DOCSLIB.ORG

The Ventriloquist's Burden? Animals, Voice, and Politics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE VENTRILOQUIST’S BURDEN? ANIMALS, VOICE, AND POLITICS LAUREN E. J. CORMAN A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY GRADUATE PROGRAM IN ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES YORK UNIVERSITY TORONTO, ONTARIO June 2012 © Lauren E. J. Corman, 2012 Library and Archives Bibliotheque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du 1+1 Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-92818-9 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-92818-9 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distrbute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non­ support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these. While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. Canada A bstract Voice is a significant metaphor within national and international animal rights and liberation movements, including in their associated literatures. Phrases such as the “voice of the voiceless,” for example, are ubiquitous. Despite heavy reliance on the trope, however, little scholarship exists about the meanings of voice within the movements. Concurrently, critics charge activists with arrogantly representing nonhuman animals while remaining woefully detached from their material lives. Such condemnation is well summarized by Richard Horwitz who accuses animal rights activists of adopting the “ventriloquist’s burden,” a phrase that invokes Rudyard Kipling’s poem “The White Man’s Burden,” which helped frame U.S. imperialism as a noble pursuit. While some within the movements challenge those who claim to be animals’ voices and to speak for “those who cannot speak for themselves,” there is a dearth of sustained and rigorous discussion about these suppositions. Drawing primarily on feminist, animal rights, and posthumanist theory, I employ critical discourse analysis to explore metaphorical uses of voice within a larger investigation of the politics of representation, particularly in relation to the question of “speaking for” animals. I centrally posit that a nuanced analysis of voice is necessary to more adeptly navigate the difficult terrain of animal representation. First, I show the failure of identity politics to address the problems of voice and representation within the animal movements. Second, I trace the development of voice within feminist theory and critical pedagogy, two major sets of discourses that have profoundly shaped the voice metaphor, in order to detail contemporary meanings of political voice. I conclude that the dynamics of political voice (including subjectivity, relationality, experiential knowledge, and resistance) are all deeply informed by humanism. Third, in relation, I examine the ways in which Western understandings of both politics and voice are crucially defined by interpenetrating ideas about humanity and animality. I then investigate how anthropocentric understandings of voice are both reproduced and challenged by the animal movements. Last, alongside a critique of Donna Haraway’s work on “companion species,” I consider how certain activists disentangle the dynamics of political voice from legacies of humanism in order to foreground animal voices. Dedication Dedicated to Mark Karbusicky (1972-2007) Acknow ledgem ents I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to Cate Sandilands, my outstanding Ph.D. Advisor and Dissertation Supervisor. Her unfaltering support and skilled guidance helped me find my voice in the most profound way. It was a tremendous honour to work with such a brilliant scholar and wise mentor. Thank you to members of my excellent Ph.D. Advisory Committee: Harriet Friedmann, Roger Keil, and Leesa Fawcett. 1 would also like to thank Leesa Fawcett and John Sorenson, members of my Dissertation Supervisory Committee. Their feedback was invaluable. Leesa’s influence, in particular, on my scholarship was enormous throughout my graduate studies. She taught me about animals in ways that deeply affected me and continue to touch all of my scholarship. I would like to extend my appreciation to my Defense Committee: Greta Gaard, Leesa Fawcett, Joan Steigerwald, John Sorenson, Peter Timmerman, and Cate Sandilands. I would also like to thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) for awarding me a Doctoral Fellowship. Thank you to the entire Faculty of Environmental Studies, especially the administrative staff. Thank you to my dear friend, Jane Marion, who made completing this work possible. You are my heart. Special thanks to the intrepid Rebekka Augustine for her incredible attention to detail and vast copy-editing superpowers. Thank you to my supportive family: Cary Hamilton, Sean Corman, Barry Hamilton, Emmalee Hamilton, Alexis Hamilton, Julian, Frank, and Kristy. Thank you to my wonderful friends and colleagues: Krishna Mercer, Sarah Pinder, Nicola Brown, Francisca Lanthier, Connie Russell, Sherri Manko, Bruce Erickson, Bevin Shores, Dino Paoletti, Mark Karbusicky, Catherine Brigantino, Lisa Kretz, Ebru Ustundag, Sue Sinclair, Jacqueline Kennedy, Mike Hoolboom, Jill DiTillio, Dylan Powell, Nadine Flagel, Siue Moffat, Susan Moore, Jodey Castricano, Jenny Kerber, Jeannette LeBlanc, Graeme Scott, Shauna Pomerantz, Jon Eben Field, Michelle Webber, Greg Jackson, Gail Mooney (Auntie Mooney), Ken Bjomson, Neil Harvey, Erin O’Sullivan, Jaimie Godard, Keri Cronin, Laurie Morrison, Daria Richards, Brian Gasbarini, Kelsey Cheslock, Terrance Luscombe, Joanna Adamiak, Karol Orzechowski, Zofia and Wojciech Orzechowski & Family, Traci Warkentin, Kevin Tillman, Pablo Bose, Rich Oddie, Kerianne Dechamais, Wade Hunt, Kyle Paton, Rob MacNinch, Lamia Gibson, Nadja Lubiw-Hazard, Michael Smith, Peter Pritchard, Jan Oakley, Piotr Pawlowski, Lenore Newman, Shannon Blatt, Dennis Soron, Mary-Beth Raddon, Nancy Cook, Kate Bezanson, Jonah Butovsky, Jane Helleiner, Linda Landry, Elizabeth Maddeaux, Julia Gottli, Viola Bartel, Jill DeBon, Tamari Kitossa, Ifeanyi Ezeonu, Margot Francis, Kevin Gosine, Hijin Park, Janet Conway, Ann Duffy, Nikita Cox, Sara McLean, Ray Godin, Cheryl Koller, Dane Clark, Adam Weitzenfeld, Mirha-Soleil Ross, Ken Stowar, Andrew Chambers, Denver Nixon, Steve Romanin, Helen Pracnic, Levi Waldron, Brandy Humes, Richard Brooks, Tim Leduc, Christina Lessels, Cary Wolfe, Anthony Nocella II, Sarat Colling, Steve Best, John Sanbonmatsu, Richard Kahn, Richard White, Gavan Watson, Martha Jecmen, Carol Glasser, Daria Richards, David Sztybel, Kristyn Dunnion, Allison Noble, and Rob Moore. Thanks also to Animal Voices, guests of the Animal Voices radio show, Propagandhi, Rise Above (Restaurant), Fine Grind Cafe, Mahtay Cafe, and the many excellent students I have worked with over the years. TABLE OF CONTENTS A bstract..................................................................................................................................................... ii D edication ................................................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgements............................................................................................................................... v Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................vii P relu de.......................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 12 Chapter Summaries........................................................................................................................... 14 Chapter I: Voice and the Human Subject................................................................................. 19 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Are Illegal Direct Actions by Animal Rights Activists Ethically Vigilante?

