Speciesism--Not Sexism--Is the Foundation of "Isms"
Published June 14, 2009 @ 10:22AM PT
Friends, the weekend has gotten away from me, and the post I was preparing to share with you isn't quite finished yet--and I absolutely have to head out the door. So until I can get back to the computer and finish up, do me a favor and check out the following post, will you?
Guess who's really at the bottom of the shitpile? from I, Bonobo
It fits in perfectly with the guest posts from Kelly earlier this week, and it's an excellent response to a conversation at Feministing to which I was desperately hoping a feminist animal rights advocate would respond.
If you're a feminist, if you're a progressive, if you're an animal rights advocate--if you are any of these--read this post.
"Being a speciesist, even if one is a feminist, is playing by men’s rules. You’re better than that."
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
EmailRelated Posts
Author
-
Stephanie Ernst is an independent animal rights advocate, a vegan, a tree-hugging environmentalist, and a freelance editor and writer. She lives in St. Louis with an aging corgi-lab and an adolescent rescued pit bull. In her advocacy, she works to challenge prevailing perceptions of animals, to show the connections between animal exploitation and other injustices, to help people see that animals are more like us than different, and to encourage compassionate, nonviolent living and eating.
Wow, that was actually a great article.
I'm not so sure there is a foundation of "isms." There is a wonderful book by Anne Bishop called "Becoming an Ally: Breaking the Cycle of Oppression in People." It talks about racism, sexism, heterosexism, etc. (not speciesism). I believe that for her classism is the foundation of "isms," followed closely by sexism. I don't remember her argument very clearly (will have to re-read), but basically it's about power-oppression. When you are of a higher class, you don't want to lose that, you feel threatened by the lower classes... so you oppress them. And somehow this leads to all kinds of other oppressions.
Seen in this light, it's not really between speciesism and sexism if the foundation of "isms" is what you're looking for. On the other hand, it's true that animals are at the bottom, and I had never thought about the fact that women are called animals! OMG, I wish I had thought of that in my Anthropology class when we were talking about sexism and how men are feminized in order to put them down!!
Posted by Luella - on 06/14/2009 @ 04:04PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Amazing argument…now here’s the hard part…trying to argue that one with Christians…(and yes I am one, kind of, long story) anyways…the bible clearly states that man is more important than woman and human is more important than animal…but than again I fell away from the church mainly for this reason…it’s a bunch of Bullshit…no God would subject his creation to absurd hierarchies…at least not one I would want to worship…any help?? how do I bridge the gap with those who are religious and use that as an excuse…
Posted by Kristen Magno on 06/15/2009 @ 07:55AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I wish she didn't close comments because I want to praise her for this. Excellent write up.
Posted by Philosophia and Animal Liberation on 06/16/2009 @ 12:43PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.