Critical Race Theory and Pets

Yeah, so it's seeping in even here, and if it does, it has the potential to undo all kinds of good for our animal friends.

Some nit named Katja Guenter is on the warpath and has written a book called The Lives and Deaths of Shelter Animals. In it she argues that shelter practices are constructs of "capitalism, anthroparchy, white supremacy, and patriarchy".

She argues that allowing dogs to sleep inside is a privilege reserved for the white and wealthy and that policies against keeping dogs chained up in backyards are intended to oppress people of color by imposing “middle-class norms of animal keeping in which companion animals are considered family and treated accordingly,” which ignore the fact that people of color “are themselves trapped in poverty, may have few options for legitimate income generation and possibly rely on their dogs for … status.”

Nathan Winograd at Areo tackles her construct head-on.

It's really disturbing when you get into the gist of what she's trying to argue which seems to be that since so many BIPOC are victims, then you can't hold their treatment of animals against them, and thus, the system that removes those animals is unfair. I don't know whether she seems to think it's better to leave these animals in their lives as fighting animals or chained in backyards with insufficient care than it is to seize them only to possibly have them put down, or what her argument must be.

In Guenther’s book, moreover, white people do things; people of color have things done to them. For example, people of color who abandon their dogs in empty apartments are victims “ensnared in the legal system,” forced to leave their animals behind “under the duress of sudden eviction or deportation or arrest.” Guenther even claims that such people actually believe that what they are doing is for the best, because of “the constraints of their knowledge and resources, both of which are limited by the nexus of their class, status as immigrants, and ethnicity.”

She also argues that when BIPOC use their animals for status or economic reasons, it's fine.

She appears to be arguing that if a person of color can turn a profit or build a reputation through animal exploitation that excuses animal suffering—even in the case of sadistic animal abuse: “From a class perspective, wealthy people are believed to be too ‘civilized’ to engage in barbaric activities like dogfighting, and it’s no coincidence that the only affluent person who has been publicly shamed for dogfighting in the U.S., Michael Vick, is Black, newly wealthy after growing up in poverty.”

She misses, of course, that the barbarism of such things are what they do to the animals, and similar practices among the wealthy are also targeted - like fox hunting or really any sport that seems to be overly damaging or exploitative to the animal like horse racing. Class has nothing to do with it.

Then this lady goes on to get angry with rescuers who go into high kill shelters to remove dogs under sentence of death to try to rehabilitate and adopt them out. She calls it "perpetuating whiteness"! A lot of volunteers who try to do this stuff face hostility at shelters and feel horrible when faced with all the ones they cannot save when they pick and choose the ones they will, but she ignores that.

Despite acknowledging these traumas, because most of the volunteers Guenther encountered were white, she accuses them of working to “reinscribe hierarchies of power and status within the shelter” against the non-white workers and thus “maintain existing social inequalities between humans even as they seek to help animals.” When a rescuer laments the condition of a dog “with sagging belly skin, elongated nipples, and enlarged genitalia” and expresses dismay that the former owners “confined their dog outdoors” and “used the pit bull primarily for income generation through breeding,” Guenther dismisses the criticism as “the animal practices of white rescuers.”

On the one hand, Guenther writes that people of color should not be held responsible if they mistreat animals (“including medical neglect”) because they lead precarious lives. On the other, she criticizes rescuers for using “the animals as instruments for reproducing whiteness” when they take “the dog out of the ghetto” and give it to “the ‘right’ kind of adopters, namely those who will treat their dog as a family member and have the financial means to care for their dog at a high level for the duration of the dog’s life, for example by providing specialty-brand food, toys and beds, and extensive veterinary care should any illness or injury occur.”

Isn't it important that a shelter think about whether or not a person they adopt out to can provide a lifetime of care for an animal?

The scariest thing about this piece and the book it was written about is that the author mentions that this book is gaining traction. It's one thing when we treat each other badly because we can't ignore our own skin color, but why drag our animals into this? They didn't ask for this and they certainly didn't deserve to be returned to a time when they were treated by different standards: some as property to be used and disposed of and others as precious family members because of the perceived racial differences of their owners.

