We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
THE PROBLEM OF FALSE COMPARISONS: ANIMAL WELFARE DISCOURSE AND THE ANTI-CHOICE MOVEMENT.
- Authors
Power, Nicole
- Abstract
Advocacy for the protection of animal welfare and women's right to reproductive choice have little, if anything, in common. It is productive, then, to question the recurring association of these unrelated ethical issues. If one feels compassion for the plight of the nonhuman animal, the argument goes, then it is morally inconsistent to neglect the fetus. An understanding of the incongruous political contexts at play between abortion and animal welfare effectively repudiates this argument, but a more important question must be answered: why is this strange argument so pervasive? In brief, it is the uniform legal marginalization of women and animals that animates this false comparison, which is instructively analyzed through the theoretical lens of ecofeminism. The leading Canadian judgments of R v Morgentakr and R v Menard exemplify the socio-legal contours of 'otherness' outside the locus of patriarchal dominance. This renders a broadly transferable framew'ork of oppression at the hands of the law; examining jurisprudential examples of displacement of agency, fragmentation of the self, and instrumental objectification, in both contexts, provides a useful starting point in a consideration of the broad intersections between the legal treatment of women and animals.
- Publication
Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies, 2016, Vol 25, p107
- ISSN
1188-4258
- Publication type
Article