First published in 1990, The Sexual Politics of Meat" is a landmark text in the ongoing debates about animal rights. In the two decades since, the ...
read full description
reviews
Dec 09, 2007
Fostergrants
rated it: 
I will quote from the book
"to talk about eliminating meat is to talk about displacing one aspect of male control and demonstrates the ways in which animals' oppression and women's oppression are linked together."
"If meat is a symbol of male dominance then the presence of meat proclaims the disempowering of women."
I dislike this book so much as to want my two dollars back, and I'm pretty sure Mother Nature would love it if this dogmatic wom More...
"to talk about eliminating meat is to talk about displacing one aspect of male control and demonstrates the ways in which animals' oppression and women's oppression are linked together."
"If meat is a symbol of male dominance then the presence of meat proclaims the disempowering of women."
I dislike this book so much as to want my two dollars back, and I'm pretty sure Mother Nature would love it if this dogmatic wom More...
6 comments
like
(11 people liked it)
Jan 04, 2008
Elizabeth
rated it: 
let me preface this review by saying that carol adams is a true pioneer in the field of eco/vegetarian-feminist critical theory. she sheds light on how systems of oppression intersect with one another and how capitalism, patriarchy, racism and classism converge and are expressed in the oppression and exploitation of animals. i think this is a seminal work in the field and warrants thoughtful reading. it provides an alternative critique of capitalist and patriarchal systems of oppression and i
More...
0 comments
like
(5 people liked it)
Oct 14, 2007
Bart
rated it: 
"[T]he phrase 'humane slaughter' confers a certain benignity on the term 'slaughter.' [Mary] Daly would call this process of 'simple inversion': 'the usage of terms and phrases to label ... activites as the opposite of what they are.' [...] Just as all rapes are forcible, all slaughter of animals for food is inhumane regardless of what it is called" (69-70).
Most compelling are Carol J. Adams' deconstructions of language. Adams' literary examinations of vegetarianism and feminism More...
Most compelling are Carol J. Adams' deconstructions of language. Adams' literary examinations of vegetarianism and feminism More...
0 comments
like
(2 people liked it)
Jul 12, 2007
Robyn
rated it:
it has a tendency to be a tad one note... in truth the author really has two main points to get across to the reader... but she milks (ha ha! food analogy!) the material well. of interest are her sections on language and animal metaphors as they are employed to describe meat dishes (hero sandwiches, etc) as well as in how victims of sexual violence describe themselves ("i was a piece of meat")... the author navigates the theoretical aspects of this discussion reasonably well.
More...
More...
0 comments
like
(2 people liked it)
Dec 08, 2011
Hannah
rated it:
I thought she made some interesting points until I talked to my husband (who worked at dairies and slaughtered chickens, etc. as a teenager) who grew up in a farming community. There were a lot of "assumptions" made. For instance she claims that female animals are extorted because of milk and eggs which have to do with female reproduction. Then my husband explained how many male cows become steers because the rancher chooses a few males with desirable traits to mate with the cows (b
More...
Dec 06, 2009
Vegantrav
rated it:
“Our dietary choices reflect and reinforce our cosmology, our politics.”
This sentence, the third-to-last sentence in The Sexual Politics of Meat, nicely summarizes Carol Adams’s basic thesis in this book wherein she ties together her feminist critique of patriarchy with her vegetarian critique of patriarchy. These two social critiques, argues Adams, are not merely related but are part of an organic whole: to live fully the feminist protest against the heterosexual male oppressivene More...
This sentence, the third-to-last sentence in The Sexual Politics of Meat, nicely summarizes Carol Adams’s basic thesis in this book wherein she ties together her feminist critique of patriarchy with her vegetarian critique of patriarchy. These two social critiques, argues Adams, are not merely related but are part of an organic whole: to live fully the feminist protest against the heterosexual male oppressivene More...
Dec 16, 2009
Lisa
rated it: 
I don’t know whether it was the style or some other nebulous reason, but I found this book difficult to read. It was well worth the effort, though, because the author presents an important hypothesis about the correlation between the ways women and animals are treated and regarded in society. I found this book to be unique, as some of the information and ideas it presents I’ve found in no other books.
6 comments
like
(2 people liked it)
Jul 02, 2008
Michael
rated it:
Well researched and pretty comprehensive. Some pretty strong arguments. Adams makes some pretty compelling arguments linking the oppression of women to domination of animals. Some of the book was theoretically light: could use a stronger theory of subjectivity and felt at times a bit simplistic/essentialist. Decent and quick read. Accessible.
