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.

Author: Nall Sar
Country: Namibia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Video
Published (Last): 12 August 2008
Pages: 230
PDF File Size: 19.50 Mb
ePub File Size: 10.78 Mb
ISBN: 133-9-39000-636-5
Downloads: 93435
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Sazil

Just a moment while dunwyer sign you in to your Goodreads account. Defining speciesism as “a failure, in attitude or practice, to accord any nonhuman being equal consideration and respect,” this brilliant work critiques speciesism both outside and within the animal rights movement.

Resisting Speciesism and Expanding the Community of Equals. Any proposal to modify the confinement of exploited hens endorses their property status. Is Speciesism Opposed to Liberationism?

All of this is not to say that two authors, working separately, cannot arrive at similar lines of thought and derive similar conclusions independently.

However, if our treatment and view of other animals became caring, respectful, and just, nonhuman-animal metaphors would quickly lose all power to demean.

Speciesism – Joan Dunayer – Google Books

This would still constitute wrongful exploitation, and Francione explicitly states this. Refresh and try again. As such, following them in any given djnayer to impose a legal restriction on non-human animal exploiters will not result in the complete abolition of non-human animal exploitation. Lists with This Book. Paperbackpages.


Joan Dunayer, Speciesism – PhilPapers

If, for example, laying hens spfciesism removed completely from the battery cage and placed in an environment where the treatment they received was consistent with that which these animals should receive were they no longer regarded as human property–that is, in a way that respected completely their interest in bodily movement–then that change would qualify [as abolitionist].

Jonathan rated it it was ok May 13, In addition to devaluing most animals, new-speciesists give greater moral consideration and stronger basic rights to humans than they do to any nonhumans.

Sapontzis, Tom Regan and others, her main source is Francione. Additional incremental prohibitions, however, will together result in complete abolition.

Dunayer begins her book by exploring speciesism through Peter Singer and Tom Regan, and for someone who’s never read or studied those people’s philosophies, it is confusing.


Furthermore, it is noteworthy that Dunayer grounds her questionable definition of speciesism by arguing that it is not immoral to kill or otherwise harm human animals for the reason that they possess abstract reason, language and so on–and this is so because it is immoral and illegal to kill or otherwise harm humans who lack those qualities.

Francione on the State of the U. As such, Francione would reject these prohibitions. I can’t wait to read it again. Humans would not touch or disturb the birds, save for stealing their eggs from their nests when the birds were away. If one fails to treat a human animal with equal moral consideration of interests and respect because that human animal lacks traits that are prevalently associated with non-human animals or possesses traits that are prevalently associated with human animals one has committed a speciesist act.


These pillars are that the property status of non-human animals must be abolished and, when pursuing this goal, the interests of non-human animals cannot be violated in the present in order to prevent the interests of other animals from being violated in the future. Speciesism makes the case that every creature with a nervous system should be regarded as sentient. They see animalkind as a hierarchy, with humans at the top. Yizuz Shostakovich rated it it was amazing Oct 17, New-speciesists espouse rights for only some nonhumans, those whose minds seem most like those of humans.

Hence, after complete abolition, they would be placed in sanctuaries that are acceptable to genuine abolitionists.

Ivan rated it it was amazing Jun 27, Hunters kill approximately million animals in the United States annually.

The property owner may, of course, try to pass such costs along to djnayer. I think this is a must read for anyone in order to open their eyes and truly see the beings they share the planet with.

Dunaydr fact that nonhumans feel, Dunayer asserts, is reason enough to grant them rights. Lexidreams rated it really liked it Jul 13, While a polar bear has no capacity to make abstract, reasoned moral decisions and any moral sacrifice that might stem from such decisions, most human animals do have that capacity.