PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS AND THE EROSION OF THE ANIMAL ...

180 Pages·2005·1.59 MB·English

IDENTITY SHIFTING: PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS AND
THE EROSION OF THE ANIMAL/HUMAN DIVIDE
by
WENDY ATKINS-SAYRE
(Under the Direction of John M. Murphy)
ABSTRACT
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), arguably the most successful
animal rights organization, encounters a tremendous obstacle in selling the animal rights
message to a broad audience. Faced with the entrenched belief in the nature/culture,
animal/human divide, they are forced to chip away at those divisions using a number of different
rhetorical tactics. This project argues that PETA pulls from different threads of identity
arguments that appeal to a wide range of individuals. In arguing against animal testing, they use
dissociation to create a corrupted and an ethical science and invite a reassessment of our
understanding of animal identity. In many of their visual campaigns, PETA encourages identity-
questioning by blurring the lines between human and animal and emphasizing shared
characteristics. Other campaigns use intertextuality to develop a story that highlights shared
substance between human and animal by comparing animal and human atrocities. This project
concludes that identity rhetoric is a vital part of contemporary social movements and rhetorical
studies must account for this change.

INDEX WORDS: Animal rights, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, PETA,
Kenneth Burke, Dissociation, Hierarchy, Perspective by Incongruity,
Analogy, Intertextuality, Identity, Identification, Social Movement
Rhetoric
IDENTITY SHIFTING: PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS AND
THE EROSION OF THE ANIMAL/HUMAN DIVIDE

by

WENDY ATKINS-SAYRE
B.A., Texas State University—San Marcos, 1994
M.A., Texas State University—San Marcos, 1996

A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

ATHENS, GEORGIA
2005
© 2005
Wendy Atkins-Sayre
All Rights Reserved
IDENTITY SHIFTING: PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS AND
THE EROSION OF THE ANIMAL/HUMAN DIVIDE

by

WENDY ATKINS-SAYRE

Major Professor: John M. Murphy

Committee: Bonnie J. Dow
Kevin M. DeLuca
Celeste M. Condit
Kathleen Clark

Electronic Version Approved:

Maureen Grasso
Dean of the Graduate School
The University of Georgia
December 2005
iv

DEDICATION
For Gillian, the most passionate animal rights activist that I know.
v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
When I began my search for a college and a major, it is not surprising that I had only
vague ideas about what I wanted to do with my life. Seeking out all kinds of advice, I can
remember asking my drama teacher what she thought my major should be when I began my
academic career. She quickly responded “Speech Communication” because it would lead me to
the law degree that I was half-heartedly convinced I wanted. It might not have been the most
inspired way to find my calling, but her advice was certainly fortuitous. That fall I entered my
freshman year as a Speech Communication major and now I graduate with my doctorate 15 years
later.
My passion for rhetoric grew out of my experiences in a wonderful department. There
were many people at Southwest Texas State University that helped shape who I am today.
Wayne Kraemer was my debate coach for 4 years and somehow lived to talk about it. That
debate experience was life-shaping (in too many ways to enumerate here!) and I thank Wayne
for giving me that opportunity and for being a good friend. Dan Cavanaugh was my first college
Speech teacher and his love of his profession (he once said to me, “How many people can
honestly say that they love their jobs? I love doing what I do.”) inspired me to begin the MA
program at Southwest Texas. Roseann Mandziuk and Tom Burkholder both introduced me to
rhetoric—and especially social movement rhetoric—and set me on the path to continue studying
rhetoric through dissent. Roseann continues to be a wonderful mentor and friend. Tom helped
my through the Master’s program in many ways: as an advisor, a like-minded political refuge,
and a friend. Both Roseann and Tom also heavily influenced my teaching styles. There are
vi
many others at (now) Texas State that influenced me, but suffice it to say that I couldn’t have
asked for a better fit for my undergraduate and the start of my graduate education.
My time at the University of Georgia has been memorable in so many ways. It has been
challenging beyond belief, but also rewarding. I spent many hours in Terrell Hall commiserating
with good friends. Thanks go to Ashli, Tasha, and Kristy who were terrific listeners. I’d
especially like to thank Ashli for keeping me sane through many of the stages of this program.
Hopefully I never added too much to your stress levels!
I’d also like to thank my committee for pushing me on this project. I had both divergent
and convergent comments from Drs. Clark, Condit, DeLuca, Dow, and Murphy that made me
think more carefully about how to craft my arguments. Dr. Murphy has been my saving grace in
this process. He was firm enough to ask those “When exactly will I see that?” questions and
understanding enough to let me work within my own timeframe.
My friends have also inspired me to finish this journey. My good friend Shellie has been
there for me since junior high. Thanks for being supportive for so many years. I’ve also made
many good friends since moving to Decatur. All of my Agnes Scott buddies have only known
me as a struggling grad student. Thanks to all of you for understanding exactly what I was going
through.
Mom and Dad and the rest of my family have also been a terrific support network.
Thanks for putting up with my crazy desires to be a student for so many years. Thanks
especially to Mom and Dad for providing a wonderful home for me—one that created a love of
reading, a desire to learn, and a passion for politics.
vii
Making the decision to enter a doctoral program was, perhaps, too easy; completing it
was another matter. There were many times over the past four years when I questioned my
decision. I want to thank my family—Ward, Gillian, and Owen—for reminding me that they
still loved me despite the “I have a paper to write… a class to attend…a class to
prepare…reading to plow through…a long commute ahead of me” barrage of excuses. I know
that the last few years have been hard on us, but we have emerged on the other side. Thanks to
Gillian and Owen for understanding and being proud of me.
Ward, I can’t begin to express what your support has meant to me. You, more than
anyone else, helped me survive these last few years and all of the challenges that went with it.
Thank you for being a terrific father, proofreader, sounding board, defender, and supplier of
coffee—just to name a few important roles. You have been a wonderful partner.
viii

PREFACE
At a recent conference, the subject of “telling the stories” behind your research emerged
from the discussion. Although I knew that I had very clear reasons for being compelled to take
up the animal rights issue in my research, I was not convinced that I needed to share my stories
with the readers of my work. As I heard more stories about the interdependence of our lived
experience and our work, however, I began to question the wisdom of “holding out,” as it were.
Our research stories are important to tell, not only because they disclose the lenses
through which we filter our readings and conclusions, but also, I think, because they remind us
of the significance of our work. As Bonnie Dow (1996) writes, “The myth of the critic as a
disinterested and wholly detached reporter has long since been deconstructed…” (p. xiii). If we
are in the business of changing the world through the study of human symbols, then we should
be comfortable explaining all of the reasons that we believe our research is important.
Concern for animals is something that has been a large part of my life. I have mourned
the loss of family pets just as I have mourned the loss of family members. I have stood on the
street with signs in hand protesting the use of animals in research. I have made the decision to
become vegetarian and to raise my children vegetarian. I admit that this outlook on animals
affects the way I read animal rights rhetoric. Closely reading all of the literature was painful for
me, often leaving me in tears and struggling to understand why this issue isn’t more important to
more people.
Consequently, I feel that I have a vested interest in understanding animal rights rhetoric.
I want to see the ultimate goal of creating a deeper understanding of animals reached. Although