0 comments
like
(1 person liked it)
Nov 28, 2009
Robin
rated it:
In this book, Carol Adams argues the intersection of feminist and vegetarian theory. She successfully demonstrates a connect between meat and power. There is also an interesting discussion of the use of language surrounding meat and vegetables ("beef up," "feel like a piece of meat," "a vegetative state"). I found her most compelling argument to be that people who claim to oppose war/are non-violent should also espouse that behavior in their food choices. Near the e
More...
Nov 03, 2011
Cheryl
rated it:
2.5 stars, really. I almost liked it, I liked parts of it. I enjoyed learning about the historical connections between vegetarianism and feminism. Adams makes a good point that these connections have generally been ignored. However, I disagree with many of her premises and conclusions. In particular, she presents diet choices as those who eat nothing but meat all day, every day, and those who abstain from meat in all circumstances. There is no room for a middle ground. I, myself, like to eat mea
More...
Dec 01, 2011
michelle
rated it:
Look, this book was OK. The things that make me not consider it to be a better work, was the cissexism and transphobia throughout the piece. It turns out Adams' mentor was Mary Daly, notorious for not just her radical feminism, but her extreme transphobia.
The most blatant (and simple) demonstration of Adams' prejudice was her treatment of Doctor James Barry.
When Dr. Barry died, it was discovered that he was apparently born female. Once she reveals this of Barry, Adams pr More...
The most blatant (and simple) demonstration of Adams' prejudice was her treatment of Doctor James Barry.
When Dr. Barry died, it was discovered that he was apparently born female. Once she reveals this of Barry, Adams pr More...
Aug 07, 2011
Parts of this book shine, and Adams really hits the nail on the head when she explains why veg*ns can get so offended by omnivores who call themselves vegetarians. However, I think the title is misleading. Adams starts out with much promise, showing the links between advertising meat and women for consumption, but quickly falls into literary critiques and leaves a lot of the politics and sociology behind.
This book is much better suited to viewing literature, rather than life, from a femin More...
This book is much better suited to viewing literature, rather than life, from a femin More...
Dec 22, 2011
Liz
rated it:
I'm conflicted. On the one hand, I feel like the arguments are sometimes circular, the writing isn't fabulous, and I had a hard time getting through such a theoretical book. I admit that I skimmed the last half because I had already discussed it at book group and I was getting a bit bogged down in the repetition.
But. This book has probably given me more pause than anything I've read in a while, simply because she makes some interesting arguments that, while not the main thesis of More...
But. This book has probably given me more pause than anything I've read in a while, simply because she makes some interesting arguments that, while not the main thesis of More...
Jan 30, 2012
Stephanie
rated it:
While I enjoyed the subject matter of this book (which was mostly a statement against meat-eating), I found her writing style a bit hard to follow. Adams repeats herself a lot and the flow of her argument is really fragmented. I was intrigued, however, by the idea of a link between feminism and vegetarianism/veganism; while the meat industry regularly uses degrading images of women in their advertisements for meat, and society certainly reinforces the notion that meat-eating is 'manly' (real men
More...
Feb 06, 2010
Joel
rated it: 
This book opened my eyes to a fundamental concept that I feel is lacking in most of discussions of most of the subjects we discuss, societally speaking: the absent referent.
Sure, this book draws parallels between culture's attitude and treatment of animals and its treatment and attitude toward women, but it goes further with regard to the former. It posits that the reason it's so easy for us to abuse, misuse, mistreat, and [whatever:] animals the way we do, is that, linguistically, More...
Sure, this book draws parallels between culture's attitude and treatment of animals and its treatment and attitude toward women, but it goes further with regard to the former. It posits that the reason it's so easy for us to abuse, misuse, mistreat, and [whatever:] animals the way we do, is that, linguistically, More...
0 comments
like
(4 people liked it)
Jun 06, 2008
Dana
rated it:
While vegetarianism is often explained and adopted for environmental and/or animal rights reasons, there is relatively little discussion about its connections to feminism. Adams is strongest when she writes about the gendered/racial cultural significance of meat consumption, as well as relating the literal and figurative relationship between animals and women. She exposes a Western history of vegetarianism and the place of vegetarianism within the lives of past feminists. Although this book o
More...
Nov 02, 2008
Tammy
rated it:
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers.
To view it, click here
Sep 03, 2011
Lisa
rated it:
I really enjoyed this book; the concept of the 'absent referent' really revolutionised my thinking, and I am grateful for that. However, I found that the language became very academic and convoluted at times, which made the excellent concepts somewhat less accessible to me. Of particular interest was the analysis of the Romantic period and Mary Shelley in the chapter 'Frankenstein's Vegetarian Monster'.
