What do you think?
Rate this book
Dreaded Comparison, The: Human and Animal Slavery
Considered a seminal book in the fields of Bioethics and Human-Animal
Studies, and a classic in the field of humane thought, Marjorie
Spiegel's The Dreaded Comparison makes a significant contribution to
our efforts to understand the roots of individual and societal
violence, tying current cultural practices to the legacy of human
bondage, and introducing new and diverse audiences to the history of
slavery and institutionalized racism in the United States.
Spanning history, psychology, and current events-- and ground-breaking
for its thesis which presents the first in-depth exploration of the
similarities between the violence humans have wrought against other
humans, and our culture's treatment of non-human animals-- The Dreaded
Comparison has contributed to subsequent explorations by other
scholars, historians, legal scholars, law professors and educators in
diverse fields to view and further define the modern system of animal
exploitation in terms of the model and legacy of human slavery.
The Dreaded Comparison also contributed substantially to broadening
the philosophical foundation of the modern discourse about animals
beyond its traditionally more limited scope, instilling a far more
inclusive and historically-grounded understanding of the critical
issues Spiegel sensitively explores in this book.
Highly acclaimed and widely reviewed-- Gordon Parks declared that
"The Dreaded Comparison should be placed in schoolrooms across the
universe," and civil rights attorney William Kunstler wrote that he
"was heavily influenced by Marjorie Spiegelʼs powerful tour de
force" -- The Dreaded Comparison has been adopted as required
reading in colleges, universities, law curriculum, and high schools
throughout the nation. Now in its third edition, The Dreaded
Comparison has also been excerpted in college textbooks in the fields
of Philosophy and Human-Animal Studies, and excerpted as a cover story
in national journals.
Studies, and a classic in the field of humane thought, Marjorie
Spiegel's The Dreaded Comparison makes a significant contribution to
our efforts to understand the roots of individual and societal
violence, tying current cultural practices to the legacy of human
bondage, and introducing new and diverse audiences to the history of
slavery and institutionalized racism in the United States.
Spanning history, psychology, and current events-- and ground-breaking
for its thesis which presents the first in-depth exploration of the
similarities between the violence humans have wrought against other
humans, and our culture's treatment of non-human animals-- The Dreaded
Comparison has contributed to subsequent explorations by other
scholars, historians, legal scholars, law professors and educators in
diverse fields to view and further define the modern system of animal
exploitation in terms of the model and legacy of human slavery.
The Dreaded Comparison also contributed substantially to broadening
the philosophical foundation of the modern discourse about animals
beyond its traditionally more limited scope, instilling a far more
inclusive and historically-grounded understanding of the critical
issues Spiegel sensitively explores in this book.
Highly acclaimed and widely reviewed-- Gordon Parks declared that
"The Dreaded Comparison should be placed in schoolrooms across the
universe," and civil rights attorney William Kunstler wrote that he
"was heavily influenced by Marjorie Spiegelʼs powerful tour de
force" -- The Dreaded Comparison has been adopted as required
reading in colleges, universities, law curriculum, and high schools
throughout the nation. Now in its third edition, The Dreaded
Comparison has also been excerpted in college textbooks in the fields
of Philosophy and Human-Animal Studies, and excerpted as a cover story
in national journals.
105 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
9 people are currently reading
1054 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
February 10, 2017
It makes folks uncomfortable to think that we treat animals as slaves, but that's just because they want to continue doing it. But here it is. The comparison is clear. Everything from the tools used to oppress people and animals to the language around their oppression have clear connection.
I'll leave you with this meme:
I'll leave you with this meme:
March 7, 2018
i liked this book a lot in high school and it made me feel soooo smart and cool but now i’m older and i think the book is racist
October 16, 2021
This book is excellent. What I really enjoyed about it was how the entire thing is set up from the beginning to avoid the kind of tokenism often seen amongst single issue vegans to use a human rights issue to further veganism (and then ignoring that issue at all other times or pretending it has been solved). It takes both oppressions into account to show how they further one another. The forward by Alice Walker is also very good.
