Nik Taylor
(Dr.) Nik Taylor is an internationally recognized critical and public sociologist who has published over 70 articles, books and book chapters. Her research focusses on mechanisms of power and marginalisation expressed in/through human relations with other species and is informed by critical/ intersectional feminism. Nik teaches topics in the sociology program at Flinders University that focus on human-animal violence links; scholar-advocacy; social change, and crime and deviance, particularly domestic violence and animal abuse.
Nik is also the co-convenor of the Animals in Society Working Group at Flinders University. Their web page has useful human-animal studies information, links, and a blog. https://animalsinsocietygroup.wordpress.com/
Nik is also the co-convenor of the Animals in Society Working Group at Flinders University. Their web page has useful human-animal studies information, links, and a blog. https://animalsinsocietygroup.wordpress.com/
less
uploads
Empathy is associated with engagement, compassion, social support and emotional sensitivity, and it is a hallmark of good social work practice. Empathy rightfully receives much attention in social work practice, however, interspecies empathy has yet to be included. This article has been written to address this gap.
Ethnography after Humanism suggests how researchers could conduct different forms of fieldwork and writing to include animals more fruitfully and will be of interest to students and scholars across a range of disciplines, including human-animal studies, sociology, criminology, animal geography, anthropology, social theory and natural resources.
a ‘limit situation’ within which lies the potential to think anew about media ethics and particularly about the “normative implications of life with media” (p. 181). The current chapter considers how critical animal
studies scholarship might contribute to this debate by problematizing the way in which ‘cruelty to animals’ is framed by the media in such a way as to reinforce, rather than question, human domination of other species.
Rescuing me, rescuing you speaks to the mutual, loving connections that can be formed across species, and in households where there is domestic violence. It also speaks to the potentially soothing, healing and recovery oriented aspects of human-companion animal relationships before, during and after the violence. Viewing domestic violence through the imaginary eyes of companion animals offers the opportunity to understand this widespread and potentially fatal social problem in new and engaging ways. While we do not suggest that we can truly speak for or adequately represent the interests of all companion animals in violent domestic situations, we can place them and their interests under the spotlight of human inquiry. This is our intention: to centre the rights and interests of companion animals at risk of, experiencing and/or trying to recover from domestic violence. Judging by the interest in social media and scholarly literature on human-animal relations, we think we are not alone in this interest.
The appeal of animal related literature can be seen in the exponential growth of the interdisciplinary field of human-animal studies. Within this field there is a consistent focus on human and animal directed violence research. Research in this area has consistently shown the links between domestic violence, child abuse and companion animal abuse. What has been left under-investigated, reported and theorised are the positive relationships many women and children, in violent situations, share with their companion animals. While previous focus has been, quite rightly, on how to help human and animal survivors of domestic violence, what has not been carefully examined are the deep, caring relationships that can exist between human and animals, particularly those trying to survive domestic violence.
It is this niche that the current book fills by weaving stories of human and companion animal ‘rescue’ and redemption through a work that closely considers the dynamics of human-animal abuse links within domestic violence. Drawing on a range of data from numerous projects the authors have conducted with women, about their companion animals and about links between domestic violence and animal abuse, this book highlights the deep, personal connections between women and their animals. In these regards our proposed book is innovative and different.
Our book presents an in-depth consideration of the power, politics and philosophy inherent to multi-species relationships and violence. It does so through paying close attention to the stories and images of those affected by such violence. As a result the book will be accessible, compelling, and of interest to a broad market including academics in various disciplines, and those interested in domestic violence service provision, as well as members of the animal-loving general public.
FORTHCOMING 2018
Considering topics ranging from the human–animal bond, meat eating, and animals in entertainment, this book presents key concepts in simple and easy-to-understand ways as it covers the breadth of empirical work currently being done in the field. Through an examination of ideas such as anthropocentrism and the social construction of animals, it looks at how animals are symbolically transformed, presented, and re-presented as part of human culture. Ultimately, the book argues that there is nothing "natural" about our social relations with animals, but that animals are made use of and understood through a human lens.
Humans, Animals, and Society spans the diverse interests of the HAS community and is necessary reading for students and the general public looking to better understand our relationship with animals.
