What is Critical Animal Studies?
A. Matsuoka and J. Sorenson June 2019.

Critical Animal Studies (CAS) investigates human relationships with other animals. However, rather than regarding these relations only as matters for philosophical inquiry, CAS considers them as matters of trans-species social justice and takes an activist stance against oppression. CAS rejects anthropocentric views that characterize nonhuman animals as resources and normalize their consumption, challenging systemic and institutionalized exploitation. Opposing this structure of violence, CAS rejects not only the cruel treatment of nonhuman animals but their instrumentalist use. CAS recognizes nonhuman animals as individual and social beings with their own inherent value. Challenging anthropocentrism, CAS recognizes the agency, personhood and subjectivity of nonhuman animals. Transdisciplinary and transformational, CAS employs a range of methodologies to challenge dominant cultural and political practices.

Explicitly engaged and political, the goal of CAS is to change material conditions for nonhuman animals. Thus, CAS supports efforts to liberate animals from these oppressive conditions and encourages counter-hegemonic practices such as veganism. From a CAS perspective, veganism is not simply a diet but a matter of justice, a political gesture against oppression.  We consider oppression has five aspects, following Iris M. Young’s (2012) understanding: exploitation, violence, marginalization, powerlessness and cultural imperialism.

CAS recognizes that various systems of power intersect and that the domination of nonhuman animals operates in the context of other systems of oppression. The oppression of nonhuman animals is justified on the basis of speciesism. The term speciesism was coined in 1970 by Richard Ryder, who characterized it as a form of prejudice that prioritized human interests over those of nonhuman animals. Ryder described this prejudice as being similar to racism and sexism. All of these prejudices are based on morally irrelevant differences, exaggerating them and overlooking similarities in order to disregard the suffering of others. While philosophers Peter Singer and Tom Regan also described speciesism as a prejudice, sociologist David Nibert characterized it as an ideology that serves to legitimize a particular social order. Nibert’s characterization is significant because it emphasizes the fact that speciesism is not simply an individual biased outlook but an institutionalized social practice. This perspective also emphasizes the material interests that underlie exploitation. The ideology of speciesism operates to preserve the privileges of those who benefit most from oppression. Nibert’s work also documented how the oppression of nonhuman animals is consistently entangled with the oppression of various human groups. Thus, speciesism affects not only nonhuman animals but also various groups of humans who are equated with them and, thereby, marginalized. Intersectional understanding of oppression is a critical aspect of CAS.  Ecofeminists, like Carol Adams and Josephine Donavan, have made significant contributions to CAS by noting the intersectional oppression of sexism and speciesism not only in individual practices but in institutionalized social practices.

For the current project we are incorporating the idea of trans-species social justice into CAS.  We have written more about CAS in the introductions to our two recent edited books, Critical Animal Studies and Dog’s Best Friend?. Another introduction to our co-edited book with Anthony, J. Nocella and Kim Socha (2014) has an excellent overview of CAS, especially describing its historical development. The chapters of these edited books provide a variety of perspectives that will help readers to understand what CAS is.

References:

Matsuoka, A. and Sorenson, J. (Eds).  (2018) Critical Animal Studies: Toward Trans-species Social Justice, London: Rowman & Littlefield International.

Nibert, D. (2002). Animal rights human rights. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

Nocella, A. J. II, Sorenson, J., Socha, K.  & Matsuoka, A. (Eds.). (2014). Defining Critical Animal Studies: An Intersectional Social Justice Approach. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Regan, T. (1983, 2004). The case for animal rights: Empty Cages. London: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers

Ryder, R. D. (2000). Speciesism, Animal Revolution: Changing attitudes towards speciesism. Oxford: Berg.

Singer, P. (1990). Animal liberation. New York: Ecco.

Sorenson, J. & Matsuoka, A. (Eds). (fall 2019) Dog’s Best Friend?: Rethinking Human-Canid Relations. Montreal and Kingston: McGill & Queen University Press.

Sorenson, J.  & Matsuoka, A. (2018). Introduction. In Matsuoka, A. & Sorenson, J. (Eds). Critical Animal Studies: Toward Trans-Species Social Justice. (1-17). London: Rowman & Littlefield International. https://www.rowmaninternational.com/book/critical_animal_studies/3-156-8606c11f-3a7d-4a69-9f66-b5ab28e57336

Young, I.M., (1990, 2011). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.