The Hunt: Masculinity & Fox Oppression in Britain

By Madelaine Couch

On Boxing Day 2018, I joined a hunt gathering.

Never in my life would I expect to say those words. Never in my life would I support hunting. I was an observer to document and tell a story.

I had just spent Christmas in a small West Country town. As usual, it was a day filled with eating, opening presents, drinking alcohol – the expected festivities. The following morning on Boxing Day, as it turned out, the town centre held a hunt meet. Fox Hunting.

I was curious to see what it was all about, because throughout my whole life I have stood against hunting for sport. I have opposed blood sports and I always will. Causing unnecessary suffering for man’s pleasure seems sadistic to me. Cruelty is not an act I condone.

Rich Hardy is a storyteller, campaigner and investigative journalist. He has spent the past twenty years documenting the plight of animals around the world. He has spent time with fur trappers in America, Spanish bullfighters, exposed the rabbit fur industry, the broiler chicken industry, factory farms, followed live exports and told the story of primates kept in labs. Listening to interviews with Rich Hardy, he is a humble man who has dedicated his life to exposing cruelty and suffering, in an attempt to change laws and our behaviour towards animals.

Rich Hardy states that when spending time with many of these people who commit atrocious acts of cruelty towards animals, most of them are ordinary people in the world. They may go home to families, support their community and go to church. Some of them are respected figures in their towns and villages. Yet, beyond the human world, they can inflict profound
cruelty on another being. The sad fact is, this is quite common.

And this is the challenge. Because ultimately these people are not ‘other’. If we categorise people who do these things as ‘other’ and an ‘enemy’, we dehumanise them and remove their responsibility. We need to understand that there is a potential in this world for people to act in such ways. We need to educate and tell the stories in order for people to learn and understand the truth. Because most of the time, people don’t know the truth. The true stories are often kept behind walls – behind closed doors. They are intentionally covered up so intensive farming, blood sports and animal suffering for profitable gain can continue. The stories need to be told.

We walked into town on a crisp Boxing Day morning. I was surprised to see how busy the street was. In front of me stood a crowd of men and women in tweed jackets and hats, alcohol-induced rosy-cheeked men – their wives fashioning tall boots and neat hair do’s. I’d never seen anything like it.

As the huntsmen arrived with their immaculately groomed horses and rugged hounds, people drank mulled wine and chattered over Christmas cheer, the hunt leader in his Beauchamp blazer stood out in a street full of hunters. In his red fox-hunting jacket, he spieled about supporting hunting and fighting for the rights of hunters. I felt like I’d been flung back a few hundred years. Echoes of racism, sexism and white male patriarchal ideology hummed through the streets. This world seemed alien in the 21st century.

The crowd gathered and the man in the red jacket gave a speech.

‘First and foremost, can I just say a huge thank you to your town council for putting up with us yet again. This is one of our great traditions at Christmas time and it’s a lovely spectacle to see the hunt in the town square. So, for those of you that live here, thank you all very very much.’

A lovely spectacle isn’t the phrase that came to my mind. I genuinely felt fear for the foxes in the day that lay ahead. A large pack of rough looking hounds ran through the crowd whilst the sound of horns rang through the street. These dogs were large. They looked edgy, aggressive. People had brought their pet dogs out for the morning meet, and every single domestic dog confronted by a hound behaved with fear and aggression. Each pet dog
growled, hissed and barked at these hounds – because they were terrified of them.

‘It’s extraordinary that it was fifteen years ago now that I suspect many of you here faced a long trek to London to march in support of hunting. And of course, our voices were ignored and our politicians stabbed us in the back when they took the decision to ban hunting. But the good news is that we are still going and we have found a way to hunt within the law. And so, hunting, as we know it today, is still alive and well.’

Fox hunting was banned in 2004 in England and Wales. Since the ban of hunting, hunts invented an activity called ‘trail hunting’. Hunters claim to simply follow a pre-laid trail instead of chasing a fox. However, years of evidence shows that these ‘trail hunts’ are used as a cover for illegal hunting – and they continue to hunt foxes.

