Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory” as Want to Read:
The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory

3.85  ·  Rating Details ·  1,641 Ratings  ·  154 Reviews
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 book has inspired controversy and heated debate.

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), a

Paperback, 272 pages
Published November 1st 1999 by Continuum (first published 1990)
More Details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The Sexual Politics of Meat, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about The Sexual Politics of Meat

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30)
filter  |  sort: default (?)  |  Rating Details
Sep 23, 2013 Zanna rated it really liked it
Shelves: feminism, veg-n
Recently my adult English class were studying the topic of 'nature' which had a section on 'animals'. One of the opinions on the page was something along the lines of 'the world would be a healthier and happier place if everyone went vegetarian and it would be good for the environment too'. After giving time for students to discuss this and other ideas, I asked if they agreed with it and was answered by a chorus of heartfelt 'no!'s. Why not, I wanted to hear, and the students vehemently insisted ...more
Nov 04, 2007 Fostergrants rated it did not like it
Recommends it for: bonfires, fireplaces
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 woman would think twice before causing the death of any mor
Jan 04, 2008 Elizabeth rated it really liked it
Recommends it for: ecofeminists, vegetarians & vegans, animal rights activists
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 is a ...more
Amy Laurens
Jul 17, 2013 Amy Laurens rated it it was ok
How could I resist a title like this? This is supposed to be a classic, whatever that means. And I really came at this book wanting to like it, being a vegetarian feminist that's long wished for ANY critical theory that I don't consider to be a massive inward-looking circle jerk. But unfortunately it is quite bonkers.

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
May 08, 2009 Joel rated it it was amazing
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, we strip our
The New York Times runs an essay contest on the ethics of meat eating. The judges are animal rights advocates and plant-based nutrition gurus. They are all men.

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)
Nov 19, 2011 michelle rated it it was ok  ·  review of another edition
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 proceeds to repeatedly ref
Jeffrey Cohan
Feb 15, 2013 Jeffrey Cohan rated it really liked it
Shelves: vegetarianism

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 important ideas, chief among
Lisa Vegan
Jun 05, 2007 Lisa Vegan rated it liked it  ·  review of another edition
Recommends it for: all women, feminists, those interested in animal & human rights
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.
Jan 24, 2012 Jacquelyn rated it it was amazing  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: own
**THIS IS A LONG REVIEW. So you know where I'm coming from, I'm first going to explain what made me decide to be vegan. If you don't care, the book review will commence after some asterisks. But not these ones -->**

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
Dec 06, 2009 Vegantrav rated it really liked 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 oppressiveness of patriarc
Jul 11, 2007 Robyn rated it really liked it
Recommends it for: the girlies... or anyone, really
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.

thus far my only rea
Mark Robison
Oct 19, 2012 Mark Robison rated it it was amazing
Amazing book. This academic text read like a thriller for me, as each page turned up new insights. It looks at how patriarchal society treats women and nonhuman animals as objects and how if one wants to overturn patriarchy, one must give up meat because it is part of patriarchal power.
Ok, I'm not sure where to start with this review. I guess I'll start by first saying that I had read this book in great part already, but wanted to read it thoroughly again in order to get it fresh in my mind as I often felt like recommending it to some people when they were failing to see connections between woman and animal exploitation. I still think that this book can be a great eye-opener for some people, but reading it again now left me dissatisfied.

I was mostly annoyed by the writing styl
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 the book, are r
Melissa (YA Book Shelf)
Jan 17, 2013 Melissa (YA Book Shelf) rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: vegan
I initially read the intro chapter to this book back in 2003 when I was taking an EcoFeminism class at university. I was a new vegetarian, and many of the things that Carol J Adams mentioned in that chapter stayed with me over the years to the point when I saw her tweet something about the book, I decided that I had to go back to this text. It's been years, and now I'm a vegan and it's still just as - if not more - relevant to me.

