This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Riddle me this: Why would any humananimal use as a default position that nonhuman animals do not have personalities as rich, distinct, obnoxious, obsequious and varied as humananimals? Have they not ever observed nonhuman animals? We're all animals, aren't we? We're sentient. Or "even" obnoxious?
I was browsing for some quotes when I came across this group - The National Animal Interest Alliance (NAIA). They had a page with quotes from animalrights activists, but as I was reading, I noticed that they were very unfavorable quotes from such activists as Wayne Pacelle and Ingrid Newkirk. Clever bastards.
We should react with equal revulsion to the idea of demonstrating humanness" (110). Citing abilities such as nonhuman great apes' ability to learn human languages suggest that animalrights advocates seek nonhuman participation in human society. I'm not saying it's not speciesist, but that I understand it.
Because I've been thinking about the evolution of my own thinking--and languaging--regarding animalrights. Both animalrights groups and animal welfare groups use "compassion" frequently. Then again, so do people who kill animals for a living. Why all the quotation marks? Or vegan pumpkin pie.
Hal Herzog’s “ Some We Love, Some We Hate, Some We Eat ” (Harper 2011), though fascinating, is ultimately depressing for vegans and animalrights activists. Over at AnimalRights and AntiOppression , we’ve been discussing tactics and sharing our thoughts and experiences about what works and doesn’t work when it comes to advocacy.
The next argument is usually something along the lines of: But animals in the wild might starve to death, and get injured, maimed or killed by predators! Yes, that's true. Finally, people who object to our moral stance jump species and say we should object to the lion killing the gazelle. Besides, we have choices.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 30+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content