What’s Love Got to Do with it? An Ecofeminist Approach to Inter-Animal and Intra-Cultural Conflicts of Interest

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 22 (1):77-91 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Many familial and cultural traditions rely on animals for their fulfillment - think of Christmas ham, Rosh Hashannah chicken soup, Fourth of July barbeques, and so forth. Though philosophers writing in animal ethics often dismiss interests in certain foods as trivial, these food-based traditions pose a significant moral problem for those who take animals’ lives and interests seriously. One must either turn one’s back on one’s community or on the animals. In this paper, I consider the under-theorized area of intra-cultural critique. My focus is how we should think about and seek to resolve inter-animal conflicts of interest that arise within our own communities and cultural or religious groups. How should a theory that takes animals seriously approach a conflict between animals’ interests and culturally important human interests in the context of one’s own cultural, ethnic, or religious group? How, for example, should we think about the person staring down at a bowl of her grandmother’s chicken soup while recognizing the moral impermissibility of slaughtering chickens for human consumption? In contrast to traditional approaches that fail to take these robust, food-based, interests into account, I offer an ecofeminist approach that highlights the importance of respecting animals’ interests while also undertaking the work of moral repair to address damage done to relationships of love and care in the process.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,745

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Limited aggregation and zoonotic disease outbreaks.Angela K. Martin & Matthias Eggel - 2022 - Transforming Food Systems: Ethics, Innovation and Responsibility. Eursafe Conference Proceedings.
Animals as Stakeholders.Joshua Smart - 2022 - In Natalie Thomas (ed.), Animals and Business Ethics. Palgrave-Macmillan.
Prospects for an Animal-Friendly Business Ethics.Brian Berkey - 2022 - In Natalie Thomas (ed.), Animals and Business Ethics. Palgrave-Macmillan. pp. 67-89.
Just Fodder: The Ethics of Feeding Animals.Josh Milburn - 2022 - Chicago: McGill-Queen's University Press.
Animal Rights and the Duty to Harm: When to be a Harm Causing Deontologist.C. E. Abbate - 2020 - Journal for Ethics and Moral Philosophy 3 (1):5-26.
Is equal moral consideration really compatible with unequal moral status?John Rossi - 2010 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 20 (3):251-276.
Making a stand for animals.Oscar Horta - 2022 - New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, earthscan from Routledge.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-02-05

Downloads
37 (#118,170)

6 months
9 (#1,260,759)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Karen Emmerman
University of Washington

Citations of this work

Animal Rights and the Duty to Harm: When to be a Harm Causing Deontologist.C. E. Abbate - 2020 - Journal for Ethics and Moral Philosophy 3 (1):5-26.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Animal Liberation.Peter Singer (ed.) - 1977 - Avon Books.
Practical Ethics.Peter Singer - 1979 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Susan J. Armstrong & Richard George Botzler.
Famine, Affluence, and Morality.Peter Singer - 1972 - Oxford University Press USA.
Famine, affluence, and morality.Peter Singer - 1972 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (3):229-243.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 2004 - Univ of California Press.

View all 41 references / Add more references