    Are Illegal Direct Actions by Animal Rights Activists Ethically Vigilante?

    260 BETWEEN THE SPECIES Is the Radical Animal Rights Movement Ethically Vigilante? ABSTRACT Following contentious debates around the status and justifiability of illegal direct actions by animal rights activists, we introduce a here- tofore unexplored perspective that argues they are neither terrorist nor civilly disobedient but ethically vigilante. Radical animal rights movement (RARM) activists are vigilantes for vulnerable animals and their rights. Hence, draconian measures by the constitutional state against RARM vigilantes are both disproportionate and ille- gitimate. The state owes standing and toleration to such principled vigilantes, even though they are self-avowed anarchists and anti-stat- ists—unlike civil disobedients—repudiating allegiance to the con- stitutional order. This requires the state to acknowledge the ethical nature of challenges to its present regime of toleration, which assigns special standing to illegal actions in defense of human equality, but not equality and justice between humans and animals. Michael Allen East Tennessee State University Erica von Essen Environmental Communications Division Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Volume 22, Issue 1 Fall 2018 http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/bts/ 261 Michael Allen and Erica von Essen Introduction We explore the normative status of illegal actions under- taken by the Radical Animal Rights Movement (RARM), such as animal rescue, trespass, and sabotage as well as confronta- tion and intimidation. RARM typically characterizes these ac- tions as examples of direct action rather than civil disobedience (Milligan 2015, Pellow 2014). Moreover, many RARM activ- ists position themselves as politically anarchist, anti-statist, and anti-capitalist (Best 2014, Pellow 2014). Indeed, the US and UK take these self-presentations at face value, responding to RARM by introducing increasingly draconian legislation that treats them as terrorists (Best 2014, McCausland, O’Sullivan and Brenton 2013, O’Sullivan 2011, Pellow 2014).
  • "Go Veg" Campaigns of US Animal Rights Organizations