Edit: I wanted to update this review because it just got a thumbs up from someone. I wrote this review five years ago and I've learned a lot since then. I believe I read this book 10 years before that so there was a lot that I didn't remember. And what I've learned since then I feel like this stellar review I gave it might be a bit clouded by my own ignorance at times. I still think this is an important book and I still think there's a lot that can be gained from it. But the time it was written and now a lot has evolved and changed. And I think if you're looking for something that explores connections between the exploitation of black people in the exploitation of non-human animals, there are better things out there that are written by black women and men rather than a white woman. I would have to reread this book to be able to pick and choose what can be taken from it and I do think the author came at it from a place of really not wanting to say that the two things are the same. But I also see how this book could be used by someone in bad faith to say just that. Maybe I should have at least skimmed it before editing this review but I'm so behind on reading and I've got a lot going on so I'm just going to do this instead and try to be at least mildly responsible. If anyone does reread the book in 2021 or later I'd be interested in their thoughts now because I think most people who I know who've read it all read it a long time ago.
Edit: I wanted to update this review because it just got a thumbs up from someone. I wrote this review five years ago and I've learned a lot since then. I believe I read this book 10 years before that so there was a lot that I didn't remember. And what I've learned since then I feel like this stellar review I gave it might be a bit clouded by my own ignorance at times. I still think this is an important book and I still think there's a lot that can be gained from it. But the time it was written and now a lot has evolved and changed. And I think if you're looking for something that explores connections between the exploitation of black people in the exploitation of non-human animals, there are better things out there that are written by black women and men rather than a white woman. I would have to reread this book to be able to pick and choose what can be taken from it and I do think the author came at it from a place of really not wanting to say that the two things are the same. But I also see how this book could be used by someone in bad faith to say just that. Maybe I should have at least skimmed it before editing this review but I'm so behind on reading and I've got a lot going on so I'm just going to do this instead and try to be at least mildly responsible. If anyone does reread the book in 2021 or later I'd be interested in their thoughts now because I think most people who I know who've read it all read it a long time ago.
July 21, 2011
A provocative book that looks at power relationships, comparing human oppression of other humans to the human oppression of non humans, including misinterpretations of Darwin, namely social Darwinism. Spiegal concludes that these two forms of oppression are one in the same, that human rights and animal rights are inseparable and that neither can be accomplished alone. She writes:
"To deny our similarities to animals is to deny and undermine our own power. It is to continue actively struggling to prove to our oppressors, past or present, that we are similar to our oppressors, rather than those whom our oppressors have also victimized. It is to say that we would rather be more like those who have also been victims...
...[regards to oppression of blacks and animals] the cruelties perpetrated upon them take similar forms."
The most obvious example of this is the treatment of African Americans. During the period of slavery and leading well into the middle of the 20th Century, poor white Americans took pains to ensure that they identified with the oppressors rather than forming a common bond of solidarity with the victims, African Americans. Eventually they too assumed the role of oppressors but themselves remained impoverished and ultimately, in their own way, oppressed. Spiegal's point is that denying victimization and forming an alliance with the oppressors is to project your own suffering onto another group and ultimately leave both parties to suffer. One group suffers quite literally by the hand of the new majority and the latter suffers under the illusion that they are no longer victims, but new masters of oppression.
This comparison is at first hard to digest. No one thinks of themselves as being oppressed by eating meat. However the author argues that we use similar devices to slaughter animals to those used on other races and peoples in the past. The slaughter takes place beyond are own lives where we never witness it (or can choose quite comfortably not to) and we are not a part of it; we distance ourselves from the act of killing. To aid this process, society and its institutions support the industries, encouraging our participation as consumers and convince us that any outsiders are part of fringe movements, extremists or far leftists and reassures the majority that they are right. This primary, underlying philosophy is that animals are completely inferior and that nature has intended the superiority of one group over another and therefore condones and allows any actions that insure the supremacy and position of that group.
The most interesting part of this book is the section on the human desire to conquer and control nature and to suppress it, to, in a metaphor that the author repeats, "break it in." The author also analyzes the racist terminology that compares blacks to animals. Perhaps most inspiring of all there are some quotes from the 19th Century, one by Abraham Lincoln, that realize that animal rights and human rights are connected and both form part of a larger struggle to end all oppression.
Some portions of the book will be offensive to meat eaters and Spiegal does not hold back (she barely mentioning conscious consumers)leaving carnivorous humans to be silent witnesses or consciously oblivious partners of violence in her eyes. Other parts verge on the ridiculous, even for myself (for example the idea that breaking in a horse is unethical) However, though the content may appear hyperbolic it is these grander threads of ethical issues that get the reader thinking.
