I have to say, I was extremely intrigued by what I read from John Dunayer’s “Sexist Words, Speciesist Roots.” It brought to my attention words with degrading connotations that I myself use and also how it can be not only degrading for women, but even more degrading to animals. I never really thought about the origin of calling a young woman a “chick,” but now that I see where it comes from, I realize that these terms for women cannot continue as they do. Casual words like “chick” and “foxy” now stir a feeling of anger and frustration within me. I’ve been letting people call me these things and (worse) I’ve been calling other people these things, not knowing that I am embarrassing myself and hurting the equality of women and men (and animals) that I have been strongly supporting.
Upon seeing the definition of a “man,” I felt completely indignant. A Man is defined as “a member of the only extant species, Homo sapiens, distinguished by a highly developed brain, the capacity for abstract reasoning, and the ability to communicate by means of organized speech and record information in a variety of symbolic systems” (Course Anthology 393). My immediate thought was “can’t a woman do that too??” I thought this was the definition of a human, not merely a man. After my immediate feelings of frustration, however, the degrading of animals was evident as well. I found myself seeing women and men and animals as all having special qualities that demand equality among us. These days, jokes are often made about women. However, I really don’t find them funny.
People laughing at a not-so-funny joke.
Societal values expect me to be a “good sport” and just laugh along with everyone else, but inside I’m thinking, “Wait. Laughing at this isn’t doing me any good.” It is increasing the gap between men and women and it goes against the feminist heroines that I admire for their courage and their ability to envision a life in which we can all be equal. A guy at my old high school used to go around with the same joke and I heard him say it to groups numerous times: “Hey you want to hear a joke?” and they nod. “Women’s rights.” Not wanting to seem like a tight-ass (pardon my language), I remained silent, neither laughing uproariously with the others nor contradicting his immature and unprogressive joke. Now, however, I feel a little ashamed of myself. I’m in the TC “Emerging Selves: The Autobiographical Impulse in Women’s Writing,” and I’ve seen how hard women have fought over the years to be heard and from Dunayer’s reading, I see how much progress we have yet to make to reach a world that does not degrade and does not discriminate. If I could go back, I would muster up the courage to speak against this person, even if it cost me my popularity, as I feared then it would. However, what’s done is done and I can’t change the fact. These jokes are one of many contributing factors that force women to continue to struggle for equality.
Additionally, I can see where Dunayer is coming from when he discusses how the decreasing of speciesism can help to decrease sexism. I feel really annoyed that we create identities for animals. I can’t understand how we can just come to the conclusion that pigs are “filthy” and “overeat” (Course Anthology 392). Maybe they appear so in disgusting meat factories, but in the wild, I find it completely believable that they are peaceful, clean, and normal-eating creatures. Also, I could see how playing with a kitten could be just as much “a pastime to her […] than to” the owner (Course Anthology 397). From a certain movie, the dogs expressed the fact that humans are slaves to the animals (it’s a random kid’s movie, but I can’t remember the name). In the preview, the dog states something along the lines of “I mean, do you see us going around picking up your poop?”
Babe: the story about a pig meant for food, but ended up proving to be worth so much more.
Thus, we really shouldn’t consider ourselves so much above animals. People will go through a lot of trouble to take care of their pets. People often include pets in their will, pay thousands of dollars for pet surgery, and clothe the pet and feed it ritually. For example, my aunt holds a very special place in her heart for a dog that her family bought after her daughter died in birth. The dog became something of a replacement of the child, forming a very close bond with my aunt. Now, her whole family goes through great lengths to care for and make the dog comfortable. These gestures seem obsessive to many, but for me I see that they are gestures that bring us closer and closer to a world where all creatures can be equal.
Animals are just as capable of thinking and feeling as we are. They have shown incredible capabilities of acting humanely toward each other, as proved by the experiment involving macaque monkeys. It was shown that “87 percent preferred to go hungry rather than harm their fellow monkeys” when faced with the choice of eating at the price hurting the others.
The opposite holds true for us humans; we, who consider ourselves so much above other animals. In the Stanford and Yale experiments, humans showed the capacity to cause great harm to each other. So, in my opinion, it’s time to get off our high horse and start treating each other (and animals) with more compassion and fairness.
No comments:
Post a Comment