On the League Against Cruel Sports website, it states that more than eight out of ten people are opposed to hunting, including those in rural areas. Most people understand the cruelty of fox hunting and don’t condone it. The way we treat other sentient beings reflects the society we live.

There is the argument that fox hunting is about ‘pest control’, but hunts have been caught capturing and rearing foxes so they can be hunted. During one case, The League Against Cruel Sports investigators rescued and released foxes that were found locked up, near to a hunt meet. A few months later, monitoring the same hunt, their investigators were attacked, one resulted in a broken neck. For people to do this to human beings for rescuing a fox shows the level of violence and aggression that is tolerated in these blood sport cultures.

‘But it is alarming that just on the radio today, I heard, that it’s not enough now for them to take away our sport and then fine us if we break the law. They now want to put us in jail as well. And therefore, please, your support for this sport has never been more important. We do need to stand shoulder to shoulder. And so, what is also really lovely for us in the West Country for us to see, is the way that National Hunt Racing supports hunting.’

At that moment, I felt appalled to live in the West Country. My heart pounded, adrenaline pumped through my body. His speech was so loaded with talk of ‘rights’ and ‘being stabbed in the back’. His tone was aggressive.

What about the suffering inflicted on British wildlife – foxes and their cubs? Not to mention the other animals that are often injured and harmed if they come into contact with the hunt.

Other animals and wildlife have been known to be killed during a fox hunt.
I saw footage recently of a huntsman throwing a dead fox into a river and kicking one of the hounds. It was disgraceful and disgusting. The lack of compassion for another being was so evident. The aggression was rife. Perhaps for many supporters of hunting, there’s a pleasure in power and control. Man’s dominion over animal.

Hunt supporters say the sport is not cruel – claiming the hounds kill the foxes outright. And the fox does not anticipate death. And alternative ways to kill a fox would cause more suffering. They argue that hunting is a tradition and keeps the British culture alive.

Ban supporters argue that the sport is cruel. If there is a problem with foxes in an area shooting is more humane than hunting. Yet, foxes are not pests. These sports are old. We should have moved on from those times.

As the hunters and hounds left for the hunt, I asked a man in the crowd why he supported hunting. What is the point of it? Why does he condone it? He told me it was a tradition that he didn’t want to see lost and that it’s a part of British culture. As I continued the debate with him, co-incidentally he waved to a neighbour and cut the conversation short. I wasn’t being aggressive. I was trying to have a civilised, calm conversation. But he wouldn’t go there. He wouldn’t converse with me about it. Perhaps, deep down, he knew hunting was wrong.

So, the argument of tradition – what about bear baiting and bull baiting? These were also traditions. How can we be proud of many British traditions when they are so loaded with violence? I looked around me and saw white faces, tweed jackets, old husbands and wives, a history which I was not proud of. And fox hunting was another badge on that jacket of patriarchal dominion. Power. Elitism. Aggression. Control. A connection between blood sports and the ideologies of racism and sexism rang loud and clear.

I’ll never understand the psychology behind supporting violent sports. Fox hunting. Bullfighting. Deer hunting. Many supporters of these sports also say they respect and wish to protect British wildlife in general. Have they ever heard of hypocrisy? How bold they stand in an ocean of duplicity. We must keep telling the truth because that is all this world has.

This article has been inspired by the work of journalist Jo-Anne McArthur who is the founder of We Animals, the photographer Sam Hobson, the primatologist Jane Goodall and wildlife presenter, Chris Packham.


Maddy Couch is a writer and artist whose work examines themes relating to compassion for animals, wildlife protection, and the relationship between humans and animals. Her images feature in The Curlew Magazine and homes around the world. She has exhibited in Bristol, London and New York. Maddy has written for travel companies and VizArt Film. She is currently writing her first book and working on her 1000 Rescue project, creating 1000 artworks to raise awareness of animal and wildlife rescue worldwide. Maddy grew up in London. She received her BA from Brighton University, where she studied philosophy and history. She spent much of her twenties volunteering internationally for animal rescue, wildlife and community projects. She currently lives in Devon, with her
fiancé and two rescue cats. Maddy has also lived in Cornwall, Bristol and Taiwan.

You can find Maddy’s work on her website, Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook.

Is This What Vegan Looks Like?

In the June 2018 issue of Women’s Health UK, I was interviewed on the prevailing stereotype of angry vegans that has dominated British media in recent months. In the article, I clarify that, although most animal rights activists and vegans are women, patriarchal norms endemic to society and social movements push men (especially hegemonic ones) to the spotlight. It’s not an especially fair portrayal and neither is it representative:

Whereas women, who are well aware that their emotionality will be framed as “hysterical,” tend to focus more on mediation, education and community-building. It’s tragic that long-standing peaceful leaders in the vegan movement are suddenly being held accountable for the actions of an extreme few.

Readers can access the entire interview here.


Corey Lee WrennDr. Wrenn is the founder of Vegan Feminist Network. She is a Lecturer of Sociology and served as Director of Gender Studies with a New Jersey liberal arts college 2016-2018. She also served as council member with the Animals & Society Section of the American Sociological Association and was elected chair in 2018. She was awarded Exemplary Diversity Scholar 2016 by the University of Michigan’s National Center for Institutional Diversity. She is the author of A Rational Approach to Animal Rights: Extensions in Abolitionist Theory.

Why Can’t the ALF Talk about Sexism?

The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and other direct action collectives have a rocky track record with women in the Nonhuman Animal rights movement.

In celebrating violent masculinity, the language and imagery of the ALF is repellent to women and antagonistic to femininity. In my research, I have noted that direct action collectives regularly denounce nonviolent civil resistance (what they sometimes misconstrue as pacifism), framing it as weakness and complacency. Consider a 2012 conference presentation in which ALF founder Steve Best aggressively lectures a room of female attendees, furious at the feminization of the Nonhuman Animal rights movement and demanding that activists literally take up arms against speciesists. The now defunct project Negotiation is Over published regular criticisms of vegan baking as outreach.

Nonviolent civil resistance of all kinds, but especially baking, is, of course, feminized. The proposed alternative–taking up arms–is explicitly masculinized. As a male-dominated organization, the ALF’s adamant rejection of women’s tactics is blatantly sexist.

In Capers in the Churchyard: Animal Rights Advocacy in the Age of Terror, vegan feminist Lee Hall also describes parallels between masculinity and ALF operations. Vandalism, arson, and threats to researchers and their families are understood to be “front line” activism. This activism earns men prestige and honor in the Nonhuman Animal rights movement. This is real activism, activism for the “brave” and “courageous.” In practice, it is most adopted by male teens and 20 somethings who have absorbed the patriarchal culture of glorified violence, anger, and domination.

ALF actions are as much a performance of maleness as they are tactics of nonhuman liberation. Activists who do not engage in direct action are labeled “cowards” to humiliate men by feminizing them and intimidate women by shaming their femininity.

 ALF Supporters Group Newsletter

In a misogynistic society, there are serious consequences for women and girls when a social justice movement aggravates gender stereotypes. There are consequences for the entire movement and Nonhuman Animals, too. Although peaceful vegan activism surely played a part as well, it was specifically ALF’s violence that would prompt agricultural elites to pass the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act in the 1990s (see Muzzling a Movement 2010). This act would essentially criminalize any action that interferes with speciesist enterprise, violent or not. Equally problematic, young men are made vulnerable to serious fines and jail sentences when this kind of activism is valorized.

Women, of course, are not completely absent in direct action, but even the most masculinized of spaces will sometimes attract female participants who understand that association with patriarchy can grant them some male privilege, albeit with considerable limitations and always at the expense of other women. In ALF literature, the role of women tends to be one of sidekick and adoring fan. In Love and Liberation: An Animal Liberation Front Story (Piraeus Books LLC 2012), the female lead is portrayed as smitten by the male lead’s prowess, prompting her to follow him into combat. This is a classic masculine trope whereby men’s violent bravery is rewarded by an objectified woman. As a trophy or prize, the woman’s character is subservient to and dependent upon the man’s story.

ALF

Other ALF publications are more straightforward in their sexual objectification of women. Liberator, for instance, has been criticized for its sexist themes. The illustration below featuring a female protester with large breasts fit into a tight shirt with no bra is a case in point.

The Liberator

The comic creator Matt Miner responded to feminist criticism in a now deleted “Open Letter to the Open Letter Author on Women in Comics.” His tone was dismissive and aggressive:

[ . . . ] you’ll notice that the art does not focus on her breasts, she’s fully clothed, the piece does not sexualise her in any way.

In your “open letter” you state other inflammatory nonsense that I find particularly offensive, attacks on my qualifications to write this series and there’s even a misguided attempt of associating me with the sexist animal killers of PETA, but clearly you’ve not done the slightest bit of research before unleashing so I’ll just laugh that bit of irony off.

When another feminist questioned the implications of his comic on his Facebook page, Miner responded with a rudimentary appeal to reverse sexism in describing the criticism as “offensive.”

ALF and sexism

As this essay has outlined, there are three roles that women play in direct action claimsmaking, all of which are sexist: the feminizing factor, the prize for male activists, and the eye candy. Aggressive deflection of feminist criticism is generally engaged in favor of putting “nonhumans first,” but the ALF’s protection of sexism is not for the protection of Nonhuman Animals. It is merely unchecked violent masculinity masked as social justice. Violent masculinity “for the animals” “by any means necessary” provides a rationale for reinforcing privilege and hurting others.

Oppression cannot be dismantled with more oppression and a brazen refusal to self-reflect. In the Nonhuman Animal rights movement, sexism does not seem to exist unless it is acknowledged, validated, and legitimated by men. While it is true that men have more symbolic power in a patriarchal society, women are not obligated to take men’s sexist interpretations of the social world as reality.

 


Corey Lee WrennDr. Wrenn is Lecturer of Sociology. She received her Ph.D. in Sociology with Colorado State University in 2016. She received her M.S. in Sociology in 2008 and her B.A. in Political Science in 2005, both from Virginia Tech. She was awarded Exemplary Diversity Scholar, 2016 by the University of Michigan’s National Center for Institutional Diversity. She served as council member with the American Sociological Association’s Animals & Society section (2013-2016) and was elected Chair in 2018. She serves as Book Review Editor to Society & Animals and has contributed to the Human-Animal Studies Images and Cinema blogs for the Animals and Society Institute. She has been published in several peer-reviewed academic journals including the Journal of Gender Studies, Feminist Media Studies, Disability & Society, Food, Culture & Society, and Society & Animals. In July 2013, she founded the Vegan Feminist Network, an academic-activist project engaging intersectional social justice praxis. She is the author of A Rational Approach to Animal Rights: Extensions in Abolitionist Theory (Palgrave MacMillan 2016).

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.

On Policing Male Allies

Fake Male Feminist

In 2013, I was the victim of an online harassment campaign. It was a cyber mob attack organized to punish me for publicly criticizing a number of sexist comments made by a leading male theorist in the Nonhuman Animal rights movement (he was avidly supporting women’s sexual objection as a valid tactic). I received hundreds of aggressive and often gendered messages in response with the intent of validating the man’s patriarchal position and silencing my feminism (this is a phenomenon that happens with excruciating regularity in online spaces).

It was a frightening, upsetting, and deeply alienating experience. In the height of the chaos, one man appeared among the crowd of sexist barraging to defend my feminist critique. His support came as a great relief to me. It was much needed and much appreciated. While he would later become a good friend of mine, at that time, he was largely unknown to me. Someone amidst the fray immediately responded, labeling him my “partner.” Others responded understandingly: “Oh, that makes sense now.” Men, it seems, can’t be allies without an incentive.

David FutrelleThis experience, as it turns out, is a common one. For instance, David Futrelle of the anti-misogyny blog We Hunted the Mammoth, an online watchdog project tracking “men’s rights” advocacy, is regularly accused of writing about misogyny to “get laid.” It is as though feminist ideas are so wacky and so unimportant that the only reason men would be interested in fighting against sexism and misogyny would be to get something from women. Some men are so completely indoctrinated with the idea that women exist only as a resource that it becomes unfathomable that any man would want to challenge patriarchy. What rational man could actually take feminism seriously?

When men attack other men for promoting or defending feminism, it constitutes gender policing. Masculinity is protected in defining it by what it is not, and it is not feminine. Boys who play with Barbies, enjoy theater, or otherwise fail to “man up” may find themselves chastised. Similarly, boys who advocate gender equality are also chastised. Masculinity necessitates the rejection or devaluation of the feminine. Under patriarchy, there is no room for women’s rights, and there is even less room for traitorous men colluding with marginalized women.

Policing male allies is hurtful for a number of reasons. First, it dismisses the legitimacy of feminism. Feminism is presented as not worth supporting unless it provides men with sexual favors. Second, it reduces masculinity to the tired trope that men are only interested in sex. Third, it often entails emasculating and heterosexist gender policing. Finally, it discourages men’s involvement. Men are acutely aware that supporting feminism threatens their tenuous position in the patriarchal hierarchy and will solicit policing from other men (and some women). None of these consequences are compatible with the goals espoused by a social justice movement.

Although a number of men will feign interest in search of fame, fortune, or sex, to be sure, the truth is that some men really are interested in social justice, and not because of any personal reward. For that matter, faking feminism would prove to be a poor tactic. Many feminist women are not the easiest for patriarchal, chauvinistic men to get along with. They hold their male friends and romantic partners up to a higher standard of integrity (or, some might say, a standard of basic human decency). It is not as easy as posting a pro-feminist statement in a forum and then sitting back and waiting for the ladies to swarm in. Heterosexual feminists are more likely to be attracted to men who understand the issues, genuinely care about the issues, and can be counted on to fight for the issues. It is not something easily faked.

Writing off a man’s support with the ridiculous suggestion that he’s only interested in sex is about as shallow and lazy as calling feminists “man-haters.” It is not true, but for those committed to oppressive systems, truth is not the point. Rather, the point is to silence women and their allies in order to protect patriarchy. I believe that men claiming to be feminists (especially when they have been informed that doing so is appropriative and hurtful) is a problem, but when men are performing their duties as allies, they can be important sources of strength and support. Perhaps it is predictable then, that supporters of sexism will seek to undermine that relationship by digging deeper into sexism, degrading women as sex objects and the men that help them as hormone-driven lackeys.

 

ARationalApproachtoAnimalRights

This essay is a revision of “Are Male Allies Just Trying to Get Laid?” first published on August 1st, 2013 with a now defunct feminist blog. You can read more about gender and anti-speciesist activism in my 2016 publication, A Rational Approach to Animal Rights.

 


Corey Lee WrennDr. Wrenn is Lecturer of Sociology. She received her Ph.D. in Sociology with Colorado State University in 2016. She received her M.S. in Sociology in 2008 and her B.A. in Political Science in 2005, both from Virginia Tech. She was awarded Exemplary Diversity Scholar, 2016 by the University of Michigan’s National Center for Institutional Diversity. She served as council member with the American Sociological Association’s Animals & Society section (2013-2016) and was elected Chair in 2018. She serves as Book Review Editor to Society & Animals and has contributed to the Human-Animal Studies Images and Cinema blogs for the Animals and Society Institute. She has been published in several peer-reviewed academic journals including the Journal of Gender Studies, Feminist Media Studies, Disability & Society, Food, Culture & Society, and Society & Animals. In July 2013, she founded the Vegan Feminist Network, an academic-activist project engaging intersectional social justice praxis. She is the author of A Rational Approach to Animal Rights: Extensions in Abolitionist Theory (Palgrave MacMillan 2016).

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.

Love, Sex, and the Animal Liberation Front

Man in ski mask kisses woman in black hoodie
Image from Animal Freedom Fighters Unite Facebook group

More so than other factions of the Nonhuman Animal rights movement, the “liberation” or “direct action” faction (frequently associated with the Animal Liberation Front) often engages symbolism of human-to-human love, intimacy, and sex in its activist narrative.

Consider Love and Liberation: An Animal Liberation Front Story, a romance novel following a young female activist who falls in love with another direct action activist, the two of them bonding over illegal actions in the name of anti-speciesism.

Cover of Love and Liberation

Consider also the direct action comic, The Liberator, male-created with a male and female protagonist. The female-bodied hero, however, tends to be drawn for the male-gaze, large breasted and sometimes bra-less.

Liberator

More than other factions of the movement, the direct action faction relies on narratives of heroism, machismo, and domination. As with any hero’s tale, the “girl as reward” must be present. In a previous essay, I note the “Liam Neeson effect,” whereby Nonhuman Animals are feminized and their plight exploited as a plot device to excuse hypermasculine vigilantism and violence. “Direct action” activism hopes to attract members and new recruits by creating an opportunity for boys and men to prove their manhood and become real-life superheroes. Steve Best, a leader of the ALF faction, has stated that it will be the media coverage of this type of activism which will motivate and inspire viewers to take up arms, so to speak. Love and sex must be part of this opportunity, as becoming a “man” necessitates power over the feminine.

Relatedly, ALF activists also frequently pose with Nonhuman Animals as loving and thankful. Most of these survivors are undoubtedly relieved, but we must keep in mind that media is not created by accident, and images are carefully chosen to convey a particular message. I see in this thankful animal trope the same patriarchal or paternalist concept: man as liberator and benevolent leader, woman and animal as grateful and dependent. Savior narratives, well-meaning though they may be, are inherently disempowering to the marginalized (this is a major concern in ally politics).

ALF member in ski mask cradling small monkey

Social movements consciously strategize in their media representations, using particular codes that the audience will be expected to accurately and favorably interpret. The ALF and other direct action collectives bank on our cultural literacy with misogyny and patriarchy in order for these scripts and codes to make sense. I question as to whether or not this hypermasculine script will translate for an anti-oppression future if we’re still speaking the same language of domination.

 


Corey Lee WrennDr. Wrenn is Lecturer of Sociology. She received her Ph.D. in Sociology with Colorado State University in 2016. She received her M.S. in Sociology in 2008 and her B.A. in Political Science in 2005, both from Virginia Tech. She was awarded Exemplary Diversity Scholar, 2016 by the University of Michigan’s National Center for Institutional Diversity. She served as council member with the American Sociological Association’s Animals & Society section (2013-2016) and was elected Chair in 2018. She serves as Book Review Editor to Society & Animals and is a member of the Research Advisory Council of The Vegan Society. She has contributed to the Human-Animal Studies Images and Cinema blogs for the Animals and Society Institute and has been published in several peer-reviewed academic journals including the Journal of Gender Studies, Environmental Values, Feminist Media Studies, Disability & Society, Food, Culture & Society, and Society & Animals. In July 2013, she founded the Vegan Feminist Network, an academic-activist project engaging intersectional social justice praxis. She is the author of A Rational Approach to Animal Rights: Extensions in Abolitionist Theory (Palgrave MacMillan 2016).

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.

Héganisme: Le Véganisme pour Hommes!

Essay and translation by Hypathia: Feminist and Anti-Speciesist Blog. The original English version of the embedded essay can be found by clicking here.

Le mot “héganisme” n’est pas arrivé en France me direz-vous. Quoique. On est fins prêts en tous cas. Mardi 16 février 2016, France 5 diffusait “Un monde sans viande” plutôt prometteur. Sauf que. C’est parti en couilles dès les premières cinq minutes. Le documentariste est allé s’acheter un steak végétal chez Sojasun (lien non sponsorisé, même si c’est un voisin de Noyal Sur Vilaine) et en a fait l’analyse. Ce steak végétal est à base de soja, sorte de haricot, donc une légumineuse très protéinée, mais qui a la réputation de contenir des isoflavones, un ersatz végétal d’hormones femelles. Bon pour les femmes de plus de 50 ans, mais mauvaises, très mauvaises pour les hommes et les enfants prépubères et même pubères, dixit le journaliste ! Nous y voilà: le steak de soja est soupçonné de déviriliser les hommes. S’en est suivie une pénible bataille de chiffres et de milligrammes entre une diététicienne défenseuse des couilles des mecs, et la Cheffe de produit de Sojasun qui défend elle son produit et dit que, pas du tout, son steak de soja contient moins d’isoflavones que le prétend la diététicienne. Après le film, durant le débat, le médecin pro-viande a affirmé que les isoflavones sont inoffensives et même plutôt bonnes pour la santé. Mais le mal était fait, à mon avis. Le végétarisme et le véganisme sont perçus comme une menace pour la virilité, comme l’explique Corey Wrenn sur son blog Vegan Feminist Network, dont je vous propose cette semaine la traduction du billet:

Man with big lettuce leaf hanging out of mouth

Crédit photo: Salon – Forget vegan, he’s hegan (en anglais)

What is Heganism?

Héganisme. Oui, c’est bien quelque chose. C’est le véganisme… pour les hommes. “Héganisme” réfère généralement au “rebranding,” à donner une autre image de marque aux traditionnels concepts véganes, afin qu’ils conviennent à la consommation masculine. Mais pourquoi ?

Le mouvement végane est truffé de 101 variations différentes du véganisme, toutes avec la même intention: vendre et faire rentrer des cotisations. C’est le marketing des associations demandant à ses équipes “comment pouvons-nous nous démarquer sur cette tendance? Comment pouvons-nous nous distinguer du reste des autres? Comment pouvons-nous les faire acheter ici et pas ailleurs? Les distinctions de genre servent généralement les intérêts capitalistes et ils le font en maintenant les différences et les inégalités. Spécialiser les produits par genre suppose que les ménages ne doivent plus se contenter d’un seul produit qui peut être partagé (et les produits destinés aux femmes coûtent souvent plus cher). Le produit bleu et industriel pour lui, le produit rose fleuri (plus cher) pour elle.

Genrer est aussi l’occasion d’ouvrir un plus large marché aux produits. Le stigmate féminin est enlevé, ainsi les hommes peuvent les consommer plus confortablement ; mais ce faisant le stigmate ne disparaît pas, il est seulement renforcé. Comme pour “Guy-et,”1 Dr Pepper10 et la lotion Dove men care (pour hommes), genrer le véganisme travaille à protéger la masculinité en ostracisant, en renvoyant à l’altérité ce qui est féminin. Qu’est ce qu’il y a de mal à faire un régime, boire du soda sans sucre, ou manger végane? C’est que ce sont les stéréotypes de ce que les femmes sont censées faire, et les femmes sont le groupe le plus détesté et le plus dévalorisé de la société. Pour que les hommes y participent, il faut enlever le stigmate féminin en créant une alternative “masculine”.

A father and son in a sea of fruit and vegetables, only their faces are peaking out

Faire venir plus d’hommes au véganisme est important pour la santé du mouvement végane et pour la santé des garçons et des hommes -la plupart ne consommant pas assez de fruits et légumes. Mais l’inclusion des hommes ne doit pas se faire aux dépens des droits des femmes. Crédit photo: The Advertiser.

La masculinité est largement définie par ce qu’elle n’est pas-et elle n’est pas féminine. Cela marche de la même façon avec le spécisme:2 nous définissons l’humanité comme n’étant pas animale, et donc l’humanité est supérieure par comparaison. On pense aussi qu’elle est l’une des racines de l’hétéro-sexisme : la masculinité est définie par l’ostracisation de ce qui est féminin. En d’autres termes, différencier les personnes en groupes et les placer dans une hiérarchie qui soutient ces différences nourrit une discrimination structurelle. La distinction huile les roues de l’oppression.

PETA ad showing a nude woman laying on a giant bunch of broccoli; reads, "EAT YOUR VEGGIES"

Dans mon livre, A Rational Approach to Animal Rights, j’explore le thème du nouveau packaging des espaces véganes. Parce que le véganisme est tellement féminisé, il est considéré comme une menace pour le patriarcat et donc dévalorisé. En réaction, les organisations qui le défendent adoptent le langage du patriarcat pour mieux “vendre” le véganisme. Au lieu de rester ferme sur une opposition féministe radicale à l’oppression patriarcale, les véganes refont l’emballage du véganisme en le présentant comme “sexy” et montrent les femmes comme objets destinés à la consommation des hommes. PETA est probablement la plus détestable association à cet égard, et sa position dominante dans le mouvement signifie qu’elle influence une norme de protestation pornographique. Les femmes véganes ne sont plus facteures de changement, elles sont juste un autre goût “exotique” destinée à être servi sur un plateau au patriarcaux. Ce Tumblr “Galerie hégan” en est littéralement un exemple : les images sont inspirées de la pornographie.

Il y a un réel danger à aggraver les attitudes sexistes dans l’activisme pour les droits des animaux non humains. Le mot “Héganisme” est inutile et insultant. Est-ce qu’un espace végane féminin est si répugnant que les hommes doivent s’en dégager et occuper un espace séparé pour y participer? Si oui, nous devons remplacer et réévaluer notre approche. Aussi longtemps que le mouvement soutiendra la haine des femmes, il ne peut pas raisonnablement attendre de son public qu’il arrête de haïr les animaux non humains.

Le héganisme est une tactique qui se sabote elle-même. Si les activistes soutiennent la notion que le véganisme est “juste pour les femmes” et que les hommes seront stigmatisés s’ils y participent sans la façade de la masculinité pour les protéger, cela rend un mauvais service au mouvement. Au lieu de s’accommoder du patriarcat et du capitalisme pour être entendu.es, les activistes doivent au contraire incorporer une approche féministe à l’antispécisme. De cette façon, tous les intérêts sont pris en compte et un groupe ne sera pas diminué ou exclu au bénéfice d’un autre. Les capitalistes vont inévitablement argumenter que genrer le véganisme c’est simplement nourrir le marché, mais ils créent simplement un marché de cette sorte : “LEGO se résout finalement à créer des jouets pour les filles” (en anglais chez Feminist Frequency). Un marché basé sur l’oppression, un marché qui fonctionne sur des groupes divisés selon la ligne pouvoir contre impuissance, et ce ne sera pas un espace conduisant à la libération.”

Notes:
1. “Guy-et” : jeu de mot intraduisible en français formé de “diet”: régime, et de guy : mec, soit régime pour mec.
2. Le spécisme est un préjugé, une attitude ou un biais envers les intérêts des membres de notre propre espèce, contre les membres des autres espèces. J’ai préféré le mot francisé épicène végane à l’anglais vegan, -ce sont eux qui ont inventé le mot. En français on peut aussi écrire végétalien.

Edit: Le documentaire de France 5 comportait aussi une visite dans les laboratoires de Beyond Meat, une corporation étasunienne qui tente de cultiver le la viande en éprouvette, un autre cauchemar carniste ; en attendant l’avènement de la viande de culture, leurs steaks végétaux sont fait pour donner le change, oubliant qu’on ne devient pas forcément végéta*ien pour manger des substituts de viande, sauf si on craint de mettre à mal virilité des hommes ? On n’en sort pas.

Corey Lee WrennDr. Wrenn is Lecturer of Sociology. She received her Ph.D. in Sociology with Colorado State University in 2016. She received her M.S. in Sociology in 2008 and her B.A. in Political Science in 2005, both from Virginia Tech. She was awarded Exemplary Diversity Scholar, 2016 by the University of Michigan’s National Center for Institutional Diversity. She served as council member with the American Sociological Association’s Animals & Society section (2013-2016) and was elected Chair in 2018. She serves as Book Review Editor to Society & Animals and has contributed to the Human-Animal Studies Images and Cinema blogs for the Animals and Society Institute. She has been published in several peer-reviewed academic journals including the Journal of Gender Studies, Feminist Media Studies, Disability & Society, Food, Culture & Society, and Society & Animals. In July 2013, she founded the Vegan Feminist Network, an academic-activist project engaging intersectional social justice praxis. She is the author of A Rational Approach to Animal Rights: Extensions in Abolitionist Theory (Palgrave MacMillan 2016).

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.