    "Go Veg" Campaigns of US Animal Rights Organizations

    Society and Animals 18 (2010) 163-182 brill.nl/soan Framing Animal Rights in the “Go Veg” Campaigns of U.S. Animal Rights Organizations Carrie Packwood Freeman Georgia State University [email protected] Abstract How much do animal rights activists talk about animal rights when they attempt to persuade America’s meat-lovers to stop eating nonhuman animals? Th is study serves as the basis for a unique evaluation and categorization of problems and solutions as framed by fi ve major U.S. animal rights organizations in their vegan/food campaigns. Th e fi ndings reveal that the organiza- tions framed the problems as: cruelty and suff ering; commodifi cation; harm to humans and the environment; and needless killing. To solve problems largely blamed on factory farming, activists asked consumers to become “vegetarian” (meaning vegan) or to reduce animal product con- sumption, some requesting “humane” reforms. While certain messages supported animal rights, promoting veganism and respect for animals’ subject status, many frames used animal welfare ideology to achieve rights solutions, conservatively avoiding a direct challenge to the dominant human/animal dualism. In support of ideological authenticity, this paper recommends that vegan campaigns emphasize justice, respect, life, freedom, environmental responsibility, and a shared animality. Keywords animal rights, campaigns, farm animal, framing, ideology, vegan, vegetarian How much do or should animal rights activists talk about animal rights when they attempt to persuade America’s meat-lovers to stop eating animals? As participants in a counterhegemonic social movement, animal rights organiza- tions are faced with the discursive challenge of redefi ning accepted practices, such as farming and eating nonhuman animals, as socially unacceptable practices.
  • Thinking About the Animals in Canada

    Thinking About the Animals in Canada

    TWO DAYS OF THINKING ABOUT ANIMALS IN CANADA BROCK UNIVERSITY FEBRUARY 24&25, 2005 THURSDAY FEBRUARY 24: 8:30-9:00 am Pond Inlet Opening Remarks: David Atkinson, President, Brock University Murray Wickett, Director of Canadian Studies, Brock U. John Sorenson, Department of Sociology, Brock U. 9:00–11:00 am Pond Inlet- ANIMAL RIGHTS: HISTORY, LAW & ACTIVISM Rod Preece, Wilfred Laurier University, “Getting History Right.” Joan Reddy, York University, “All Creatures Great & Small: Legal Rights of Animals.” Lauren Corman, York University, “The Ventriloquist’s Burden (?): Speaking for Animal Others.” 11:00-12:30pm Pond Inlet- MEAT, VEGETARIANISM & SOCIAL CHANGE Tony Weis, University of Western Ontario, “Meat and Social Change.” Catriona Rae, University of Guelph, “The Role of Social Networks in Continuing Vegetarianism.” 12:30-1:30pm Pond Inlet- LUNCH 1:30-3:00pm Pond Inlet- VIVISECTION & ALTERNATIVES (ONE) David Ruffieux, “Use of Human Tissues & Cells in Research.” Stacey Byrne, Brock University, “Dissection in Schools.” Florence Berreville, Interniche, “Replacement of Harmful Animal Use in Life Science Education.” 1:30-3:00pm Senate Chambers- RELATING TO ANIMALS Gavan Watson, York University, “Common Wild Animal Others: Children Making a Connection to the More Than Human World.” Paul Hamilton, Brock University, “Animal Welfare & Liberal Democracy.” Marisa King, “Contextual Action Research.” 3:00-3:30pm Coffee Break 3:30-5:00pm Pond Inlet- VIVISECTION & ALTERNATIVES (TWO) Beth Daly, University of Windsor, “Anthrozoophilia & Empathy.” Nadja
  • Indianapolis Guide