I'd like to end this review with one quote that stood out to me in particular, from Dick Gregory:
"under the leadership of Dr King, I became totally committed to non violence...animals and humans suffer and die alike. Violence causes the same pain, the same spilling of blood, the same stench of death, the same arrogant, cruel and brutal taking of life."
"To deny our similarities to animals is to deny and undermine our own power. It is to continue actively struggling to prove to our oppressors, past or present, that we are similar to our oppressors, rather than those whom our oppressors have also victimized. It is to say that we would rather be more like those who have also been victims...
...[regards to oppression of blacks and animals] the cruelties perpetrated upon them take similar forms."
The most obvious example of this is the treatment of African Americans. During the period of slavery and leading well into the middle of the 20th Century, poor white Americans took pains to ensure that they identified with the oppressors rather than forming a common bond of solidarity with the victims, African Americans. Eventually they too assumed the role of oppressors but themselves remained impoverished and ultimately, in their own way, oppressed. Spiegal's point is that denying victimization and forming an alliance with the oppressors is to project your own suffering onto another group and ultimately leave both parties to suffer. One group suffers quite literally by the hand of the new majority and the latter suffers under the illusion that they are no longer victims, but new masters of oppression.
This comparison is at first hard to digest. No one thinks of themselves as being oppressed by eating meat. However the author argues that we use similar devices to slaughter animals to those used on other races and peoples in the past. The slaughter takes place beyond are own lives where we never witness it (or can choose quite comfortably not to) and we are not a part of it; we distance ourselves from the act of killing. To aid this process, society and its institutions support the industries, encouraging our participation as consumers and convince us that any outsiders are part of fringe movements, extremists or far leftists and reassures the majority that they are right. This primary, underlying philosophy is that animals are completely inferior and that nature has intended the superiority of one group over another and therefore condones and allows any actions that insure the supremacy and position of that group.
The most interesting part of this book is the section on the human desire to conquer and control nature and to suppress it, to, in a metaphor that the author repeats, "break it in." The author also analyzes the racist terminology that compares blacks to animals. Perhaps most inspiring of all there are some quotes from the 19th Century, one by Abraham Lincoln, that realize that animal rights and human rights are connected and both form part of a larger struggle to end all oppression.
Some portions of the book will be offensive to meat eaters and Spiegal does not hold back (she barely mentioning conscious consumers)leaving carnivorous humans to be silent witnesses or consciously oblivious partners of violence in her eyes. Other parts verge on the ridiculous, even for myself (for example the idea that breaking in a horse is unethical) However, though the content may appear hyperbolic it is these grander threads of ethical issues that get the reader thinking.
I'd like to end this review with one quote that stood out to me in particular, from Dick Gregory:
"under the leadership of Dr King, I became totally committed to non violence...animals and humans suffer and die alike. Violence causes the same pain, the same spilling of blood, the same stench of death, the same arrogant, cruel and brutal taking of life."
February 8, 2011
The Dreaded Comparison is invited to provoke thought where most comfortable omnivores fear to tread: What is the societal mindset that drives massive-scale animal slaughter and exploitation, and could it simply be an extension of the values that enabled our forebears to do hideous things to other human beings?
The author’s motive is not to equate animals and people, rather, her argument is that it is the same doministic values that encourage us to kill and exploit any life deemed weaker than us. Illustrations, often depicted side-by-side, of past human restraint and torture devices and present animal restraint and torture devices can be chilling.
The book Eternal Treblinka: Our Treatment of Animals and the Holocaust covered similar territory with more depth, in my view, so those who read Comparison will want to pick up that one, as well.
The author’s motive is not to equate animals and people, rather, her argument is that it is the same doministic values that encourage us to kill and exploit any life deemed weaker than us. Illustrations, often depicted side-by-side, of past human restraint and torture devices and present animal restraint and torture devices can be chilling.
The book Eternal Treblinka: Our Treatment of Animals and the Holocaust covered similar territory with more depth, in my view, so those who read Comparison will want to pick up that one, as well.
February 14, 2024
As someone who has been concerned for animal rights for a long time, I find it almost amazing when a book espousing those same ideals fails to compel even me. It doesn't help that the author's scope is very narrow; Spiegel vilifies just one specific group of humans for the crime of slavery, an issue that has touched every corner of this planet across many different cultures and races. If she had broadened that focus to encompass an ugly facet of humanity persistent throughout history, it would have both meshed much better with her parallel argument that animals are/have been treated no better than slaves by humankind, and made more sense. As it's written, it's almost implied that this same awful race of people is solely responsible for the mistreatment of animals as well, which, it goes without saying, is far from the case.