Adams does several things with this book. She makes you really re
Nov 05, 2009 Robin rated it liked 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 end of the book Adams raises so ...more
Aug 05, 2011 Wendy added it
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 feminist and
Oct 14, 2007 Bart rated it it was ok
"[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 are least intere
Nov 18, 2010 John rated it liked it  ·  review of another edition
I'd read part of this for a previous class; read the whole thing this time, and am glad I did. It's both wonderful and awful. First the bad: bad use of theory, bad readings of literature, writing that lacks nuance, extremely polemical. But, at certain points the key argument really sings through, namely that feminism and vegetarianism both are anti-patriarchal and are inherently tied to one another. She also tries to re-establish a feminist-vegetarian literary and cultural history, which is admi ...more
missy jean
Apr 15, 2010 missy jean rated it it was amazing
Shelves: non-fiction
Different than I expected, but still so interesting. Adams links up the oppression of women and the oppression of animals, and explores the way that women's and animal's bodies have been dismembered and consumed by patriarchal systems. This book gave me a lot to chew on (ha! pun!), and I'm still digesting the ideas (ha! ha!)
Jean Grace
Sep 05, 2007 Jean Grace rated it it was amazing
This was the first book I bought the week I decided to be a vegetarian. I found it in a new agey store in Sedona, Arizona. It's an important book. It helped me understand omnivore aggression toward vegetarians at the table, which can be a baffling experience. This is good read for new vegetarians with an academic bent. It is actually a little painfully graphic to me now.
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.
Oct 23, 2009 Philip rated it it was amazing
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.
Jun 24, 2007 Amy rated it it was amazing
This book was a cornerstone in my growth as a woman,a vegetarian and as a social liberal. Carol Adams' thorough examination of how these issues are linked is fascinating and compelling.
Kim Stallwood
Jul 16, 2012 Kim Stallwood rated it it was amazing  ·  review of another edition
Singularly important book to read to understand why meat is so culturally important...and why it shouldn't be.
Adam Freilich
Sep 09, 2015 Adam Freilich rated it really liked it
Super interesting read. I'm going to be thinking about this one for a while.

Things this book made me think about: "moral" vegetarianism and veganism, relationship with the historical vegetarian movement, dealing with "problematic" institutions and the politics of veg*nism. I'll just talk briefly about each.

I define "moral" vegetarianism or veganism to be the belief that it is wrong to kill (respectively use) animals for human pleasure or convenience. This is as opposed to "tentative" vegetaria
Aug 15, 2014 noelle rated it it was ok
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 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 comparis ...more
tracy lou
Feb 13, 2017 tracy lou rated it it was ok
Okay, I get it. I'm glad that I read this. Feminism is related to vegetarianism.

Here's a good quote: "Feminist-vegetarian activity declares that an alternative worldview exists, one which celebrates life rather than consuming death; one which does not rely on resurrected animals but empowered people."

However, the theory is literary, which is usually fine but impractical here. The quotes sometimes feel weird and misplaced.

I'd've preferred a book that focused solely on the historical relationshi
David Markwell
Carol J. Adams The Sexual Politics of Meat is an interesting read, with some very interesting arguments and positions. She argues that both the cultural attitudes towards 'meat' consumption and the patriarchal power structure make use of 'absent referents;' the once living non-human animal and women, as full subjects. This leads to both a 'sexualising' of non-human animal bodies and an 'animalizing' of women's bodies which spread throughout our culture and becomes the norm. Adams noting the co ...more
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 next »
topics  posts  views  last activity   
Better World Book...: The Sexual Politics of Meat 4 11 Apr 24, 2012 03:10PM  
  • Defiant Daughters: 21 Women on Art, Activism, Animals, and the Sexual Politics of Meat
  • Making A Killing: The Political Economy of Animal Rights
  • Eternal Treblinka: Our Treatment of Animals and the Holocaust
  • The Dreaded Comparison: Human and Animal Slavery
  • Sistah Vegan: Food, Identity, Health, and Society: Black Female Vegans Speak
  • Sister Species: Women, Animals and Social Justice
  • Introduction to Animal Rights: Your Child or the Dog?
  • Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism
  • The Case for Animal Rights
  • In Defense of Animals: The Second Wave
  • Farm Sanctuary: Changing Hearts and Minds About Animals and Food
  • Unbearable Weight: Feminism, Western Culture, and the Body
  • Feminism FOR REAL: Deconstructing the Academic Industrial Complex of Feminism
  • Thanking the Monkey: Rethinking the Way We Treat Animals
  • Jane Sexes It Up: True Confessions of Feminist Desire
  • Vegan's Daily Companion: 365 Days of Inspiration for Cooking, Eating, and Living Compassionately
  • Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy
  • The Vegan Sourcebook
Carol J. Adams is a feminist-vegetarian theorist and author of books on eco-feminism and the links between species oppression and gender oppression.
More about Carol J. Adams...

Share This Book

“We live in a culture that has institutionalized the oppression of animals on at least two levels: in formal structures such as slaughterhouses, meat markets, zoos, laboratories, and circuses, and through our language. That we refer to meat eating rather than to corpse eating is a central example of how our language transmits the dominant culture's approval of this activity.” 22 likes
“The situation is established not only to provoke defensiveness but to sidetrack the reformer into answering the wrong questions.... In this, the pattern of discourse resembles that of dinnertime conversations about feminism in the early 1970s. Questions of definition often predominate. Whereas feminists were parlaying questions which trivialized feminism such as "Are you one of those bra burners?" vegetarians must define themselves against the trivializations of "Are you one of those health nuts?" or "Are you one of those animal lovers?" While feminists encountered the response that "men need liberation too," vegetarians are greeted by the postulate that "plants have life too." Or to make the issue appear more ridiculous, the position is forwarded this way: "But what of the lettuce and tomato you are eating; they have feelings too!"

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.”
More quotes…