A Vegan Feminist’s Response to Anti-Choice Lawmaker Killing a Chicken
On Monday, Representative Mike Moon posted a video of himself beheading a chicken, in a strange attempt to advertise his anti-abortion bill. If you’re rereading that sentence and wondering “Huh? What does killing a chicken have to do with being anti-choice?”, you’re not alone in your confusion. However, violence against animals and violence against women are more connected than you might think.
During the video, Moon claims that “God gave us man dominion over life.” The usage of the term “man” to refer to all humans has been repeatedly criticized by feminist scholars. It implies that male is the default sex and excludes everyone else. And although some defend the gender-neutral usage of the word, a look at Moon’s political history suggests that Moon may very well actually mean that man has dominion over all other life.
In his proposed personhood legislation, Moon argues that embryos have a right to life, and therefore all abortions should be illegal. This includes cases of rape, insinuating that unborn sacks of cells are people, while recovering rape victims are not. Suggesting such a law without even mentioning the negative impact this would have on women is extremely oppressive, and Moon displays the same behavior in his relationship with animals.
After claiming God-given dominion over all earthlings, Moon continues: “[God] allows us to raise animals properly and care for them and then process them for food so we can sustain life.” Again, Moon completely erases the identity of the victim and keeps the focus on himself. His sentence is rampant with speciesist language and euphemisms. He appeals to a divine power in order to remove any personal responsibility, in a sort of Manifest Destiny fashion. In reference to his treatment of animals, he uses the words “raise,” “care,” and “process,” instead of the truth — “exploit,” “torture,” and “slaughter,” respectively. And finally, he claims that he does all of this in the name of “sustaining life,” when what he is really doing is upholding human supremacy.
Right-wingers repeatedly label themselves as “pro-life,” and feminists repeatedly respond with statements like Brandon Cloud’s: “…a large swathe of the ‘pro-life’ movement are the same people who support cutting funding to programs like WIC, food stamps, and other programs which generally help mothers and children. If they were really concerned with ‘life,’ and not just the fetus, then they would aggressively commit themselves to make sure children have enough food to eat, a proper education, and a place to live.”
While this critique is certainly valid, mainstream feminism doesn’t have an accurate ideal of what “pro-life” really means either, because nonhuman animals are not included in the circle of moral concern. In response to the chicken’s decapitation, National Abortion Rights Action League’s response was to make a pun. “He’s gotten pretty cocky about anti-choice bills,” is the best this advocacy organization had to offer in eulogy of the unwilling martyr for reproductive rights.
And it gets worse. In an interview with the Missouri Times, NARAL executive director Alison Dreith said, “Whatever Mike Moon does with a chicken in the privacy of his home is his own business. But we will not let him use the rights of women across Missouri as some kind of political prop. His call to ban abortion is disturbing and dangerous, no matter what he does with that chicken.”
No, Ms. Dreith, murdering an animal is not Moon’s “own business.” That chicken was denied her right to choose what happened to her body — and this is a violation of autonomy, whether it happens to a human or a nonhuman. Moon’s actions are certainly “disturbing and dangerous,” but Dreith’s denial of nonhuman rights is equally so. According to NARAL’s staff page, Dreith lives with two dogs. Her views on who deserves moral consideration are speciesist at worst and inconsistent at best. Would she react the same way if one of her canine friends was beheaded?
Throwing animals under the bus in order to advance the fight for human liberation is anti-intellectual, antiquated, and speciesist. Social justice activists passionately proclaim that “no one is free when others are oppressed” and work towards an inclusive resistance movement… until nonhuman animals are brought into the conversation.
In her book The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory, Carol J. Adams writes, “What is absent from much feminist theory that relies on metaphors of animals’ oppression for illuminating women’s experiences is the reality behind the metaphor. Feminist theorists’ use of language should describe and challenge oppression by recognizing the extent to which these oppressions are culturally analogous and interdependent.” Patriarchal society was literally built upon the backs of nonhuman animals. Feminists must strive to create a world where everyone is free, not one that follows in the footsteps of their oppressors.
NARAL, you say that you will not allow the rights of women to be used as props, and I applaud you. But I will not allow you to use animal exploitation as a prop, either. Because it’s one struggle, one fight…
Species Revolution aims to normalize anti-speciesism as a stance against injustice. To support our work, like our Facebook page and subscribe to our newsletter. Join us in the fight for animal liberation.
