Speciesism has 54 ratings and 4 reviews. Wendy said: This is a take-no- prisoners look at human treatment of nonhumans and how such behavior is enabled th. Joan Dunayer is a writer, editor, and animal rights advocate. She is the author of two books, Animal Equality () and Speciesism (). Dunayer graduated. Joan Dunayer is an American writer, editor, and animal rights advocate. “Sexist Words, Speciesist Roots”, in Animals and Women: Feminist Theoretical.
|Published (Last):||8 October 2017|
|PDF File Size:||10.99 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.57 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
We consider it immoral to treat any human, whatever their characteristics, as property. Refresh and try again. In other projects Wikipedia.
In other languages Add links. Either way, chickens suffer and die.
Joan Dunayer, Speciesism – PhilPapers
She also explains why welfarist campaigns are old-speciesist. But in the absence of such support for alternative forms of exploitation.
Admittedly, common sense regarding the widely held moral principles that Francione discusses may be open to philosophical scrutiny, but Francione readily acknowledges this.
These are the serious charges that I will now establish, drawing attention to merely one of the myriad examples of appropriation and misrepresentation found in Speciesism: Again, Francione wholly acknowledges that a campaign to introduce such a prohibition is unlikely to succeed at this point in history, and focuses instead on its important educational value.
Since Francione previously rejected this proposal, he obviously maintains that the economic costs that the proposal imposes are trivial and therefore the proposal not satisfy the third criterion for an abolitionist measure. See Francionesupra note 9, at xxxiv-xxxvi. There are a couple things I take issue with in this book; she makes disparaging comments about Christianity, and while I’m not Christian, I think this will put out a bunch of people who could potentially become allies for nonhumans.
Radically egalitarian, Speciesism envisions nonspeciesist thought, law, and action. This inevitably requires the acceptance of reformist measures. It might be objected that it is not the ancestors of modern chickens who are kept in battery cages. Dec 19, Nikki rated it really liked it Recommends it for: Tzachi Zamir – – Philosophia 34 4: Any proposal to modify the confinement of exploited hens endorses their property status.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University’s proxy server Configure custom proxy use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy. Many organizations that consider themselves animal rights advocates engage in old-speciesist campaigns, which reinforce the property status of nonhumans rather than promoting their emancipation.
So while this book definitely has its problems with comparisons to other oppressions, it is very effective when remaining in the realm of animal activism alone. They see animalkind as a hierarchy, with humans at the top.
Thanks for telling us about the problem.
Moral Theory and Practice. She also explains why welfarist campaigns are old-speciesist.
Speciesism refutes their standard arguments against nonhuman rights. Open Preview See a Problem? Animal Liberation and Critical Theory. Nov 21, Rift Vegan rated it it was amazing Recommends it for: Quotes [ edit ] When a woman responds to mistreatment by protesting “I’m a human being! Lantern Books rated it it was amazing Zpeciesism 05, The problem is that the demand for just about any food is elastic and will change as the price changes.
She suggests that African-Americans can be racist, and though some may disagree with me, what I’ve learned is that anyone can be prejudiced but that racism is oppression by the powerholders over joqn of other races and here it might be interesting to note that some cultures consider nonhumans as other races.
To do either would involve the rights advocate in sacrificing the basic right of animals not to be property in order to secure a less-than-basic protoright that. Your Child or the Dog? This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Dunayersupra note 6, at It may not be speciesist, when starving without any other option, to murder and eat either a human or a non-human animal with equal disregard, but it certainly is fundamentally immoral.
If the exploitation of non-human animals is to cease, the activists who bring about this result will have necessary been informed by a consistent, well-supported theoretical framework that was readily and effectively applied to practical situations.
In my view, the repeated and systematic  way in which Dunayer appropriates and misrepresents these ideas, as exposed in this review, is astonishing. This has not been my experience among both some, and, admittedly small in number Christians and atheists again, it is a very small number of athiests I’ve met who are not already activists who would accept the arguments against speciesism she puts forth. Do yourself a favour and read Melanie Joy joaj.
The Origin dunaydr Speciesism. In this context, spdciesism fences do not constitute alternative confinement systems: For example, if one advocates that certain human prisoners, but no non-human prisoners, be the unconsenting subjects of vivisection due to the mere fact that they are human or because human animals as a general class oppress non-human animalsthen one has failed to respect and accord equal moral consideration of interests to those humans due to a morally irrelevant quality their species.
Also, those who advocate for improved welfare for animals in the animal agriculture, vivisection etc. Strix rated it it was amazing Feb 15, I can’t wait to read it again. It’s au This book was written in a noble intent, but presentation of author’s ideas is poor and without any sense of tact or strategy whatsoever. This is a fine example of how pure theory devoid of real everyday life can cripple someone’s ability to act. Exposing this situation is important so that ojan representation can be given to a moral and legal theory, and a method of effecting political change, that has the power to radically transform human society into one that respects the basic rights and personhood of non-human animals.
Dunayer claims this is speciesist because it makes similarities to humans the raison d’etre for granting nonhumans rights. Perhaps because comparisons between women and nonhuman animals so often entail sexism, many women are anxious to distance themselves from other animals. The fourth abolitionist criterion states that if the non-institutional interests of non-human animals are to be recognized, then these interests cannot be violated, or traded away, just because doing so would secure a benefit to humans.