The Dreaded Comparison is very short and not especially well written. Skip this and read Peter Singer's Animal Liberation instead.
The Dreaded Comparison is very short and not especially well written. Skip this and read Peter Singer's Animal Liberation instead.
October 30, 2018
I agree with Spiegel that this is a useful and valid comparison to make. I think, however, that she does not do enough to defend this position beyond simply stating the case.
I would defend the main point of The Dreaded Comparison against the often poor arguments made against it, but I do have problems with several elements of the book.
Firstly, Spiegel did not focus enough on the differences between human and non-human animals. Since this is one of the most common arguments used to attack The Dreaded Comparison, it would have been useful to have a really clear understanding of both similarities and differences, and to explain how these differences do not affect the validity of The Dreaded Comparison.
Secondly, whilst she explores the economic basis of these systems of oppression, she ultimately blames culture and individual psychology for the reproduction of oppression by humans. The reality is, however, that culture is much more malleable than the economic base; oppression of all forms is rooted in economic relations above all else, culture and ideas around individuals can (and are) made to fit, not the other way around. (Furthermore, killing other human and non-human animals certainly predates any 'civilisation' or class society, the oppressive actions must be rooted in the economic basis).
Otherwise excellent. Would recommend reading. Might be useful to read alongside War Machine: The Rationalisation of Slaughter in the Modern Age by Daniel Pick (which I skim-read about 6 years ago and desperately want to return to now).
I would defend the main point of The Dreaded Comparison against the often poor arguments made against it, but I do have problems with several elements of the book.
Firstly, Spiegel did not focus enough on the differences between human and non-human animals. Since this is one of the most common arguments used to attack The Dreaded Comparison, it would have been useful to have a really clear understanding of both similarities and differences, and to explain how these differences do not affect the validity of The Dreaded Comparison.
Secondly, whilst she explores the economic basis of these systems of oppression, she ultimately blames culture and individual psychology for the reproduction of oppression by humans. The reality is, however, that culture is much more malleable than the economic base; oppression of all forms is rooted in economic relations above all else, culture and ideas around individuals can (and are) made to fit, not the other way around. (Furthermore, killing other human and non-human animals certainly predates any 'civilisation' or class society, the oppressive actions must be rooted in the economic basis).
Otherwise excellent. Would recommend reading. Might be useful to read alongside War Machine: The Rationalisation of Slaughter in the Modern Age by Daniel Pick (which I skim-read about 6 years ago and desperately want to return to now).
June 11, 2008
why are we all so blind to the repercussions (did I spell that correctly?) of taking advantage of and believing we have rights over other beings? why is this not required reading in our schools? so far brilliant and horrifying arguments . . .
January 16, 2008
Gut-wrenching comparison of violence and oppression. Chilling read - This book strongly influenced the way I think.
November 20, 2020
Excellent book. I've often thought that when it comes to the topic of animal ethics, the 'dreaded comparison' is the most astute and important comparison that can be made. Even if one isn't ready to agree with the line of thinking, the book makes a convincing argument for it. I loved it and learned from it.
The title is apt, as the comparison is difficult for some to accept, but factually substantial, and Marjorie's thesis and comparisons are solid, unflawed, and sharp. The parallels between human slavery and human cruelty toward animals are long, numerous, and depressing, as any honest person will readily admit, despite the common reluctance to accept the implications, but she brings them to light vividly and verbalizes the relationships effectively with a wealth of historical source material.
There were a few moments where she got a little far out and said things that weren't quite accurate (in regards to Western medicine vs. Oriental medicine), or made assertions I couldn't buy, but these neither affected the veracity of her overall thesis or took away from the importance of the book. It's a short read, and was the first whole book I've read in a single day in years. While vegetarians and vegans aren't going to be changed by reading it, since our morality won't be challenged by it (but maybe strengthened), anyone who wants to seek ethical or moral improvement in life is asked to read it and engage its points thoroughly and honestly, in good faith.
This is an intellectually honest and blunt piece of work that takes a refreshingly critical approach to an issue that, frankly, too many people are argumentatively weak, intellectually dishonest, and logically lazy about addressing.
The title is apt, as the comparison is difficult for some to accept, but factually substantial, and Marjorie's thesis and comparisons are solid, unflawed, and sharp. The parallels between human slavery and human cruelty toward animals are long, numerous, and depressing, as any honest person will readily admit, despite the common reluctance to accept the implications, but she brings them to light vividly and verbalizes the relationships effectively with a wealth of historical source material.
