In Contextual Moral Vegetarianism by Deane Curtain, there is a reference The Sexual Politics of Meat (Adams, 1989). Curtain references Adams’ writing of “the connection of women and animals through pornographic representations of women as ‘meat’ ready to be carved up…”
When reading this passage and looking at the chosen image, it evokes a clearer understanding of the vegetarian ecofeminist perspective.
Additionally, the genderlessness of the figure carving meat reminds viewers that systems of patriarchal oppression are perpetrated by men and women both. In many contexts, people suffering from oppression chose to live under the rules of their oppressors so as not to suffer further. Patriarchal women enforce rigid gender roles and police the behaviors of other women in order to stand taller in the patriarchy than non-patriarchal women and gender nonbinary and transgender people. Patriarchal women are often perpetrators of “slut shaming,” victim blaming and the perpetuation of myths around sexual violence.
When I think of gendered foods, I think of a messy cheeseburger. This is likely because I grew up seeing Carl’s Jr. ads like this one:
We can all recognize how significantly advertising can influence how we perceive items and actions. If we’re honest, we can also admit that our purchasing behavior is influenced too. As a kid in the ’90s & 2000s, advertising directed toward men almost always included a scantily clad woman. This is tied directly to society’s heteronormative bias, assuming that men are more likely to buy a product if an image of a woman is associated with it. To be “manly” during this time period, and to some extent now, was to be straight. We can see the same advertising principals used to sell cologne, cars, beer, and many other products.
Also closely associated with masculinity is an interest in sports. Men who aren’t interested in at least one sport tend to be seen as effeminate. Even better is to be interested in many sports, especially physical sports like football. In the consumption of sports media, we find another gendered eating practice. Chicken wings, burgers & hotdogs, nachos and beer are all commonly associated with a Sunday afternoon spent watching football. While non of these foods are especially gendered in themselves, the combination of these foods and sports is seen as the domain of men.
Deane Curtain emphasizes the “ethic of care” as a core concept of ecofeminism. As such, it is the obligation of ecofeminists to offer care to non-human animals when possible (hence her label of “contextual moral vegetarianism”). Curtain writes “An ecofeminist perspective emphasizes that one’s body is oneself, and that by inflicting violence needlessly, one’s bodily self becomes a context for violence. One becomes violent by taking part in violent food practices. The ontological implication of a feminist ethic of care is that nonhuman animals should no longer count as food.” As of the time of Curtain’s writing, and still now, many of us have the choice of vegetarianism; the choice to offer care to non-human animals. Yet so many humans don’t.
Meanwhile, Greta Gaard writes “From an ecofeminist perspective, speciesism is a form of oppression that parallels and reinforces other form(s) of oppression.” Gaard makes the case that there is a “linkage between sexism and speciesism, between the oppression of women and the oppression of animals.”
While the perspectives of Curtain and Gaard may differ, they both clearly make the case that human domination over non-human animals is at the heart of the vegetarian ecofeminist movement. Obviously, the domination of one group over others is problematic for feminists.
Hi Eric, thank you for sharing.
I hadn’t considered the human figure as a symbol of patriarchy perpetuated by men and women, alike. That’s quite interesting. Curtin writes, “An ecofeminist perspective emphasizes that one’s body is oneself, and that by inflicting violence needlessly, one’s bodily self becomes a context for violence.” While I recognized this statement as pertaining to all people, women included, I hadn’t quite applied that thought to the image. I definitely agree; patriarchy is furthered by biases/assumptions everyone carries, the key is recognizing and challenging these thoughts when they appear. You wrote, “patriarchal women enforce rigid gender roles and police the behaviors of other women in order to stand taller in the patriarchy than non-patriarchal women and gender nonbinary and transgender people.” This is a powerful, and true, statement. According to Gillis & Jacobs, patriarchy “may reward us when we perpetuate it and sanction us when we resist…not all men benefit equally…[and women] may also perpetuate patriarchy” (69). Your observation of women slut-shaming other women and belittling experiences of sexual violence is a disturbingly interesting occurrence. Klein & Gibbs, citing a 2004 study, write, “slut shaming is frequently used between women—and often between richer and poorer groups of women.” This suggests, as with standpoint theory, numerous oppressions are at work in women’s subjugation. Klein & Gibbs further argue women’s use of patriarchy/gender norms against each other reinforce the system’s success. Patriarchy is so hard to fight because it values privileged people (white men) and uses the assumption of a “norm” to oppress others; so all people try to use whatever privilege they have to succeed, even if it means harming someone else. In order to challenge this system, we need to be in a place where we can value diversity and unique experience, rather than belittling them. Regarding human/animal relations, this system prevails. As Gaard puts it, “people have come to believe that their well-being can be attained and enjoyed independently of—and even, at the expense of—the well-being of others, both human and non-human” (21). Humans extend the concept of privilege and control onto animals, and for vegetarian ecofeminists, understandably, this devalues all life.
Piper
Works Cited
Curtin, Deane. “Toward an Ecological Ethic of Care.” Hypathia, No. 6, Spring 1991, pp. 68-71, Acrobat Version, University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, myCourses, WGS 307-7101: Ecofeminism: Philosophy & Practice – On-Line (2025 Spring CE1). Accessed 26 February 2025.
Gaard, Greta. “Ecofeminism on the Wing: Perspectives on Human-Animal Relations.” Women & Environments, Fall 2001. University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, myCourses, WGS 307-7101: Ecofeminism: Philosophy & Practice – On-Line (2025 Spring CE1). Accessed 26 February 2025.
Gillis, Melissa J., and Andrew T. Jacobs. “Chapter 7: Embodiment, Beauty, and the Viewer.” Introduction to Women’s and Gender Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach, Second Edition, Oxford University Press, 2017, 2020, New York, p. 69. Accessed 26 February 2025.
Klein, Gavi, and Audrey Gibbs. “Tools of the Partiarchy: The Weaponization of Sexual Freedom.” Ms. Magazine, 12 August 2020. Web. msmagazine.com/2020/08/12/tools-of-the-patriarchy-the-weaponization-of-sexual-freedom/. Accessed 26 February 2025.
I like how you mentioned slut shaming because I said something similar about how women were degraded and dehumanized. Body shaming and the degradation of women are issues that have been an issue for years. The act of shaming women for their bodies has led to a culture that dehumanizes individuals based on their appearance. The photo of meat being sliced can be seen as a symbol of this degradation connecting to how society often treats women. When we look at the image of slicing meat and analyze it, we can see that it can represent the way women’s bodies are often viewed in society — as objects to be dissected and judged. Just as a piece of meat is viewed based on its appearance and cut, women often find themselves in a harsh situation concerning their looks. By treating women like this it strips their humanity making it easier for others to judge them rather than appreciating them as a normal human. Even the quote I used “Feminists and ecofeminists alike have noted the ways that animal pejoratives are used to dehumanize women. pointing to the linkage of women and animals in such derogatory terms for women as “sow.” “bitch,” “pussy.” chick?” etc.” (Gaard 2001 ) shows us how terms like “sow,” “bitch,” “pussy,” and “chick “are not only to insult but also to objectify women, connecting their identities with animals.
Thanks for posting, this was a great read! You make such a good point about masculinity, sports, and food. Men are expected to be athletic, and there’s an entire restaurant culture surrounding sports. Sports bars. Bleacher bars. Football pubs. Bear with me for a second while I ponder: these are all places where a certain type of cuisine is offered, and that cuisine definitely includes meat, grilled or fried, served alongside copious amounts of alcohol. By societal standards, men should feel comfortable in such places. But are they? They’re dark, cramped, and packed with people staring up at glowing TVs. That’s about as far as you can get from the nature, I think. And according to Greta Gaard, the farther we get from nature, the less we are connected to our compassion. There’s no wilderness to be found in a sports bar; it’s an amalgamation of hierarchical and gendered constructs.
Hi Eric,
I like how you included that Curtin and Gaard have different opinions but here main goal is that humans have dominance over non-human animals. I believe that even today, we have differences over what we believe is right, but we have similar end goals. I also talked about the link believe oppressions of woman and the oppression of animals in my Blog. I believe that this is such a good perspective, and your blog was really interesting to read!
Hi Eric! I think your connection between the genderless chef carving the meat from this weeks module and how patriarchy is perpetrated by men and women alike was spot on. I didn’t think too much about the ways that women really have been trained under the male oppression to put other women down to make themselves appear more aligned with the very ones who are oppressing them in the first place. The correlation between women and meat is a strangely sexualized one. But it makes sense if men view meat as inherently masculine, or imperative to their masculinity then women as sexual objects serve the same purpose for men.
This info is worth everyone’s attention. Where can I find
out more?