Empathy is associated with engagement, compassion, social support and emotional sensitivity, and it is a hallmark of good social work practice. Empathy rightfully receives much attention in social work practice, however, interspecies empathy has yet to be included. This article has been written to address this gap.
Ethnography after Humanism suggests how researchers could conduct different forms of fieldwork and writing to include animals more fruitfully and will be of interest to students and scholars across a range of disciplines, including human-animal studies, sociology, criminology, animal geography, anthropology, social theory and natural resources.
a ‘limit situation’ within which lies the potential to think anew about media ethics and particularly about the “normative implications of life with media” (p. 181). The current chapter considers how critical animal
studies scholarship might contribute to this debate by problematizing the way in which ‘cruelty to animals’ is framed by the media in such a way as to reinforce, rather than question, human domination of other species.
Rescuing me, rescuing you speaks to the mutual, loving connections that can be formed across species, and in households where there is domestic violence. It also speaks to the potentially soothing, healing and recovery oriented aspects of human-companion animal relationships before, during and after the violence. Viewing domestic violence through the imaginary eyes of companion animals offers the opportunity to understand this widespread and potentially fatal social problem in new and engaging ways. While we do not suggest that we can truly speak for or adequately represent the interests of all companion animals in violent domestic situations, we can place them and their interests under the spotlight of human inquiry. This is our intention: to centre the rights and interests of companion animals at risk of, experiencing and/or trying to recover from domestic violence. Judging by the interest in social media and scholarly literature on human-animal relations, we think we are not alone in this interest.
The appeal of animal related literature can be seen in the exponential growth of the interdisciplinary field of human-animal studies. Within this field there is a consistent focus on human and animal directed violence research. Research in this area has consistently shown the links between domestic violence, child abuse and companion animal abuse. What has been left under-investigated, reported and theorised are the positive relationships many women and children, in violent situations, share with their companion animals. While previous focus has been, quite rightly, on how to help human and animal survivors of domestic violence, what has not been carefully examined are the deep, caring relationships that can exist between human and animals, particularly those trying to survive domestic violence.
It is this niche that the current book fills by weaving stories of human and companion animal ‘rescue’ and redemption through a work that closely considers the dynamics of human-animal abuse links within domestic violence. Drawing on a range of data from numerous projects the authors have conducted with women, about their companion animals and about links between domestic violence and animal abuse, this book highlights the deep, personal connections between women and their animals. In these regards our proposed book is innovative and different.
Our book presents an in-depth consideration of the power, politics and philosophy inherent to multi-species relationships and violence. It does so through paying close attention to the stories and images of those affected by such violence. As a result the book will be accessible, compelling, and of interest to a broad market including academics in various disciplines, and those interested in domestic violence service provision, as well as members of the animal-loving general public.
FORTHCOMING 2018
Considering topics ranging from the human–animal bond, meat eating, and animals in entertainment, this book presents key concepts in simple and easy-to-understand ways as it covers the breadth of empirical work currently being done in the field. Through an examination of ideas such as anthropocentrism and the social construction of animals, it looks at how animals are symbolically transformed, presented, and re-presented as part of human culture. Ultimately, the book argues that there is nothing "natural" about our social relations with animals, but that animals are made use of and understood through a human lens.
Humans, Animals, and Society spans the diverse interests of the HAS community and is necessary reading for students and the general public looking to better understand our relationship with animals.
However, what is strikingly absent in the overwhelming majority of the
commentary is any critical discussion of meat eating per se. Rather, the opposite is true; by its very absence meat eating is assumed to be normal and is thus further normalized. In lieu of any critical engagement with meat eating practices, discourses of contamination, xenophobia and nationhood pervade the coverage of the topic. Analyzing approximately 100 reports carried in the popular media from January to March 2013, this chapter considers the meaning of such a focus and, in particular, why meat eating and animal bodies are the ‘absent referent’ throughout the discourse. We argue that the media frenzy regarding horse meat is not about health concerns, and is certainly not about animal welfare in general (although we accept that there are speciesist tensions here and that the debate touches upon certain animals’ welfare—those we consider worthy, e.g. as ‘pets’), but is instead an example of the maintenance of hegemonic species boundaries. In so arguing, we show how binaries between clean and dirty or moral and immoral serve to reinforce the legitimacy of so-called alternatives that are already within the normative standards of a culture. Arguing that the disruption of such normative ideologies and assumptions is how they are made visible, we demonstrate that concern over the supposed pollutant of horse meat in cattle meat is not governed by a fear of disease or contamination per se; rather it is about attempts to reinforce species
hierarchies through a normalization of the cultural practice of eating some animals, and not others. We do this by drawing on Mary Douglas’s Purity and Danger (1966) and through a critical consideration of mainstream anthropocentrist and carnist discourse.
In: The Palgrave International Handbook of Animal Abuse Studies,
Editors: Maher, Jennifer, Pierpoint, Harriet, Beirne, Piers (Eds.)
The last few decades have seen the rise of a new field of inquiry – human–animal studies (HAS). As a rich, theoretically and disciplinarily diverse field, HAS shines a light on the various relations that humans have with other animals across time, space and culture. While still a small, but rapidly growing field, HAS has supported the development of multiple theoretical and conceptual initiatives which have aimed to capture the rich diversity of human–animal interactions. Yet the methodologies for doing this have not kept pace with the ambitions of such projects. In this chapter, we seek to shed light on this particular issue.
Design/methodology/approach
We consider the difficulties of researching other-than-human beings by asking what might happen if methods incorporated true inter-disciplinarity, for instance if social scientists were able to work with natural scientists on multi-species ethnographies. The lack of established methodology (and the lack of cross disciplinary research between the natural and social sciences) is one of the main problems that we consider here. It is an issue complicated immensely by the ‘otherness’ of animals – the vast differences in the ways that we (humans) and they (animals) see the world, communicate and behave. This chapter provides the opportunity for us to consider how we can take account of (if not resolve) these differences to arrive at meaningful research data, to better understand the contemporary world by embarking upon more precise investigations of our relationships with animals.
Findings
Drawing upon a selection of examples from contemporary research of human–animal interactions, both ethnographic and scientific, we shed light on some new possibilities for multi-species research. We suggest that this can be done best by considering and applying a diversity of theoretical frameworks which deal explicitly with the constitution of the social environment.
Originality/value
Our methodological exploration offers the reader insight into new ways of working within the template of human animal studies by drawing upon a range of useful theories such as post-structuralism and actor network theory (ANT) (for example, Callon, 1986; Hamilton & Taylor, 2013; Latour, 2005; Law, Ruppert, & Savage, 2011) and post-humanist perspectives (for example, Anderson, 2014; Haraway, 2003; Wolfe, 2010). Our contribution to this literature is distinctive because rather than remaining at the philosophical level, we suggest how the human politics of method might be navigated practically to the benefit of multiple species.
Keywords:
Ethnography, human-animal studies, interdisciplinary, ontology, epistemology, politics
Under the remit of an expanded definition of sustainability – one that acknowledges animal agriculture as a key carbon intensive industry, and one that includes interspecies ethics as an integral part of social justice – institutions such as Universities can and
should play a role in supporting a wider agenda for sustainable food practices on campus. By
drawing out clear connections between sustainability objectives on campus and the shift away
from animal based products, the objective of this article is to advocate for a more consistent
understanding and implementation of sustainability measures as championed by university
campuses at large. We will draw out clear connections between sustainability objectives on
campus and the shift away from animal based products. Overall, our arguments are
contextualised within broader debates on the relationship between sustainability, social justice
and interspecies ethics. We envisage that such discussion will contribute to an enriched, more
robust sense of sustainability—one in which food justice refers not only to justice for human
consumers and producers of food and the land used by them, but also to justice for the
nonhuman animals considered as potential sources of food themselves.
environment, however clinicians rarely enquire about animals in the home unless so prompted. Second, psychosocial assessment practices which include consideration of animals within the home may increase the likelihood that child abuse allegations are substantiated.
into the help-seeking needs of people of diverse genders and/or sexualities who live with animal companions in the context of domestic violence.