    Indianapolis Guide

    Nutrition Information Vegan Blogs Nutritionfacts.org: http://nutritionfacts.org/ AngiePalmer: http://angiepalmer.wordpress.com/ Get Connected The Position Paper of the American Dietetic Association: Colin Donoghue: http://colindonoghue.wordpress.com/ http://www.vrg.org/nutrition/2009_ADA_position_paper.pdf James McWilliams: http://james-mcwilliams.com/ The Vegan RD: www.theveganrd.com General Vegans: Five Major Poisons Inherent in Animal Proteins: Human Non-human Relations: http://human-nonhuman.blogspot.com When they ask; http://drmcdougall.com/misc/2010nl/jan/poison.htm Paleo Veganology: http://paleovegan.blogspot.com/ The Starch Solution by John McDougal MD: Say What Michael Pollan: http://saywhatmichaelpollan.wordpress.com/ “How did you hear about us” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XVf36nwraw&feature=related Skeptical Vegan: http://skepticalvegan.wordpress.com/ tell them; Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease by Caldwell Esselstyn MD The Busy Vegan: http://thevegancommunicator.wordpress.com/ www.heartattackproof.com/ The China Study and Whole by T. Collin Campbell The Rational Vegan: http://therationalvegan.blogspot.com/ “300 Vegans!” www.plantbasednutrition.org The Vegan Truth: http://thevegantruth.blogspot.com/ The Food Revolution John Robbins www.foodrevolution.org/ Vegansaurus: Dr. Barnard’s Program for Reversing Diabetes Neal Barnard MD http://vegansaurus.com/ www.pcrm.org/health/diabetes/ Vegan Skeptic: http://veganskeptic.blogspot.com/ 300 Vegans & The Multiple Sclerosis Diet Book by Roy Laver Swank MD, PhD Vegan Scientist: http://www.veganscientist.com/
  • Giving Voice to the "Voiceless:" Incorporating Nonhuman Animal Perspectives As Journalistic Sources

    Giving Voice to the "Voiceless:" Incorporating Nonhuman Animal Perspectives As Journalistic Sources

    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Communication Faculty Publications Department of Communication 2011 Giving Voice to the "Voiceless:" Incorporating Nonhuman Animal Perspectives as Journalistic Sources Carrie Packwood Freeman Georgia State University, [email protected] Marc Bekoff Sarah M. Bexell [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/communication_facpub Part of the Journalism Studies Commons, and the Social Influence and oliticalP Communication Commons Recommended Citation Freeman, C. P., Bekoff, M. & Bexell, S. (2011). Giving voice to the voiceless: Incorporating nonhuman animal perspectives as journalistic sources. Journalism Studies, 12(5), 590-607. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Communication at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Communication Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VOICE TO THE VOICELESS 1 A similar version of this paper was later published as: Freeman, C. P., Bekoff, M. & Bexell, S. (2011). Giving Voice to the Voiceless: Incorporating Nonhuman Animal Perspectives as Journalistic Sources, Journalism Studies, 12(5), 590-607. GIVING VOICE TO THE "VOICELESS": Incorporating nonhuman animal perspectives as journalistic sources Carrie Packwood Freeman, Marc Bekoff and Sarah M. Bexell As part of journalism’s commitment to truth and justice
  • Ways of Seeing Animals Documenting and Imag(In)Ing the Other in the Digital Turn

