February 6 - ecofeminist reaction = thats anthropocentric,...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
February 6, 2008 Neither Man Nor Beast ecofeminism can be considered consequentialist consumption is experienced separately from production production is valued over maintenance “we are what we eat” don’t think about how we get our food don’t consider consequences tax monies go to making bovine growth hormone perpetuate cheapness of animals’ bodies as a food source (pg 94) Americans consume too much protein meat eating Tv focuses on animals in the wild rather than animals in “factory farms” out of sight, out of mind One life sustains another unnatural to be vegetarians Ontology recapitulates ideology essence of our being determines our ideology Passive voice diminishes argument “Someone kills animals so that I can eat them.” “Animals are killed so I can eat them” “meat animals” “meat” Using animal’s body that you kill = justification
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ecofeminist reaction = thats anthropocentric, not a justification Sentience plants dont suffer from being eaten. if something suffers, dont kill it. Peter Singer (deflection argument) Feminists should incorporate vegetarianism theoretically and logically the personal is political political change begins with you and your decisions gender blind analysis would ignore personal platforms + issues feminized + animalized protein food based on lactation female animals and humans share lactation in common dairy products derived from production of milk = feminized/animalized protein no neutral either eat meat or dont eating meat is not seen as political its personal life people compartmentalize fatigue syndrome tired of dieting, food, fitness leave it all and just have your junk food...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online