She needs to STFU. And whomever thought it was a good idea to publish this book should be slapped.

Animals need to be treated cruelty free.

I don't see keeping a dog chained up in the back yard as cruel, as long as they have a warm house, food and water, and still ARE NOT BEATEN. How hard is that concept? I grew up with that. (don't do it now, myself, but I understand it)

Seems to me, African Americans should be a bit upset with her. Isn't she saying they don't understand the difference between right and wrong? They don't know HOW to properly care for animals?
Curious if she also excuses dog fighting?

Absolutely ridiculous.

The animal’s welfare should be top of considerations where animal shelters are concerned.

What this person is claiming is absolutely ridiculous and actually does more damage to the issues of inequality in society. Being a pet owner should be a privilege and only afforded to those that are able to care for animals in a loving environment,

Black, white, brown, yellow it doesn’t matter what the colour of your skin is, it’s about how the animal you have decided to take responsibility for is going to be treated in their new life, with their new family.

Madness.

a reply to: chiefsmom

I remember catching a few episodes of Animal Cops: Detroit, and I recall them going around in the winter and they seized a few animals kept chained in the backyard, but you're right, it wasn't wrong to do necessarily so long as there were adequate provisions for the animal's comfort: proper house with proper insulation was a big one. Another one was that the animal had to be able to move around. Fencing was preferred for that reason.

a reply to: ketsuko

What does race have anything to do with how animals
are treated by people?

originally posted by: mamabeth
a reply to: ketsuko
What does race have anything to do with how animals are treated by people?

Not a shrink ... but ... I think they're comparing shelter animals to people who make their living off the government teat.

ETA: Animals wind up in the shelter when dumb-asses find out they bit off more than they can chew (reflection|politicians) ... or ... those animals don't belong anywhere near society (reflection|thugs).

ETA2: Ya know ... if ya burned the animal shelter to the ground, ya might not have a problem with shelter animals.



Wonder if we should burn shantyville to the ground? Wonder if that perma-fence they put up in DC can hold?

a reply to: mamabeth

Apparently now everything in this country has everything to do with it because we all live in Critical Race Theory land.

I guess that means that you look at how most suburban middle class white folks live and if urban blacks don't live that way, then it's wrong and bad and racist to live that way - a mark of white supremacy and oppression and that seems to be my takeaway.

So then you look at how the practices don't match up and where what urban blacks do is considered bad or illegal and ignore why that might actually be - say in the cases of dog or cock fighting - and instead say it's just because their practices don't culturally match the ethos of suburban whites, and that's the only reason *why* anyone would consider it wrong or illegal.

So this has the potential to offer up the lives of dogs and other animals as sacrifices to Critical Race Theory political correctness.

a reply to: ketsuko

Are we really talking about dogs.......

There is a deeper meaning to this and I'm not going to say it
but let's say we are not talking about adults....

When you get down to the core of it, the people who push these ideas are doing so because they're racist/sexist themselves. What I'm seeing here is "it's ok for black people to mistreat animals because they don't know better like white people".

On the one hand, Guenther writes that people of color should not be held responsible if they mistreat animals (“including medical neglect”) because they lead precarious lives. On the other, she criticizes rescuers for using “the animals as instruments for reproducing whiteness” when they take “the dog out of the ghetto” and give it to “the ‘right’ kind of adopters, namely those who will treat their dog as a family member and have the financial means to care for their dog at a high level for the duration of the dog’s life, for example by providing specialty-brand food, toys and beds, and extensive veterinary care should any illness or injury occur.”

Guenther even claims that such people actually believe that what they are doing is for the best, because of “the constraints of their knowledge and resources, both of which are limited by the nexus of their class, status as immigrants, and ethnicity.”

She's literally saying here that she believes black people don't know better because the "constraints of their knowledge" are limited by their ethnicity.

