Portal:Animal rights

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Animal rights

Animal rights, also known as animal liberation, is the idea that the most basic interests of non-human animals have to be afforded the same moral and legal consideration as the similar interests of human beings, and that to do otherwise is a prejudice known as speciesism.

This painting of the trial of Bill Burns hangs in the headquarters of the RSPCA in London.

Most writers trace the beginning of the modern concept of animal rights to 19th-century England, and the 1822 Cruel Treatment of Cattle Act, introduced by Richard Martin MP. Anti-cruelty legislation had been passed before this: for example in 1635 in Ireland, in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1641, and in England during the rule of Oliver Cromwell, though it was overturned when Charles II became king in 1660. But prosecutions in England had been pursued from the perspective of animals qua property, so that damage to a non-human animal constituted damage to the human owner. The 1822 Act changed this. Martin himself brought the first prosecution when he had Bill Burns, a fruit seller, convicted for beating a donkey, and brought the donkey to court to demonstrate the injuries.

From 1824, starting with the English SPCA, animal protection and anti-vivisection groups sprang up across Europe, Scandinavia, Australia and North America, and between then and the end of the century, several treatises were published that explicitly developed the idea of animal rights. In the 1960s, a group of intellectuals centered around the University of Oxford – now known as the Oxford Group – began discussing ideas that became the foundation of the modern movement. In parallel to the academic work, direct action groups began to form, starting with the English Hunt Saboteurs Association, founded by a journalist in 1963. In 1964, Ruth Harrison published Animal Machines, a critique of factory farming. A year later, Brigid Brophy wrote an influential article, "The Rights of Animals," for The Sunday Times, and in 1970, inspired by Brophy, the Oxford clinical psychologist Richard D. Ryder coined the term "speciesism."

In 1971, three Oxford philosophers – Roslind and Stanley Godlovitch, and John Harris – edited a collection of essays, Animals, Men and Morals: An Inquiry into the Maltreatment of Non-humans. This, in turn, inspired the Australian philosopher, Peter Singer, to become involved, and in 1975 he published the now-canonical work, Animal Liberation, drawing an explicit comparison between the liberation of women and animals. In 1983, American philosopher, Tom Regan, who had also come into contact with the Oxford Group, published The Case for Animal Rights, laying the groundwork for a rights-based theory.

Animal rights advocates today approach the issue from different philosophical positions, some abolitionist and some gradualist, but generally share the view that animals should be viewed as non-human persons, and should not be used as food, clothing, research subjects, or entertainment.

Selected article

Peter Singer

Animal Liberation is a 1975 book by Australian philosopher Peter Singer. The book is widely considered by the animal rights movement to be the founding philosophical statement of its ideas. Singer himself rejected the use of the theoretical framework of rights for both human and nonhuman animals: he argued that the interests of animals should be considered because of their ability to suffer. He popularized the term "speciesism" in the book, which was originally coined by Richard D. Ryder, to describe the assignment of value to an individual based on species membership alone.

Singer holds that the interests of all beings capable of suffering are worthy of equal consideration, and argues that giving less consideration to beings based on their species is no more justified than discrimination based on skin colour. Read more...

Selected picture

The macaque enclosure in the Zigong People's Park Zoo, Sichuan Province, China. Photographed by the Asian Animal Protection Network in November 2001.

Selected biography

Henry Spira (1927–1998) is widely regarded as one of the most effective animal rights activists of the 20th century. He is credited with the idea of "reintegrative shaming," which involves encouraging opponents to change by working with them, rather than by publicly vilifying them. Sociologist Lyle Munro writes that Spira went to great lengths to avoid using publicity to shame companies that were using animals, resorting to it only as a last resort.

Spira is particularly remembered for his campaign against animal testing at the American Museum of Natural History in 1976, where cats were being mutilated for sex research, and for his full-page advertisement in The New York Times in 1980, famously featuring a rabbit with sticking plaster over the eyes, which asked, "How many rabbits does Revlon blind for beauty's sake?" Within a year, Revlon had donated $750,000 to a fund to investigate alternatives to animal testing, followed by substantial donations from Avon, Bristol Meyers, Estée Lauder, Max Factor, Chanel, and Mary Kay Cosmetics, donations that led to the creation of the Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing. Spira's life was chronicled by Peter Singer in Ethics Into Action: Henry Spira and the Animal Rights Movement (1998). Read more...

Did you know?

DYK Question Mark
  • ... that Lizzy Lind af Hageby, a Swedish anti-vivisectionist, broke a record in England in 1913 when she spoke 210,000 words during a libel trial and asked 20,000 questions?
  • ... that in January 2010 a team of scientists suggested that dolphins are second in intelligence only to human beings, and should be regarded as non-human persons?
  • ... that in 2011 People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (unsuccessfully) sued SeaWorld over its captivity of whales, the first time an attempt was made to use the United States Thirteenth Amendment to protect non-human rights?


Associated Wikimedia

Related portals

Purge server cache