| Non-speciesist language used on this website: Progressive change requires its own progressive language. To consciously use discriminatory language is to perpetuate the discrimination, either direcly (thoughts lead to corresponding actions), or indirectly (by unconsciously miseducating the public and perpetuating wrong concepts - in this case about non-human animals). So while the grammatical or linguistic changes may look tedious to the unaccustomed reader, we feel they are a necessary requirement for real change. On this page you will also find the meaning of terms you may not be accustomed to. Speciesism: Speciesism entails discriminating between individuals on the basis of species membership and the species' attributes. Particular rights should be assigned to relevant attributes, and not any other attributes it is convenient for us to cite. As in racism, where racism is discriminating between members of different races only on the basis of the colour of their skin, speciesism is discriminating between members of different species on the basis of species membership. For instance, it is not speciesist to ascribe the right to vote to adult humans and not to non-human animals, since to vote necessitates a capacity to understand political issues. But it is speciesist to ascribe the right to life and protection from unnecessary suffering to human infants and deny it to non-human animals, since all that is required to have the right to life and protection from unnecessary suffering is the capacity for sentience and the will to survive. And since both human children and non-human animals have sentience and the will to live, both should be allowed the right to live and protection from unnecessary suffering. Unnecessary suffering: By unnecessary suffering or killing, we mean suffering or killing that is done in situations where it is not a question of self-defence. One example is that it is perfectly justifiable to kill a non-human animal if the non-human animal attacks the human and killing the non-human animal is the only way to stop him. This also applies in cases where the attacker is a human being. Unnecessary suffering is all other suffering inflicted for personal gain (be it financial gain or the gain of more pleasure or satisfaction). Thus, killing (or making suffer) non-human animals for the taste of their flesh is unnecessary suffering, since we may live without eating flesh (actually a vegetarian diet is a healthier diet for humans). So is unnecessary any activity which treats non-humans as objects, tools or utilities. Non-human animals: By non-human animals we mean all members of sentient species. We have to make the distinction since, though humans are animals, non-human animals still lack legal rights, and are still unjustly regarded as human individual or collective property. Plants are not non-human animals and may be regarded as another category, since plants lack a brain or nervous system that are the pre-requisite for sentience. Pronouns describing non-human animals: Since non-human animals, like humans, are sentient individuals, they are not things or objects. They, like us, should be regarded as persons. One should note that persons does not necessarily mean humans. In most western countries, even corporations are legal persons. In our case, by persons we mean individuals who are subjects of a life which may fare better or worse for them due to their being conscious and sentient individuals. Thus, on this website, we describe individual non-human animals as "he" or "she" and not "it". Exploitative institutions, practices or products: We would like to eliminate as much as possible terms that act as a "cover-up" for unjust institutions or practices, or the products derived from these institutions or practices. Thus, a "factory farm" will be generally shown in quotes, since truly, it is neither a factory nor a farm. A factory produces things, and non-human animals are not things. A farm grows plants, and plants are planted. Non-human animals cannot be "grown" and neither "planted". Non-human animals in "factory farms" or any other type of "farm" are presently imprisoned, raped (forced breeding), tortured and finally murdered for food. Also, as much as possible, terms such as "meat" and "leather", which are really non-human animal skin or body parts, if used at all, are as much as possible put in quotes, to indicate general use and still indicate the deceptive nature of the terms. Murder and torture: By murder and torture we mean (as should be) the unnecessary killing and the unnecessary subjection to physical or mental suffering, no matter the degree of the suffering. By unnecessary, as explained above, we mean "not necessary for survival". Murder includes practices such as the killing of animals for food, clothing, or entertainment. Torture includes all unnecessary use of non-human animals which denies them their freedom or otherwise subjects them to human-imposed suffering. Thus, torture is found in "animal farms", "abattoirs" (killing houses), circuses, zoos, marine prisons, vivisection laboratories, non-human animal races, and several other institutions, practices or places where non-human animals are denied their freedom. Almost all of these practices or institutions finally lead to murder. Animal protection organisations: When it is not necessary to separate animal rights organisations (which agree to all the above) and "animal welfare" organisations (which do not), to avoid unnecessary confusion and for convenience's sake, we use the term "animal protection organisations", when both types are grouped together. Final note: Correspondence or letters from Animal Rights Malta prior to 2006, which are reproduced on this website, are left intact and uncorrected even though they may include some language or descriptions which, in view of the above, may be described as speciesist. We will make all the necessary effort to eliminate as much as possible all speciesist language in our correspondence from January 2006 onwards. Thanks goes to Joan Dunayer whose book "Speciesism" (see Suggested Reading in the index page) convinced us of the importance of eliminating speciesist language from animal rights campaigning. |
 |