Search results for: animality

Authors: Francesco De Giorgio

Abstract:

As different groups of wild animals are moving from natural to more anthropic environments, the need to overcome the human-animal gap for ethical coexistence becomes a public concern. Ethnology and ethnography play fundamental roles in the understanding of dynamics, perspective and movement in our interaction with (other) animals. In this effort, the Animality perspective provides an essential ethical lens and quality guidance for ethnography. It deconstructs the human/animal distinction and creates an inclusive approach to society. It further transgresses the rigid lines of normalizing images in human cultures, in which individuals are easily marginalized as ‘different’. Just like labeling an animal with species-specific behavior, judging and categorizing humans according to culture-specific expectations is easier than recognizing subjectivity. A fusion of anti-speciesist ethnology and ethnography of natural and social sciences can redress the shortcomings of current practices of multispecies ethnography that largely remain within an exclusively normalized human perspective. Empirically, the paper is based on current research on wild urban animals and human movement in Genua (IT), collecting data from systematic observations in the field regarding wild boars and ethnographic data collection over a period of time (18 months) where the human involved are educated in a changing perspective of coexistence. An “animality-ethnography” starts from observing our animal movement, how much and when we move, how we intersect our movement with that of other animals cohabiting with us, how we can observe and know others by moving, and ways of walking. The research will show how (interspecies) socio-cognition implies motion and movement and animal journeys between nature and the city, but also within the cities themselves, where a web of motion becomes the basic cultural matrix for cohabiting spaces, places, and systems. Here, the term "cognition" does not refer just to the brain or mind or intelligence. Indeed, cognition has a lot to do with movement, space, motion, proprioception, and the body. The ability to be informed, not only through what you see but also through the information you get from being in tune with the motion of a shared dynamic. To be an informative presence instead of an active stimulus or passive expectation, where the latter leaves too much space for projections and interpretations. What is proposed here is an understanding of our own animal movement linked to our own animal cognition. The result of breaking down your own culturally prescribed way in ethnographic research is breaking the barrier of limited options for observation and comprehension of the Other. Walking in the same way results in seeing others in the same way, studying them through only one channel of perception, causing a one-dimensional life instead of a multidimensional web. Returning to an understanding of our Animality, our animal movement, being in tune to improve a socio-cognitive context of cohabitation, both with domestic and wild animals, both in a forest or in a metropolis, represents the challenge of the coming years, and the evolution of the next centuries, to both preserve and share cultures, beyond the boundaries of species.

Keywords: antispeciesist ethology, interspecies coexistence, socio-cognition, intersectionality, animality

Procedia PDF Downloads 37

Authors: Desmond F. Bellamy

Abstract:

Discourses about animal rights usually assume an ontological abyss between human and animal. This supposition of non-animality allows us to utilise and exploit non-humans, particularly those with commercial value, with little regard for their rights or interests. We can and do confine them, inflict painful treatments such as castration and branding, and slaughter them at an age determined only by financial considerations. This paper explores the way images and texts depicting human cannibalism reflect this deprivation of rights back onto our species and examines how this offers new perspectives on our granting or withholding of rights to farmed animals. The animals we eat – sheep, pigs, cows, chickens and a small handful of other species – are during processing de-animalised, turned into commodities, and made unrecognisable as formerly living beings. To do the same to a human requires the cannibal to enact another step – humans must first be considered as animals before they can be commodified or de-animalised. Different iterations of cannibalism in a selection of fiction and non-fiction texts will be considered: survivalism (necessitated by catastrophe or dystopian social collapse), the primitive savage of colonial discourses, and the inhuman psychopath. Each type of cannibalism shows alternative ways humans can be animalised and thereby dispossessed of both their human and animal rights. Human rights, summarised in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights as ‘life, liberty, and security of person’ are stubbornly denied to many humans, and are refused to virtually all farmed non-humans. How might this paradigm be transformed by seeing the animal victim replaced by an animalised human? People are fascinated as well as repulsed by cannibalism, as demonstrated by the upsurge of films on the subject in the last few decades. Cannibalism is, at its most basic, about envisaging and treating humans as objects: meat. It is on the dinner plate that the abyss between human and ‘animal’ is most challenged. We grasp at a conscious level that we are a species of animal and may become, if in the wrong place (e.g., shark-infested water), ‘just food’. Culturally, however, strong traditions insist that humans are much more than ‘just meat’ and deserve a better fate than torment and death. The billions of animals on death row awaiting human consumption would ask the same if they could. Depictions of cannibalism demonstrate in graphic ways that humans are animals, made of meat and that we can also be butchered and eaten. These depictions of us as having the same fleshiness as non-human animals reminds us that they have the same capacities for pain and pleasure as we do. Depictions of cannibalism, therefore, unconsciously aid in deconstructing the human/animal binary and give a unique glimpse into the often unnoticed repudiation of animal rights.

Keywords: animal rights, cannibalism, human/animal binary, objectification

Procedia PDF Downloads 108