Espacios y especies en intersección: Cuerpos femeninos y la esfera doméstica en el activismo por los derechos de los animales

Claudia Alonso Recarte

doi:10.5209/rev_infe.2012.v3.41138

Abstract

The object of this article is to explore how current animal rights activism draws on images of women-animal corporeal hybrids to articulate a plight for animals, and how the domestic setting used in such campaigns is strategically conveyed to either instill sympathy or abhorrence at the ‘miscegenation’ of species within a single bodily space. I begin with a few observations on the matter of animal ontology in accordance with the muchdebated notion of commonness with humans (and in particular women). I then make a comparative analysis between video campaigns by two major animal rights organizations, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) to evaluate how their rhetoric of species hybridism conveys different assumptions regarding womanhood, and how domestic settings serve as instrumental tools through which to strengthen their rhetoric of animal liberation.

Highlights

CONNECTING WOMEN AND NON-HUMAN OTHERSIn her recent study Animal Lessons, Kelly Oliver offers an alternative reading to De Beauvoir’s The Second Sex in which she cleverly exposes the inconsistencies and contradictions of the text regarding non-human others: De Beauvoir initiates her discussion by drawing on biology to articulate the underlying cultural assumptions that endorse the shared oppression of all female subjects, regardless of species
Espacios y especies en intersección: Cuerpos femeninos y la esfera doméstica en el activismo por los derechos de los animales
“De Beauvoir points out that patriarchal values are placed on these female animals and that valuation becomes biological data, which in turn support the patriarchal thesis that women are inferior to men” (Oliver, 2009: 158)

Summary

CONNECTING WOMEN AND NON-HUMAN OTHERS

In her recent study Animal Lessons, Kelly Oliver offers an alternative reading to De Beauvoir’s The Second Sex in which she cleverly exposes the inconsistencies and contradictions of the text regarding non-human others: De Beauvoir initiates her discussion by drawing on biology to articulate the underlying cultural assumptions that endorse the shared oppression of all female subjects, regardless of species. In much the same way that animals, deemed as servants, were enslaved within certain spaces for the sake of civilization (prominent Victorian spaces of animal exploitation include vivisection theaters and laboratories, zoos and modern zoological parks, abattoirs, and even the streets, where passer-bys were witness to the abuse of horses, cart-dogs and to reminiscent practices of baiting), so were women relegated to the private sphere on the basis of their alleged emotional, wild and irrational nature. These private domains were customized for the performance of female labors. “they expose the inherent bias in contemporary animal rights theory towards rationalism, which, paradoxically, in the form of Cartesian objectivism, established a major theoretical justification for animal abuse” (DONOVAN, 1993: 168)

WOMANHOOD AND THE DOMESTIC SPHERE IN CURRENT ANIMAL RIGHTS CAMPAIGNS

CONCLUSION