There were a few moments where she got a little far out and said things that weren't quite accurate (in regards to Western medicine vs. Oriental medicine), or made assertions I couldn't buy, but these neither affected the veracity of her overall thesis or took away from the importance of the book. It's a short read, and was the first whole book I've read in a single day in years. While vegetarians and vegans aren't going to be changed by reading it, since our morality won't be challenged by it (but maybe strengthened), anyone who wants to seek ethical or moral improvement in life is asked to read it and engage its points thoroughly and honestly, in good faith.
This is an intellectually honest and blunt piece of work that takes a refreshingly critical approach to an issue that, frankly, too many people are argumentatively weak, intellectually dishonest, and logically lazy about addressing.
July 29, 2015
I think looking at how speciesism and racism (and sexism) are connected is important but ... are dogs really 'slaves' though. For me, the issue is less whether there are similarities between various forms of oppression (there invariably are) but whether we should be employing this language. Is it productive? Does it devalue historic and ongoing human suffering? Does it gloss over key differences? The idea that it's only offensive if you think being compared to an animal is an insult is a gross oversimplification IMO. And I don't know, do you really need to be told that we make 'slaves' out of animals to think how animals are treated is wrong?
October 12, 2013
Comparing human and animal slavery as Spiegel does in The Dreaded Comparison is an extremely controversial position to take. I don't know whether my uncomfort with the topic is due to societal expectations of what's "politically correct" or the fact that I necessarily disagree with Speigel's argument. Either way, this book is remarkably thought-provoking, and I would encourage others to read it. How humans treat non-human animals is abhorrent.
February 21, 2017
I am ashamed of myself and my species after reading this book.
June 2, 2017
The title of the book says it all!
June 5, 2019
Randomly picked this up at a charity shop. Wasn't what I expected it to be. Small but
thought provoking
thought provoking
November 28, 2012
While it is a comment worth making this book felt very bloated to me, the idea could fit in a pithy quote and be stuck on a photo to circulate facebook. Basically "If treating people like animals is so horrible and we know that animals suffer then isn't it actually wrong to treat animals that way also?"
There. That's all the book had to say. Worth saying, not worth an entire book.
There. That's all the book had to say. Worth saying, not worth an entire book.
March 12, 2014
Most certainly thought-provoking. I would not readily say that I concur with all of the assertions made by the author, but she clearly had researched significantly and wrote persuasively. Some of the comparisons were spot-on and chilling.
Read
July 8, 2012Nothing especially new or compelling here, but maybe I've just reached a point of saturation; these ideas just aren't new to me or presented in a way that provokes much introspection.
September 11, 2025
The Dreaded Comparison tries to draw a parallel between the enslavement of Black people and the treatment of animals, and somehow thinks that’s a productive or respectful thing to do. Spoiler: it’s not. It’s offensive, tone-deaf, and just straight-up gross.
From the jump, it reads like someone hijacking the brutal, centuries-long suffering of Black people to push a completely different agenda. I don’t care how well-meaning the author thought she was - using the trauma of slavery to make a point about factory farming is not just tasteless, it’s dehumanizing. There's a long, violent history of Black people being compared to animals, and this book leans right into it with disturbing confidence, as if it’s enlightening us with some deep truth. It’s not. It’s rehashing racism under the guise of activism.
And don’t even get me started on the images. Side-by-side pictures of slaves in chains and animals in cages - what the hell was she thinking? That’s not activism, that’s exploitation. It’s manipulative, emotionally shallow, and just flat-out disrespectful. There's no real philosophical weight behind it either, just guilt-tripping and shock value. If you want a good argument for animal rights, look literally anywhere else. This book does the animal rights movement no favors by associating it with this kind of nonsense.
From the jump, it reads like someone hijacking the brutal, centuries-long suffering of Black people to push a completely different agenda. I don’t care how well-meaning the author thought she was - using the trauma of slavery to make a point about factory farming is not just tasteless, it’s dehumanizing. There's a long, violent history of Black people being compared to animals, and this book leans right into it with disturbing confidence, as if it’s enlightening us with some deep truth. It’s not. It’s rehashing racism under the guise of activism.