    Ways of Seeing Animals Documenting and Imag(In)Ing the Other in the Digital Turn

    InMedia The French Journal of Media Studies 8.1. | 2020 Ubiquitous Visuality Ways of Seeing Animals Documenting and Imag(in)ing the Other in the Digital Turn Diane Leblond Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/inmedia/1957 DOI: 10.4000/inmedia.1957 ISSN: 2259-4728 Publisher Center for Research on the English-Speaking World (CREW) Electronic reference Diane Leblond, “Ways of Seeing Animals”, InMedia [Online], 8.1. | 2020, Online since 15 December 2020, connection on 26 January 2021. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/inmedia/1957 ; DOI: https:// doi.org/10.4000/inmedia.1957 This text was automatically generated on 26 January 2021. © InMedia Ways of Seeing Animals 1 Ways of Seeing Animals Documenting and Imag(in)ing the Other in the Digital Turn Diane Leblond Introduction. Looking at animals: when visual nature questions visual culture 1 A topos of Western philosophy indexes animals’ irreducible alienation from the human condition on their lack of speech. In ancient times, their inarticulate cries provided the necessary analogy to designate non-Greeks as other, the adjective “Barbarian” assimilating foreign languages to incomprehensible birdcalls.1 To this day, the exclusion of animals from the sphere of logos remains one of the crucial questions addressed by philosophy and linguistics.2 In the work of some contemporary critics, however, the tenets of this relation to the animal “other” seem to have undergone a change in focus. With renewed insistence that difference is inextricably bound up in a sense of proximity, such writings have described animals not simply as “other,” but as our speechless others. This approach seems to find particularly fruitful ground where theory proposes to explore ways of seeing as constitutive of the discursive structures that we inhabit.
  • Vegetarianism and World Peace and Justice

    Vegetarianism and World Peace and Justice

    Visit the Triangle-Wide calendar of peace events, www.trianglevegsociety.org/peacecalendar VVeeggeettaarriiaanniissmm,, WWoorrlldd PPeeaaccee,, aanndd JJuussttiiccee By moving toward vegetarianism, can we help avoid some of the reasons for fighting? We find ourselves in a world of conflict and war. Why do people fight? Some conflict is driven by a desire to impose a value system, some by intolerance, and some by pure greed and quest for power. The struggle to obtain resources to support life is another important source of conflict; all creatures have a drive to live and sustain themselves. In 1980, Richard J. Barnet, director of the Institute for Policy Studies, warned that by the end of the 20th century, anger and despair of hungry people could lead to terrorist acts and economic class war [Staten Island Advance, Susan Fogy, July 14, 1980, p.1]. Developed nations are the largest polluters in the world; according to Mother Jones (March/April 1997, http://www. motherjones.com/mother_jones/MA97/hawken2.html), for example, Americans, “have the largest material requirements in the world ... each directly or indirectly [using] an average of 125 pounds of material every day ... Americans waste more than 1 million pounds per person per year ... less than 5 percent of the total waste ... gets recycled”. In the US, we make up 6% of the world's population, but consume 30% of its resources [http://www.enough.org.uk/enough02.htm]. Relatively affluent countries are 15% of the world’s population, but consume 73% of the world’s output, while 78% of the world, in developing nations, consume 16% of the output [The New Field Guide to the U.

  • Teen Stabbing Questions Still Unanswered What Motivated 14-Year-Old Boy to Attack Family?

