Contesting the meat–animal link and the visibility of animals killed for food: a focus group study in Finland

Abstract

Dissociating meat from its animal origins has been considered a central strategy omnivores employ to sustain their meat consumption despite their concerns for animal welfare. In recent years, the dissociation strategy has become increasingly contested as short food-chain movements promote consumer contact with farmed animals as a means to more ethical eating. This article examines how different groups of Finnish consumers construct the meat–animal link based on focus groups with gastronomes, hunters, organic consumers, rural women, and supermarket customers. The theoretical approach is based on Noëlie Vialles’s concepts of the sarcophage and zoophage logic of meat eating and on the literature on animal categorization. Supermarket customers preferred to dissociate meat from the animal, while gastronomes and rural residents regarded the presence of the animal in meat as important for its quality. Hunters valued game meat highly as animals were transformed into meat through their own effort. Although rural women and some organic consumers personalized certain farmed animals due to their proximity, these animals were still edible and killable. The research suggests that challenging dissociation does not in itself necessarily imply an increased moral valuation of animals if the objectification of animals is not confronted.