The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory
Praise for The Sexual Politics of Meat:
CAROL J. ADAMS i s the author of The Pornography of Meat (Continuum, 2004), and co-author of Beyond Animal Rights (Continuum, 2000), and The Bedside, Batht
More lists with this book...
This book questions the nature of feminism; it questions its purpose, it’s incompleteness and its prejudices within the world at large.
Now that an odd thing to say isn’t it? Prejudices, in a movement that argues for equality betwee ...more
There are some basic points I was on board with. There are some interesting ways that women and meat are connected by "da patriarchy": meat eating is associated with strength and v ...more
Carol J. Adams wrote "The Sexual Politics of Ethics" and questioned the choice of an all male panel. Why wasn't a single female included (Karen Davis, Pattrice Jones, Lauren Ornelas, Erica Meier, Josephine Donovan, Greta Gaard, Lori Gruen, Marla Rose, Laura Wright, Kim Socha, Breeze Harper, Jasmin Singer or Mariann Sullivan for example) ...more
It’s hard not to feel ambivalent – strongly ambivalent – about this book.
Unless you’re a student, or teacher, of feminist literature, it is somewhat of a slog to get through this book. “The Sexual Politics of Meat” is mainly an analysis of feminist literature and most of the works to which Adams refers will seem obscure to the average reader.
On the other hand, this book is considered a classic in the veg*n genre and for good reason. Adams artfully conveys a number of impo ...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 proceeds to re ...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, we strip our ...more
One warm autumn night in Los Angeles, I had a dream. I was on a lunch date with my mom and an old friend at a nice Chinese restaurant I’ve never been to before. The walls and décor were dark, red, paper lanterns and dragons on the walls. It was busy, and we could barely hear the n ...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 oppressiveness of p ...more
thus far ...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 the ...more
Most compelling are Carol J. Adams' deconstructions of language. Adams' literary examinations of vegetarianism and feminism are least ...more
Adams does several things with this book. She makes you really re ...more
This book is much better suited to viewing literature, rather than life, from a femini ...more
First, Adams argues that discourse about meat is gendered. Definitely true, no questions here. However, the fact that meat-eating is gendered by Western societies does not fundamentally resolve the question of whether to eat meat or not.
Second, Adams argues that feminism and v ...more
The attempt to create defensiveness through trivialization is the first conversational gambit which greets threatening reforms. This pre-establishes the perimeters of discourse. One must explain that no bras were burned at the Miss America pageant, or the symbolic nature of the action of that time, or that this question fails to regard with seriousness questions such as equal pay for equal work. Similarly, a vegetarian, thinking that answering these questions will provide enlightenment, may patiently explain that if plants have life, then why not be responsible solely for the plants one eats at the table rather than for the larger quantities of plants consumed by the herbivorous animals before they become meat? In each case a more radical answer could be forwarded: "Men need first to acknowledge how they benefit from male dominance," "Can anyone really argue that the suffering of this lettuce equals that of a sentient cow who must be bled out before being butchered?" But if the feminist or vegetarian responds this way they will be put back on the defensive by the accusation that they are being aggressive. What to a vegetarian or a feminist is of political, personal, existential, and ethical importance, becomes for others only an entertainment during dinnertime.”