pumping water into meat are regular grist on the current affairs mill.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Clearly the meat industry has done quite a job on its customers. How do you persuade people to part with 50 bucks a kilo for something whose flavour needs to changed by marinating with a potent array of herbs and spices and every kind of sauce?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Some researchers a few years ago did an interesting study on the ways cultural symbols affect how we perceive taste. One experimental group got beef sausage rolls while the other received a vegetarian sausage roll. Half of each group was told truthfully what they were eating, while the other half was told a lie.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">So half of the veggie group was told they were eating beef and half of the beef group were told they were eating veggie. Guess what? While half the people had been lied to, fully 80 percent had no idea they’d been deceived. And how they thought the food tasted depended not on the food itself but on whether the symbolism of the food matched their world view.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Those who gloried in power and the domination of others and resources thought their meat meal was great, even if it was actually vegetarian, and those who had a more egalitarian view of social relations thought their vegetarian roll was good, even if it was meat. Conversely, the domination lovers thought their veggie roll didn’t taste very good, even if it was really meat. Similarly, the egalitarians didn’t think much of their meat, even if it was really veggie.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">But despite our sense of taste being highly influenced by a range of non-physical issues, the researchers also point out that people who eat a lot of meat insist that they simply enjoy the taste. Which taste? Horse, beef, kangaroo? How many people who have actually eaten kangaroo will confess to not liking it?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">They generally wax lyrical, but they must be mostly lying because kangaroo meat is produced in very small quantities and so little is sold locally that the industry has to resort to exporting it overseas to shift it. The analogy to Japanese whale meat is obvious with a story emerging in the middle of last year that 75 percent of the year’s catch was unsold. They couldn’t move even a paltry 1,200 tonnes in a country of 127 million people.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">So the horror in meat eaters finding they have been duped has been one of the best comedy scenes of the week. I reckon it’s like when Australia Post asks you to declare earnestly on a package that it isn’t a bomb. They presume a bomber would think twice about telling lies. Does anybody seriously expect robust honesty from slaughterhouse owners? There’s more to telling porkies than just rhyming slang.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3">Source: </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;" class="font-size-3"><a href="http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/Unbridled-hypocrisy-over-a-pie-with-dead-horse/?fb_action_ids=10151491107314534%2C10151490948449534&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%2210151491107314534%22%3A536429953045669%2C%2210151490948449534%22%3A504521376256182%7D&action_type_map=%7B%2210151491107314534%22%3A%22og.recommends%22%2C%2210151490948449534%22%3A%22og.recommends%22%7D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D" target="_blank"><img width="320" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3038381653?profile=RESIZE_480x480" width="320" class="align-center"/></a></span></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
</div>
</div>