Jan 06, 2011
Peacegal
rated it:
I found the core arguments of the book intriguing, but they were buried in so much academia-speak that it was often tough going to get to the heart of the matter.
Where I wished for specific examples I got only avalanches of esoteric words. Those seeking Adam’s arguments in a more concise, reader-friendly form should pick up The Pornography of Meat.
Where I wished for specific examples I got only avalanches of esoteric words. Those seeking Adam’s arguments in a more concise, reader-friendly form should pick up The Pornography of Meat.
Jan 11, 2011
Brianna
rated it:
This was an intriguing read for me. It drew a lot of interesting connections between vegetarianism and feminism, between meat-eating and masculinity, and between violence and meat-eating, just to name a few.
She also does a great job of debunking the common criticism that vegetarianism is a fad, by quoting famous vegetarians from all the way back to Pythagoras to Bernard Shaw to members of the suffrage movement and so on.
She also does a great job of debunking the common criticism that vegetarianism is a fad, by quoting famous vegetarians from all the way back to Pythagoras to Bernard Shaw to members of the suffrage movement and so on.
Dec 07, 2011
Monika
rated it:
A very interesting, slightly weird philosophy of how the meat industry and the opression of women are linked. Discusses the history of food, and how the vocabulary of meat is also used as nicknames for women. Slightly crazy, but very interesting and highly recommended if you are open minded.
Dec 09, 2010
Flat
rated it:
Read this when I was about 14. Still remember having to put in a special order at Barnes & Noble, and the looks the clerks gave me when I picked it up. My parents should probably have screened me from this book--kids are way too susceptible to vegetarianism as it is.
Jul 24, 2008
April
rated it:
I agree that there are links between vegetarianism and feminism, but Adams' books is only a decent beginning into exploring their connection.
Her entire book presupposes there is only one reason for going vegetarian - that it is inhumane and immoral to consume animals. Period. Try sticking any other sort of reasoning, and her argument falls apart. I think she fails to see the shades of gray when it comes to vegetarianism.
What seriously turned me off was her implied disgust More...
Her entire book presupposes there is only one reason for going vegetarian - that it is inhumane and immoral to consume animals. Period. Try sticking any other sort of reasoning, and her argument falls apart. I think she fails to see the shades of gray when it comes to vegetarianism.
What seriously turned me off was her implied disgust More...
Jan 09, 2012
Shannon
rated it:
I thought this book was a good starting point for a larger discourse. I would have liked to see her discuss more concrete examples of sexism in the meat market (expand on advertisements that link meat to women). I hope this book inspired more books on the topic that I can find.
Everyone who calls themselves a feminist but still eats meat should try this book out.
Everyone who calls themselves a feminist but still eats meat should try this book out.
Jun 02, 2010
chubs
rated it:
Read this when I was about 14. Still remember having to put in a special order at Barnes & Noble, and the looks the clerks gave me when I picked it up. My parents should probably have screened me from this book--kids are way too susceptible to vegetarianism as it is.
Oct 23, 2009
Philip
rated it:
This is one of the most amazing books written about how our society,
through the culture and nature of patriarchy chews up and spits out women and animals. It's a brilliant book and one every animal rights advocate and feminist should read.
through the culture and nature of patriarchy chews up and spits out women and animals. It's a brilliant book and one every animal rights advocate and feminist should read.
Nov 04, 2009
So far this book is pretty good and has made me think about some of the sexualized language surrounding food. I do find that there is a tendancy to not differenciate between factory farms and local farms which I take serious pause with.
Feb 07, 2012
Chris
rated it:
Carol Adams' 'The Sexual Politics of Meat' (revised in this anniversary addition to better reflect current socio-cultural trends) is quite easily among the most daring works of feminist critique I've yet to encounter. By exploring the intersection of vegetarianism and feminism, Adams strengthens the underlying premises of both arguments in a one-two punch of soundly reasoned ethical examination. Her perspective is refreshingly contemporary, even as she bolsters her argument by appeal to foundati
More...
Feb 18, 2010
Renate
rated it:
A good read for earnest, self-righteous vegan college students and hairy-legged feminists, speaking as a former member of the first camp and a current member of the second. Overly dogmatic but thought-provoking.
Jul 26, 2011
Emily
rated it:
Some 5-star concepts (absent referrent!) along with other information that seems less relevant. The book is over 20 years old now, and I wonder what Adams would think of more recent developments.