And don’t even get me started on the images. Side-by-side pictures of slaves in chains and animals in cages - what the hell was she thinking? That’s not activism, that’s exploitation. It’s manipulative, emotionally shallow, and just flat-out disrespectful. There's no real philosophical weight behind it either, just guilt-tripping and shock value. If you want a good argument for animal rights, look literally anywhere else. This book does the animal rights movement no favors by associating it with this kind of nonsense.
March 20, 2018
This is an incredible read. It's fast-paced and, though the topics and intersections of speciesism and racism are tough to swallow, Spiegel presents her arguments in concise, easy to understand texts.
She focuses a lot on the language that compares the way enslaved humans were spoken of during the period of slavery in the United States and the language used to enslave animals. Her points definitely have made me think about how humans who are still enslaved in sex and labor trades are spoken of and transported alongside of comparisons with humans.
My main complaint about this novel is that, though the historic pictures alongside the text add to the examples greatly, they are often introduced with no warning. It's nearly exploitative in that matter, as seeing any body, especially ones that look like ones own, being treated with no sensitivity or morality without warning can be particularly upsetting and can take away from the message.
TL;DR: This book is an incredible launching pad to the intersections of veganism and human animal rights, though there is both texts and images that are quite disturbing, though not particularly gory, so be warned!
She focuses a lot on the language that compares the way enslaved humans were spoken of during the period of slavery in the United States and the language used to enslave animals. Her points definitely have made me think about how humans who are still enslaved in sex and labor trades are spoken of and transported alongside of comparisons with humans.
My main complaint about this novel is that, though the historic pictures alongside the text add to the examples greatly, they are often introduced with no warning. It's nearly exploitative in that matter, as seeing any body, especially ones that look like ones own, being treated with no sensitivity or morality without warning can be particularly upsetting and can take away from the message.
TL;DR: This book is an incredible launching pad to the intersections of veganism and human animal rights, though there is both texts and images that are quite disturbing, though not particularly gory, so be warned!
December 27, 2020
This book blew my mind when I read it for my environmental ethics class circa 2000. Now that I'm more educated on these topics, it just felt familiar and I wanted deeper analysis and broader data. This is definitely a book that everyone should read, to see how so many of our industries (food, cosmetics, chemicals) use, harm, and kill animals. But this book should not be the end of our learning. I would love it if Spiegel wrote an updated version and compared how things have evolved since this publication.
March 10, 2024
I think this book is fine, I read it in about 2 hours. It is a fine introduction to the intersecting oppressions of non human animals and racialised peoples. However, I felt it was too short to fully encapsulate some of the finer nuances of this topic. I would’ve like the text to be longer, as I felt some sections could’ve been better fleshed out. Overall, a book I’ve wanted to read for a long time and I am glad I finally got around to it.
January 6, 2018
This book disturbs because not only the practices pictured and described disturb but the acceptance of these practices by the general public both in past and present disturb. Essentially a catalog of how power is imposed and rationalized to justify brutalization of living beings, both animal and human. Challenging the lies underlying any oppressive act opposes all oppressive acts.
October 11, 2019
I'm so happy this little book was written, because it's something that dearly needed to be said. Anyone apt to take offense at the comparison between human and animal slavery should give this a read (it only takes one sitting). Spiegel builds an airtight case with an unavoidable conclusion: Oppression is oppression.
February 27, 2024
I'm surprised so many people liked this book. Many of the arguments were not only hasty generalizations but also contradictory. The whole book also feels disingenuous coming from a white lady. I will say I read it very fast because I simply could not believe my eyes at how crazy it was
July 22, 2019
I would love to see this redone now. I think this was way too big a subject for such a short book however, and either needs to be longer or made into a series of books somehow.
October 2, 2020
This is a book I've been avoiding because I knew it would change how I thought. I didn't know about the transportation issue before in animals and the striking parallels to the slave trade.
January 27, 2022
Offers concrete examples of parallelism between human slavery and modern treatment of nonhuman animals. Posits intersectional root cause, and specific psychoanalysis of tormentor personalities.
Read
September 11, 2022This book may bring up politically unpopular ideas, but the message is clear. If we view another creature, whether a human or an animals, as an object, we are freed to do unspeakable things
January 25, 2025
An important comparison between racism and speciesism. Drawing comparisons in the treatment of enslaved people with the treatment of livestock animals. The author compares these two conditions in agriculture, hunting, lab testing, and cultural treatment. The argument is interesting and the incorporation of images of animal cruelty next to images of enslaved humans draws visual comparison which was very emotional and raw. This is an important read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews