In 2008, the Dutch Party for the Animals submitted a proposal to ban religious slaughter without prior stunning. The proposal was widely supported in the Lower House but finally rejected in the Upper House in 2012, mainly on the grounds of religious freedom. Academia was keen to study the polemic, but no research has attempted to study the controversy through a lens of racialization. This is remarkable, given the well-documented increase in Islamophobia and the political use of racism since (at least) the turn of the millennium in The Netherlands (and the geopolitical “West” at large). In this article, I demonstrate that a racializing dynamic is actually part and parcel of the Dutch controversy. I apply a reflexive thematic analysis to study archival material from the Dutch Parliamentarian debate and show that the dispute foremost references Islamic slaughter. Appeals to civilization, accusations of barbarism, dystopian warnings against Islamization, and invocations of Judeo-Christianity are discursive elements that feature in the debate and have racializing ramifications for Muslims. By unmasking this racializing dynamic, I offer a means to empirically explore the ways in which taxonomies of religion and race intersect with and through the politicization of animal ethics. When considering religious slaughter it is essential, I ultimately maintain, to observe the violence caused by socially constructed racial and species differences. Only if we hold both in serious regard do we have a chance to begin to imagine ourselves in relation to others differently and move towards more just futures—for humans and non-humans alike.
In the past decade, animal and antiracist politics are on the rise in the Netherlands and Belgium. Both integrate feminism into their political practice, albeit in divergent ways. Nevertheless, their core concerns are generally viewed as antithetical on a conceptual, normative, and politically practical level. This paper explores the extent to which feminist, antiracist, and animal concerns are (in)commensurable. Coupling the ecofeminist analysis of dualism developed by Val Plumwood with recent developments in black studies advanced by Claire Jean Kim and Zakiyyah Iman Jackson, processes of animalisation and dehumanisation are scrutinised. It is demonstrated that the onto-epistemological categories of gender, race, and animality connect on the level of being subjected to the logic of domination exemplary of Western thought (1), and on the level of being the abject yet constitutive Others of the normative category of ‘the human’ (2). Subsequently, to build bridges between feminist, antiracist, and animal advocacy movements, it is argued that animal advocates need to critically question the assumption of ‘human privilege’ and stop using slavery analogies, while feminists and antiracists should aspire to divest from human supremacy. A new approach to collective liberation in the Low Countries is needed, one that acknowledges the interconnectedness of gender, race, and animality alike.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.