    Save $86.25 with coupons in today’s paper Penn State holds The Kirby at 30 off late Honoring the Center’s charge rich history and its to beat Temple impact on the region SPORTS • 1C SPECIAL SECTION Sunday, September 18, 2016 BREAKING NEWS AT TIMESLEADER.COM '365/=[+<</M /88=C6@+83+sǍL Teen stabbing questions still unanswered What motivated 14-year-old boy to attack family? By Bill O’Boyle Sinoracki in the chest, causing Sinoracki’s wife, Bobbi Jo, 36, ,9,9C6/Ľ>37/=6/+./<L-97 his death. and the couple’s 17-year-old Investigators say Hocken- daughter. KINGSTON TWP. — Specu- berry, 14, of 145 S. Lehigh A preliminary hearing lation has been rampant since St. — located adjacent to the for Hockenberry, originally last Sunday when a 14-year-old Sinoracki home — entered 7 scheduled for Sept. 22, has boy entered his neighbors’ Orchard St. and stabbed three been continued at the request house in the middle of the day members of the Sinoracki fam- of his attorney, Frank Nocito. and stabbed three people, kill- According to the office of ing one. ily. Hockenberry is charged Magisterial District Justice Everyone connected to the James Tupper and Kingston case and the general public with homicide, aggravated assault, simple assault, reck- Township Police Chief Michael have been wondering what Moravec, the hearing will be lessly endangering another Photo courtesy of GoFundMe could have motivated the held at 9:30 a.m. Nov. 7 at person and burglary in connec- In this photo taken from the GoFundMe account page set up for the Sinoracki accused, Zachary Hocken- Tupper’s office, 11 Carverton family, David Sinoracki is shown with his wife, Bobbi Jo, and their three children, berry, to walk into a home on tion with the death of David Megan 17; Madison, 14; and David Jr., 11.
  • All Creation Groans: the Lives of Factory Farm Animals in the United States

    All Creation Groans: the Lives of Factory Farm Animals in the United States

    InSight: RIVIER ACADEMIC JOURNAL, VOLUME 13, NUMBER 1, SPRING 2017 “ALL CREATION GROANS”: The Lives of Factory Farm Animals in the United States Sr. Lucille C. Thibodeau, pm, Ph.D.* Writer-in-Residence, Department of English, Rivier University Today, more animals suffer at human hands than at any other time in history. It is therefore not surprising that an intense and controversial debate is taking place over the status of the 60+ billion animals raised and slaughtered for food worldwide every year. To keep up with the high demand for meat, industrialized nations employ modern processes generally referred to as “factory farming.” This article focuses on factory farming in the United States because the United States inaugurated this approach to farming, because factory farming is more highly sophisticated here than elsewhere, and because the government agency overseeing it, the Department of Agriculture (USDA), publishes abundant readily available statistics that reveal the astonishing scale of factory farming in this country.1 The debate over factory farming is often “complicated and contentious,”2 with the deepest point of contention arising over the nature, degree, and duration of suffering food animals undergo. “In their numbers and in the duration and depth of the cruelty inflicted upon them,” writes Allan Kornberg, M.D., former Executive Director of Farm Sanctuary in a 2012 Farm Sanctuary brochure, “factory-farm animals are the most widely abused and most suffering of all creatures on our planet.” Raising the specter of animal suffering inevitably raises the question of animal consciousness and sentience. Jeremy Bentham, the 18th-century founder of utilitarianism, focused on sentience as the source of animals’ entitlement to equal consideration of interests.
  • Critical Animal Studies: an Introduction by Dawne Mccance Rosemary-Claire Collard University of Toronto

    Critical Animal Studies: an Introduction by Dawne Mccance Rosemary-Claire Collard University of Toronto

    The Goose Volume 13 | No. 1 Article 25 8-1-2014 Critical Animal Studies: An Introduction by Dawne McCance Rosemary-Claire Collard University of Toronto Part of the Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons, and the Literature in English, North America Commons Follow this and additional works at / Suivez-nous ainsi que d’autres travaux et œuvres: https://scholars.wlu.ca/thegoose Recommended Citation / Citation recommandée Collard, Rosemary-Claire. "Critical Animal Studies: An Introduction by Dawne McCance." The Goose, vol. 13 , no. 1 , article 25, 2014, https://scholars.wlu.ca/thegoose/vol13/iss1/25. This article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Goose by an authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Cet article vous est accessible gratuitement et en libre accès grâce à Scholars Commons @ Laurier. Le texte a été approuvé pour faire partie intégrante de la revue The Goose par un rédacteur autorisé de Scholars Commons @ Laurier. Pour de plus amples informations, contactez [email protected]. Collard: Critical Animal Studies: An Introduction by Dawne McCance Made, not born, machines this reduction is accomplished and what its implications are for animal life and Critical Animal Studies: An Introduction death. by DAWNE McCANCE After a short introduction in State U of New York P, 2013 $22.65 which McCance outlines the hierarchical Cartesian dualism (mind/body, Reviewed by ROSEMARY-CLAIRE human/animal) to which her book and COLLARD critical animal studies’ are opposed, McCance turns to what are, for CAS The field of critical animal scholars, familiar figures in a familiar studies (CAS) is thoroughly multi- place: Peter Singer and Tom Regan on disciplinary and, as Dawne McCance’s the factory farm.
  • The Sexual Politics of Meat by Carol J. Adams

