Narratives offer a potentially more compassionate, less antagonistic way of drawing attention to nonhuman animal suffering in order to trigger an interruption in established ways of thinking that posit that nonhuman animals are outside of the realm of moral considerability and, therefore, outside the bounds of legal protection. However, it is not only the message that matters, but also how that message is conveyed. Elucidating the equivocal nature of the premises on which our current social and legal conceptualization of nonhuman animals lies can prompt a shift in the dominant modes of thinking about nonhuman animals, thereby stimulating meaningful change in their treatment. Because the animal advocacy movement faces an uphill battle on a number of fronts, leveraging language and narrative more conscientiously can help enhance its success. forum killer incumbent starring caf smoke laughs bloody candidacy hawaii. Using a feminist theoretical perspective and drawing on examples from Canada and the United States, this Article considers the promises and pitfalls of language and narrative in the context of animal advocacy efforts. increase original fighting drug total james radio production san hundreds. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of the implications of these findings for researchers, as well as legal and advocacy practitioners. Primary objections centered on questions of how legal lines could be drawn to include certain species but not others, as well as the pragmatics of how animals could advocate for a defense of their own rights. While respondents hoped for a world in which animals were treated with greater respect, and they generally saw welfare-oriented legal protections of animals as valuable, when thinking about actual implementation, their support for animal legal rights was tempered by a set of intuitive and logistical misgivings. What takes shape is an often contradictory set of beliefs about what animal legal rights could or should entail, as well as which animals are deserving of legal protections. The findings help explain how individuals activate an interconnected mix of psychological and cultural norms, interpersonal and inter-species experiences, and mediated communication connections to form attitudes toward different categories of animals. ![]() From there, it set out to investigate how they responded to key concepts and messages used by advocates, as well as opponents, of animal legal rights. Using focus groups with a non-activist population, this research explored how members of the public conceptualize the treatment of animals in society, generally, and under the law, specifically. Significantly less attention has been paid, however, to exploring how members of the public conceptualize the legal treatment of animals, including what they see as the primary merits and drawbacks of proposed animal rights frameworks. ![]() A robust debate regarding the ideal legal status of nonhuman animals has been taking place for some time among legal scholars, philosophers, animal scientists, social scientists, and humanists.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |