Category Archives: Sexualization

Vegan Porn is a Barrier to Egalitarianism

Posted on by

A new study in Psychology of Women Quarterly, reports that people who admitted to watching pornography were less likely to support affirmative action for women in a subsequent interview.  Why?

“[ . . . ] sexual media activate abstract social scripts, which may then be used to inform opinions about social issues.”

“Pornography often presents women as sexual objects deserving of degradation, and even aggression.”

“In alignment with these depictions, prior studies have found that pornography viewers are more likely to hold a variety of antisocial attitudes towards women.”

Countless studies similar to this one have supported the link between exposure to pornography and a rejection of egalitarian values.

So, my question is: Why does the Nonhuman Animal rights movement (PETA, James McWilliams, CUFA, 269Life, VOKRA, VGirls|VGuys, Animal Liberation Victoria, Vegan Pinup, LUSH, etc.) use porn?  How can “sex sell” Nonhuman Animal rights if it fosters anti-egalitarian attitudes?  If pornography fosters female objectification and degradation and aggression against women, why would we expect that reaction to magically transform to respect for other animals?  And do we not have a duty to protect the safety and dignity of the women who compromise 80% of our movement?  How can we build a strong collective if we’re giving the green light to antisocial attitudes against our largest demographic?

This post was originally published on  The Academic Abolitionist Vegan on September 16, 2013.

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.

Social Movement Prostitution

Posted on by

Trigger Warning: Discusses prostitution and pornography.

Not Safe for Work: Contains nude images.

Nude PETA protester (white and female) stands in city street and is surrounded by menNude protest has a long history in social activism, but it is certainly gaining a lot of momentum in today’s hyper-sexualized world where pornography is mainstream and third-wave feminism prioritizes sexualization as empowerment.  Media attention is a social movement’s best asset.  It gets the organization more recognition, attracts more volunteers, and more importantly, it brings in more donations.  These days, to get media attention in a digitized, high-speed media landscape that is bombarded with trillions of competing images, some social movement organizations attempt to stand out with free soft-core porn. Free sampling is a technique heavily utilized by pornographers in a highly competitive online pornography space.  They give the consumer a little taste of the product with the expectation that the consumer will become excited and will want to purchase more.

When I set out to write this essay, I had hoped to explore social movements as a whole, but sadly, once again, the Nonhuman Animal rights movement steals the show in its problematic treatment of women.  The only other large social movement (that isn’t the nudity movement itself, where people advocate for the freedom to be naked without penalization) is the peace and anti-war movement.  Breasts Not Bombs, for instance, has female volunteers march in public spaces holding political signs.

Protesters (mostly white and middle-aged or older) holding a number of signs, predominantly a banner that reads "Breasts Not Bombs"

Then there’s Femen, a male-led feminist group of mostly white, thin young women who claim to speak on behalf of all women (and sometimes brown women in particular) by going topless in public spaces.

Four young white thin women wearing only underwear holding signs in front of the Eiffel tower, "Muslim women, let's get naked," and "I am a woman, not an object"

Aside from these exceptions, getting naked for a cause is the Nonhuman Animal rights movement’s modus operandi. And, though many supporters of Nonhuman Animal rights organizations that utilize sexualization as a tactic may claim that men’s naked bodies are used, too, the overwhelming majority of sexualized bodies presented to the public are that of young, thin, white women. With 80% of the movement identifying as female, the movement’s largest volunteer pool offers to organizations a wealth of physical assets. Body parts are politicized to the exclusion of women’s intelligence, skills, creativity, dedication, or leadership ability.

Organizations like PETA take female volunteers, put them on street corners, posters, and film, and, for all intents and purposes, prostitute these unpaid women to extract funding, media attention, or other resources (incidentally PETA may be the most infamous, but it is certainly not the only organization engaging this tactic). This systemic social movement prostitution is defended in ways similar to that of typical street prostitution: women choose to do it, or she’s getting something out of it. But free choice is often an illusion. Women do not have the same choices available to them that men do. Women in Nonhuman Animal rights are being funneled into the “choice” of stripping down for the male gaze in public spaces. Do women get something out of it? Some do, particularly middle-class white women. Is nudity a bad thing? No, of course not. But we need to be cognizant of patterns and power. There is a pattern of women’s bodies being used in a world where men have the power.

PETA protest with person in fish suit holding sign that says "Fishing hurts," next to a thin white woman holding a sign that says, "Don't let your kids become hookers."

PETA sign reads, “Don’t Let Your Kids Become Hookers.”

Female activists are “selling” their bodies for resources, but none of the profit goes to these sex workers.  Instead, the money raised goes to the organizations that they represent.  If a John buys a prostituted woman for sex acts, he pays her, and more often than not, the money goes to her pimp.  If a John buys a PETA membership because of his interest in PETA’s women (see PETA’s “Veggie Love” campaign for example), the money goes to her organization.

Incidentally, there is a vegan strip club in Portland, Oregon where women are also being prostituted for “the cause.”  The male club owner insists that “throwing boobs out there” is the only way to get people to visit his restaurant and try his vegan menu.  He claims he wants to “end the suffering of all creatures,” but it seems that he and the movement ignore the fact that women are “creatures,” too. We can be certain that “throwing penises out there” would draw some attention as well, but, patriarchy ensures that it is female nudity that will expected.

Stripping, like prostitution, is sex work that often preys on vulnerable populations of women (many feminists and survivors regard “sex work” to be a euphemism; for women who are trafficked, we must recognize it as sex slavery).  It is “work” with extremely high rates of sexual assault, rape, and other forms of violence.  It is “work” that is extremely difficult for most women to make a living with and it is “work” with little job security.  Strip clubs have a strict set of rules that ensure most money stays in the hands of the male owners, not in the hands of the hard-working women.  Like prostitution, stripping is glamorized or romanticized in the liberal imagination as something freely chosen by independent women who have full control over their work and lives. Some women enjoy that kind of agency, but most women do not.

Social activism today has been swept into the Non-Profit Industrial Complex, where organizations must compete for vital fundraising in order to survive. This extreme dependence on funding means that tactics are compromised, and advocacy becomes a means of making money to sustain the organization, not changing the world. In other words, even if viewers were to begin supporting Nonhuman Animal rights organizations as a result of being exposed to these sexualized tactics (and there is no evidence to support such a notion), most of the money raised will not be used in support of anti-speciesism. Instead, most of it will be put toward keeping the lights on, paying staff members, and funding more ways to raise money.

I argue that the Nonhuman Animal rights movement squanders an important resource by degrading women’s participation to stripping and legal forms of prostitution. So much more could be accomplished by nurturing women’s brains instead of objectifying their bodies. Beyond the negative impact that these tactics are having on so many of the girls and women groomed by the movement, we also need to take into account the impact that this type of activism has on women as a demographic. The socially-accepted degradation of women and their sexual objectification is directly linked with discrimination and violence against women. This is a consequence that social justice movements should take very seriously.

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.

PETA and the Sexual Objectification Checklist

Posted on by

Identifying sexual objectification in the media is a good skill to learn! Here we’ve applied the sexual objectification checklist to PETA campaigning.

1. Does the image show only part(s) of a sexualized person’s body?

Image of woman's body under a scan. Her bra reads "Be Proud"; her bottom reads: "Of your body scan; go vegan"

Bottom half of a woman in a thong with hair protruding. Reads: Fur trim. Unattractive.

2. Does the image present a sexualized person as a stand-in for an object?

Alyssa Milano dressed in vegetables. Reads: "Let Vegetarianism Grow on You."

Naked woman painted like a globe. Reads: "Fight Climate Change with Diet Change, Go Veg"

3. Does the image show sexualized persons as interchangeable?

Several thin naked women standing close and intertwining. Reads: "Feel beautiful in your own skin."

Group of cheerleaders wearing the same bikini outfit with long hair, tan skin, same thin athletic physique. Reads: "Tackle Cruelty: Bench Fur"

4. Does the image affirm the idea of violating the bodily integrity of a sexualized person who can’t consent?

Image depicts the upper body of a woman butchered and hanging on a meat hook. Reads: “Hooked on meat? Go veg.”

Woman on the ground wrapped in chains, legs spread and exposed, cleavage. Reads: "Shackled, Beaten, Abused."

5. Does the image suggest that sexual availability is the defining characteristic of the person?

Sasha Gray sits naked on a bed shown from behind, looking over her shoulder and cupping her breast

Thin white blonde woman sprawled out on some haystacks with legs spread pulling her dress down over her bosom. Reads: "No one likes an 8 second ride."

6. Does the image show a sexualized person as a commodity that can be bought and sold?

Image shows a white woman reclining on her hand. She is naked and painted with "meat cuts"

Woman laying under plastic wrap like a piece of meat with a bar code.

 

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.

Why the “We Use Men, Too!” Excuse Doesn’t Work

Posted on by

In a nutshell:  We do not live in a post-gender society where women’s and men’s bodies are interchangeable.  Men’s bodies are portrayed and perceived in much different ways that women’s bodies.  Women’s bodies are also the vast majority of those bodies that are sexually objectified in the media (over 95%!).  The sexual objectification of women is linked to increased rates of domestic violence and sexual violence against women.

Oftentimes in the Nonhuman Animal rights movement, organizations and their volunteers will vehemently state that their sexual objectification of women is not sexist because they also use men in their campaigning. This doesn’t cut it for two reasons:  1. Women’s bodies are disproportionately sexually objectified in the Nonhuman Animal rights movement just as they are in mainstream media; 2. Men tend to be portrayed in ways that protects their masculinity and social power, whereas women tend to be portrayed in ways that reinforce their submissiveness and sexual availability.

Let’s take a look at some images taken from PETA as examples.  As you peruse them, keep in mind the sexual objectification checklist:

1. Does the image show only part(s) of a sexualized person’s body?

2. Does the image present a sexualized person as a stand-in for an object?

3. Does the image show sexualized persons as interchangeable?

4. Does the image affirm the idea of violating the bodily integrity of a sexualized person who can’t consent?

5. Does the image suggest that sexual availability is the defining characteristic of the person?

6. Does the image show a sexualized person as a commodity that can be bought and sold?

Shows muscular boxer staring at camera wit fists raised.

Tattooed man looks at camera, he is shirtless, hand in fist

Basketball player, shirtless, heavily tattooed, has arms spread out, head faced up, holding a basketball in each hand

Shirtless muscular and hairy man faces camera and has arms folded.

Muscular man staring at camera with hands together in front of him, to display his muscles

Heavily tattooed, shirtless man with one arm to the side and one hand pulling at a chain around his neck. Making a tough face, in a tough posture

Muscular boxer raises fists to the camera, stares into camera

Muscular football player grimacing at camera, flexing muscles as he holds football with two hands

Mike from Jersey Shore shown surrounded by cats, holding a cat, no shirt, very muscular, kneeling, smirking at camera

The common factors in these images are direct eye contact with the camera, a threatening or powerful pose, and display of strength and prowess.  Indeed, many of these pictures demonstrate hyper-masculinity.  Look at the hand positions of these men:  They are demonstrating command over space, command over their body, and command over the viewer.  Men are not being used as objects, and their personhood is protected.  There is no sexual violation, and there is no compromised consent.  They are not shown as interchangeable, and they are not shown as sexually available.  These images don’t say, “Come and get me,” they say, “I’m coming to get you.”

Some images depict naked men, but these are often shown as humorous.  Because sexually objectifying men is so rare and so abnormal for our understanding of masculinity, it becomes funny.

David Cross is naked and on a fashion runway. He is striking a pose and looking at the camera with a silly face.

Steve-O is naked and jumping in the air. We see him from behind. He is making a goofy face. He has a tattoo of himself making that face on his back.

In images where men and women are pictured, the difference is easily spotted.  Notice how this man is facing the camera head on, displaying no vulnerability.  The woman, however, faces the camera from the side, leans on him, and is standing on one foot on tip toe, demonstrating her vulnerability.  Indeed, many mixed-gender images show women leaning on men for support.

Naked man sitting on stool with guitar covering his bottom half, naked woman at his side leaning on him with one leg latched on to him the other on a tip toe. Her head is tilted against his, he is looking straight at the camera.

See also this image where Corey Feldman is facing the camera head on, playing an instrument, and in command of his space.  His wife is shown leaning on him, and looking at the camera from an upturned face.  Much more of her body exposed.  She is not in command of her space, but rather  she is finding support on the man.

Corey Feldman and Susie Feldman in bed. Corey is playing guitar, sitting cross legged on the bed looking straight at the camera. His wife is leaning on him exposing much more skin.

 

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.

An Open Letter to PETA

Posted on by

Open Letter to PETA

Dear PETA,

We have such a complicated relationship and history. You were one of my first entry points into animal activism, made me feel not so alone, gave me a sense of connection, and so much passion and hope as a middle schooler. I proudly wore my PETA t-shirts to school, lived on your street team website, and even spent the summer interning with you. I learned how to organize my first protest from you. You provided advice when my teacher wouldn’t allow me dissection alternatives. The “Street Team” forums helped me not feel so weird in the world (although, now I know – weirdness is the best) and gave me the strength to keep going, to keep fighting, even after cruel kids and comments.

So much has changed – and it really, really hurts, to be honest. I know you haven’t changed, and I guess that is the problem. You are still doing what you’re doing – in the way you are doing it. I see your campaigns/advertisements – over the past few years, have reflected back on the media “brainstorming” sessions we had when I was an intern, and it creates these twisted knots in my stomach. It’s really hard to describe the feeling. It’s like when a family member says something really homophobic or sexist, does something that you know isn’t right – but they were the ones who stayed up with you  at night as a kid, read you bed time stories, and fought against some of the monsters in your closet. There’s always this soft spot, this hope that they can change, will change.

I’m just. Angry. And sad. Sad for the non-human animals – sad for the animal rights and social justice movements – because it’s a loss, a huge loss, and it’s hurting all of us. We need organizations that are working towards ending ALL forms of oppression – not perpetuating them in the name of justice for one – because it’s not possible. Nothing is a single level issue. And animal rights IS a social justice issue. The non-human animals need everyone.

I struggle when feeling the divide between the social justice/feminist movements and animal rights movements- as though they are separate non-connected issues. And I hate that you are so often the face of the animal rights movement – but you are, so it’s time to hold yourself accountable, take responsibility, and make a change. I beg of you. As that bright and teary fire eyed middle schooler. Please stop with this sexist, racist, non-consent centered bullshit, and please get rid of any remnants related to your latest campaign: “Vegans go all the way.” NO. NO. NO. We need to challenge rape supportive culture, not contribute to it – for non-human animals and human animals.

I don’t really have any more words, but please, I beg of you, on my hands and knees, for all the passionate teens, the cant-quite-fit-in people like me – teach them that we can make a difference, and support them in their multiple identities and experiences, and in ending all forms of violence. Because it’s all connected. Only then can we create a beautifully loving and compassionate world – where violence is not digested. Where sexualized violence is not normalized. Where marginalized non- human animals and human animals are not objectified and seen as inferior.

This goes out to all the feminist movements as well – it’s time to recognize the role violence against non-human animals plays in desensitizing us and normalizing other forms of violence and oppression.

-A once young PETA lover, hoping for change.

By Mary Sue Savage

You can follow her on her blog, Confessions of an Activist with Social Anxiety.

Are You Demanding Respect and Safety or Just Bickering?

Posted on by

Content Warning:  Discusses pornography and sexism.

Not Safe for Work:  Contains coarse language and sexually explicit subject matter.

PETA posted on Vegan Feminist Network today in response to my article that deconstructs their “Veggie Love Casting” campaign.  The campaign depicts young women in bikinis and high heels performing oral sex and other sex acts on vegetables “for the animals.”  The statement is reproduced here. I have emphasized the problematic statements and will unpack them below.

The smart, compassionate women who participated in this spot choose to do so because they supported the idea and wanted to take action to help animals. PETA admires them for that and would never tell them that they must behave a certain way in order to gain someone else’s approval. PETA applauds all that everyone does to help animals and attempts to have something to appeal to everyone.

Not everyone agrees with all of PETA’s tactics–and they can choose not to show our videos if they wish–but surely we can all agree that it’s more effective to focus our time and energy on animal abusers rather than bickering with one another.

If you want to learn more about PETA’s other campaigns, or see our ads featuring men, please visit http://www.PETA.org. Thanks again for all you do to promote vegan living and make the world a kinder place for animals.

A white woman deep-throating a cucumber.

An image from the campaign

PETA claims that it did not tell the women to engage these behaviors, but this is a disingenuous justification. Obviously, PETA designed the campaign and hired the participants. This was not a spontaneous grassroots movement to promote vegetable sex for Nonhuman Animals.  For that matter, is having sex with cucumbers what women are supposed to do if they want to help animals?

In one way, PETA is correct to say that women are not “told” to engage these behaviors. This is because PETA is normalizing sexist advocacy as female-appropriate advocacy. Female-identified activists increasingly enter the Nonhuman Animal rights movement with an understanding of what is to be expected of them (Gail Dines refers to this socialization phenomenon as “porn ready”). Pornified campaigning is now normalized in the political imagination of the movement. It has become taken for granted as useful, despite social psychological research demonstrating that it is not only ineffective, but also counter-productive.

The tropes embedded in PETA’s response work to protect this normalcy and thus warrant discussion.

1. Choice

“Choice” is a loaded concept that generally works to detract from structural inequality and places responsibility on the individual.  It hides privilege and reinforces oppression.

Women “choose” to work in porn because a patriarchal society gives them extremely limited options.  Women make this “choice” because they are raised in this society to understand that their worth is tied up in their sexual attractiveness and their sexual availability (unlike men who are taught that they can succeed with strength, leadership, intelligence, wit, etc.).

The Girls Gone Wild tour bus. Depicts two blonde white women, reads "Do you have what it takes?"

Most porn actresses come from low income and/or abusive households and have extremely short careers (about 3 years, a time span that has been declining dramatically). The vast majority of porn actresses make very little money.  We’re talking about a few hundred bucks for each movie, with a movie deal every few weeks or so. Once they’ve “done it all,” they’re spent, and no longer of use to the industry.  Sound familiar?  That’s exactly how humans treat layer hens and dairy cows: as expendable sexual resources.  Women continue to consent to increasingly degrading, painful, or dangerous sex acts in order to keep in the game as long as possible. The industry exposes women to these precarious and unsafe work conditions with zero job security. If this is the “choice” available to women, something is seriously awry with our labor system.

I’m not blaming these actresses (advocates?) who work for PETA. They’re just doing their job, trying to make a living. Some probably even enjoyed themselves and had fun participating. Instead, I’m blaming the patriarchy that raises women as resources for men. I’m blaming a social movement that is supposed to be about peace but instead exploits women’s vulnerability for fundraising.   Under a patriarchy, the rules of the game are rigged to benefit men at the expense of women (and other vulnerable populations, including Nonhuman Animals).  All women are products of a patriarchy that grooms them to believe:  “Your social worth = Your sex appeal.”

“Choice” relies on a very narrowly defined set of options that patriarchy allows women.  If we want to have a serious discussion of “choice,” I suggest we get a straight answer from PETA as to why they intentionally choose women for fundraising and media attention, and why women are disproportionately placed in degrading scenarios, oftentimes (though not in this case) simulating the horrific suffering and death of a Nonhuman Animal by drawing on scripts of violence against women. Like any pornography, PETA campaigns sexualize the humiliation and hurt of women.

2. Appealing to a Wide Audience

The demographics likely attracted to pornography are not likely to be interested in seriously engaging social justice.  Pornography further entrenches oppression and reinforces the notion that some persons are objects of resource to other, more privileged persons.  Hardly the type of framework we would expect to challenge speciesism. Again, research demonstrates that PETA’s campaigns actually repel viewers who can easily recognize that women are being demeaned.

3. Cricism of Rape Culture as “Bickering”

One in 3 women will be raped, beaten, or otherwise abused at least once in their lifetime. This violence is strongly tied to misogynistic media, and PETA both creates and promotes misogynistic media.  To refer to feminist criticism of this systemic violence as bickering is insulting and trivializing.  Standing up against the violence that I endure, the violence that millions of women endure, is not bickering, it is social justice in action.

4. Men vs. Women

We do not live in a post-gender/post-feminist society.  The bodies of men and women are not viewed or treated similarly.  One cannot say, “We use men, too!” with accuracy. It will not negate the misogyny being engaged in the majority of PETA’s outreach.  Ninety-six percent of the sexual objectification that occurs in the media depicts women.  Women are also many, many times more likely to be victims of rape, sexual abuse, and domestic violence.  It is unfair to disregard sexist depictions of women simply because a man’s body is used from time to time.

This argument is particularly nonsensical in PETA’s case.  PETA’s advertisements featuring men by and large depict men who are in command over their social space, and their power and status is reinforced.  Some of their ads depict men as being silly, Again, there is no serious sexism going on.  We find these ads silly because men are so rarely sexually objectified and portrayed in a submissive position.  Men are not depicted in sexually submissive positions or as victims of violence, only women are.

Take, for instance, this image of a Bollywood actor advocating for PETA.  Notice his confident gaze into the camera, his power over the situation, and his ability to control the space around him and enact change.  Notice the posture that depicts confidence.

Indian Bollywood actor freeing birds. He is shown giving direct eye contact to the camera and displaying his power and strength.

In contrast, examine this typical PETA ad depicting a naked woman.  She is shown in a submissive position, vulnerable, not on her feet, at the mercy of the viewer.  Her eyes do not meet the camera directly, but look up from a down turned face.  She gently touches the rabbit; there is no command over her space.  Her buttocks are raised to denote sexual availability.

Reads "I'd rather show my buns than wear fur." Shows a naked white woman prostrate on the ground touching a rabbit.

The argument that sexism is nonexistent in PETA’s campaigning because nude men are occasionally used as well is a red herring.

We cannot end the objectification of Nonhuman Animals with the objectification of women.  We cannot end violence against Nonhuman Animals with violence against women. It’s time to decolonize the activist schema.

 

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.