    The Sexual Politics of Meat by Carol J. Adams

    THE SEXUAL POLITICS OF MEAT A FEMINISTVEGETARIAN CRITICAL THEORY Praise for The Sexual Politics of Meat and Carol J. Adams “A clearheaded scholar joins the ideas of two movements—vegetari- anism and feminism—and turns them into a single coherent and moral theory. Her argument is rational and persuasive. New ground—whole acres of it—is broken by Adams.” —Colman McCarthy, Washington Post Book World “Th e Sexual Politics of Meat examines the historical, gender, race, and class implications of meat culture, and makes the links between the prac tice of butchering/eating animals and the maintenance of male domi nance. Read this powerful new book and you may well become a vegetarian.” —Ms. “Adams’s work will almost surely become a ‘bible’ for feminist and pro gressive animal rights activists. Depiction of animal exploita- tion as one manifestation of a brutal patriarchal culture has been explored in two [of her] books, Th e Sexual Politics of Meat and Neither Man nor Beast: Feminism and the Defense of Animals. Adams argues that factory farming is part of a whole culture of oppression and insti- tutionalized violence. Th e treatment of animals as objects is parallel to and associated with patriarchal society’s objectifi cation of women, blacks, and other minorities in order to routinely exploit them. Adams excels in constructing unexpected juxtapositions by using the language of one kind of relationship to illuminate another. Employing poetic rather than rhetorical techniques, Adams makes powerful connec- tions that encourage readers to draw their own conclusions.” —Choice “A dynamic contribution toward creating a feminist/animal rights theory.” —Animals’ Agenda “A cohesive, passionate case linking meat-eating to the oppression of animals and women .
  • An Inquiry Into Animal Rights Vegan Activists' Perception and Practice of Persuasion

    An Inquiry Into Animal Rights Vegan Activists' Perception and Practice of Persuasion

    An Inquiry into Animal Rights Vegan Activists’ Perception and Practice of Persuasion by Angela Gunther B.A., Simon Fraser University, 2006 Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the School of Communication ! Angela Gunther 2012 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Summer 2012 All rights reserved. However, in accordance with the Copyright Act of Canada, this work may be reproduced, without authorization, under the conditions for “Fair Dealing.” Therefore, limited reproduction of this work for the purposes of private study, research, criticism, review and news reporting is likely to be in accordance with the law, particularly if cited appropriately. Approval Name: Angela Gunther Degree: Master of Arts Title of Thesis: An Inquiry into Animal Rights Vegan Activists’ Perception and Practice of Persuasion Examining Committee: Chair: Kathi Cross Gary McCarron Senior Supervisor Associate Professor Robert Anderson Supervisor Professor Michael Kenny External Examiner Professor, Anthropology SFU Date Defended/Approved: June 28, 2012 ii Partial Copyright Licence iii Abstract This thesis interrogates the persuasive practices of Animal Rights Vegan Activists (ARVAs) in order to determine why and how ARVAs fail to convince people to become and stay veg*n, and what they might do to succeed. While ARVAs and ARVAism are the focus of this inquiry, the approaches, concepts and theories used are broadly applicable and therefore this investigation is potentially useful for any activist or group of activists wishing to interrogate and improve their persuasive practices. Keywords: Persuasion; Communication for Social Change; Animal Rights; Veg*nism; Activism iv Table of Contents Approval ............................................................................................................................. ii! Partial Copyright Licence .................................................................................................