i agree w carol j adams that vegetarianism & the oppression of animals can/should be an ethical choice that has bearing on feminist politics, and...morei agree w carol j adams that vegetarianism & the oppression of animals can/should be an ethical choice that has bearing on feminist politics, and there are a lot of kernels of interest interspersed throughout the sexual politics of meat, but i can't fucking stand her positioning of women & animals as similar oppressed beings. somewhere in the deep recesses of her blog, in a completely different but applicable context, she makes the point of saying that feminists do not make that comparison, that it's patriarchal culture that claims women are lesser beings. that is true. here's the thing, though: it's our responsibility as feminists to challenge that. just because patriarchy says it's true doesn't mean it is. the male gaze is not the meat gaze. i don't want to be dehumanized in favor of the vegetarian cause, both as a vegetarian and feminist. the way we treat animals is horrific and the way we treat women is, too, but they're not one in the same. i don't think she's wrong in saying that there's an obvious, overarching link between animal cruelty->meat-eating and sexism in a patriarchal culture but i do think she's wrong in treating animals/women like equals.
also, she's a fucking god awful writer, both in that she can't form a coherent thought and because she includes her own indecipherable, boring journal entry from the 70s.
some choice quotes: "The Great War also provided a positive, though transitory, vegetarian environment for civilians, especially women, through the rationing of food." "Food in general and meat in specific, like the female body, is a 'site of visual pleasure, or lure of the gaze.'" "Just as a black writer refers to the treatment of a black writer by conjuring one of the quintessential forms of white racist violence against black people—rape of black women by white men would offer another metaphor of violation— so a vegetarian writer may express feelings about textual violation by referring to images of butchered animals and raising the issue of dismemberment." "Women are allied with animals because they too are objects of use and possession. Women’s oppression is expressed through the trope of meat eating." "I hold that Ursula Hamdress [a photo of a pig in panties] and the women raped, butchered, and eaten under Heidnik’s directions are linked by an overlap of cultural images of sexual violence against women and the fragmentation and dismemberment of nature and the body in Western culture." ursula hamdress. ursula hamdress. ursula hamdress. (if you repeat it three times in a mirror, she appears.) but just let that sink in. i'm supposed to take something referred to as "ursula hamdress" seriously. nope.jpeg.(less)
i didn't realize this was half lowkey analysis/history (i thought/hoped it would be closer to all...) w the second half acting as a compendium of some...morei didn't realize this was half lowkey analysis/history (i thought/hoped it would be closer to all...) w the second half acting as a compendium of some mental hygiene titles, and for a second i was kind of mad about that because i have a whole internet here to enlighten me but the chance of me enlightening myself is pretty slim and the chance of me watching most of the included films is also very slim (less)
an ok (not gr8) intro reader for porn studies, which is what i was looking for. highly reflective of the time it was written (the era of ~~raunch cult...morean ok (not gr8) intro reader for porn studies, which is what i was looking for. highly reflective of the time it was written (the era of ~~raunch culture~~, rme) but provides a few insights here n there. (less)