PIG 05049 : Christien Meindertsma : just another homocentrist human anesthetizing an anal retentive bystander mentality in speciesism
Compare how this young woman and her journalistic partner thematize taking the life of a nonhuman : http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2010/mar/27/from-one-pig-185-products, using mainly the argumentation of how useful that killing is.
A homocentrist argumentation. The mental frameset remind me of the accounts slaughterhouse workers gave in interviews Gail A. Eisnitz made in 1997 http://meat.org.uk/slaught.html, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaughterhouse … .
There is nothing different or special when either a woman or a man talk about their aggressive homocentrist attitudes, or when they anesthetize them as Meindertsma does.
Meindertsma and Buford seem to think that it is art to accompany the nonhuman animal in whose killing Buford takes part and Meindertsma acts as a bystander, collecting all the details of de-individualisation
There is no difference to these objectifications than when any farmer or slaughterer do them. Just because an account of institutionalized murder is given in “arts form” – and because it’s curated as arts, we are not dealing with morally neutral grounds here.
What is arts about it, is that we can see how the innocence, that our good old humanistic values wanted to attribute to the normal human individual, are yet again being sold out by projects such as these: No normal human individual is NOT capable of doing the most horrendous atrocities at the same time while rationalizing their deeds as reasonable, sensible and smart. And history told us that already way too many times anyway.
Now to think that questioning and eradicating homocentrism wouldn’t be the next big task we as humans have to address, if we don’t all want to fall prey to the sickly normal minds of the average human, would be unrealistic.
To get the best answers about the trustworthiness of any speciesist reasoning about animals, is to simply turn the paper and look: yeah human values, human ideals, and how do we humans deal with each other and stand towards each other? It doesn’t work either. Speciesism kills, and all other discimonatory -isms do their parts of destroying the dignities of individual lives as much as they can too.
By focusing on the point of view of the ‘human group’ (and their ‘interests’ that they won’t let to be ignored) on the false and pathological reasons of why “we humans” have “a legitimate interest” in “using animals”, we shift the focus away from two things:
A. we shift our view from the human conflicts that prove there is nothing such thing as ‘the human’ (one big single) interest
and B.) we overlook that nonhuman animals and the environment can be understood as an opposed value, one that homocentrism seeks to destroy, negate, annihilate. Our view is turned away from that possible perspective too.
The view the speciesist people hold, typically tries to make us think that we are dealing with a redundant life.
And we are not.
This swine they objectified is to me my family, soulwise, earthistorywise.
Burnt Cross – ‘look into their eyes’