As I and many other posters have mentioned before, it's always been my experience that the people who are super-liberal or who push for "diversity" and "equality" are far more racist than the people they accuse of racism. It reminds me of that video of that one liberal college girl trying to explain that black people need help to vote because they don't know how to use the internet.

I Googled the author, and of course she's white. White people who push this type of thing are usually more racist than anyone else. They're implying that POCs are too stupid and savage to know any better. It's the same thing with voter ID. They think blacks are too dumb to even know how to get an ID.

a reply to: trollz

Yes, I didn't bring that up because this isn't necessarily supposed to be political but more about the potential damage it could do to our pets, animals in general.

Some practices with animals are necessary, but allowing things like dog fighting, for example, because of the owner's socioeconomic status and racial background is not and should never be considered a permissible thing. It's just plain wrong and unnecessary. That isn't victimizing the owner; it's trying to save the animals from something cruel and unnecessary.

originally posted by: AnonymousNutjob
I Googled the author, and of course she's white. White people who push this type of thing are usually more racist than anyone else. They're implying that POCs are too stupid and savage to know any better. It's the same thing with voter ID. They think blacks are too dumb to even know how to get an ID.

Yep, that's exactly it. See my post directly above yours. Here's the video I mentioned:

a reply to: AnonymousNutjob

Was just about to post this as a response, let's get offended on behalf of people who are capable of defending themselves.

a reply to: ketsuko

Well, that was a real long convoluted way of saying

'Black people should be allowed to abuse animals because they're too stupid to know any better and stopping them is racist.'

a reply to: ketsuko
You are spot on with your thoughts. How far can one wander away from basic decency and logic?

Somebody shake her awake already, I never read someone building so many air castles yet. It's like a row of inception of air castles inside aircastles and at the center core on the highest tower she's raises her head like Tommy from Froopyland.

a reply to: ketsuko

Personally, I don't think this is about animals at all.

Rather, I think this is yet another example of the unrelenting attempts by the SJW's to paint every evil, unspeakable and twisted thing which happens in society of the world today, and throughout history, as evidence of 'white privilege and supremacy'. And...it's all complete Bullsh!t!!!

I wish there was a way to carve out a perfect functioning subset of society, a perfect cross section of the racial, ethnic and ideological background and place them all in a sealed impenetrable place, completely isolated from the rest of the world. Then, remove all the laws, customs and practices and historical knowlege from all the members of this group...and let them form their own Utopian society. Require every history, sociological and civics education system to observe what happens.

In short order...they'd all kill each other!

If she saw how my Westie gets pampered she would have a heart attack!

Stupid Bitch, Honestly I am convinced people think this # up because they know it will grab attention, they don't believe it at all, it's a money making and attention seeking opportunity!

a reply to: valiant

Well and if she's honest, and the guy who wrote the review piece points this out - screwed up animal treatment is not solely the province of any one race or even any one economic class. Good animal care doesn't belong to any one race or class either. I was watching an episode of Dr. Pol the other day where one of the cases was an African American lady whose Pomeranian got into some sort of trouble and lost an eye, and she was very, very upset about it and spared no expense over the poor thing to get it back to health as much as possible. She was endlessly worried that it wouldn't be able to adjust to life with one eye, but in the end, it all had a happy ending and her dog did fabulously with one eye, was just as happy and healthy, bright and bouncy as ever.

a reply to: ketsuko

LOL...that's the kind of schitt my brother is into. That's his Christmas presented sorted then...

This is my take on this book.

She is saying that whites can't judge other group's treatment of animals because of social, economic and ethnic differences in the cultures. However, the white animal rescuers CAN be judged for having different views on how an animal is treated because this is systemic racism. Of course, it is inexcusable for whites to appropriate from the other cultures, so adopting their behaviors is out.

As hypocritical as that attitude is, the hypocrisy actually goes deeper into cultural and moral relativism. Relativism would say that moral standards for the treatment of animals in one ethnic culture are just as valid as the standards of another culture. That premise being true unless you're of white European decent that is, then your cultural values are invalid against any others. More than that, those white cultural values are worse because of systemic racism and white privilege.