1st Edition

Animals and Society Critical Concepts in the Social Sciences

    2032 Pages
    by Routledge

    Animals are crucial to the functioning of any society: they provide humans with food, labour, raw materials, modes of transport, companionship, scientific knowledge through observation and experimentation, and forms of leisure and entertainment. Given both the wide variety of ways in which animals are involved in human societies, and also the broad range of controversies (from vivisection for scientific and commercial purposes, to factory farming) that have arisen, the study of animals is by its very nature interdisciplinary.

    Each social scientific discipline has distinctive and interesting things to say about the relations that pertain both historically and in the present day between humans and animals. In subjects such as anthropology and geography, the study of human-animal relations has become in recent years a key area of analysis. Other subjects, such as sociology, are now increasingly recognising the need to put animals firmly on their research agendas.

    This collection brings together the rich diversity of research work from across the social sciences on the topic of human-animal relations, and also provides overviews of research that has been carried out within particular disciplines in this area.

    Animals and Society


    1. E. Fudge, ‘A Left-Handed Blow: Writing the History of Animals’, in N. Rothfels, ed., Representing Animals, (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002), pp. 3-18.
    2. John Berger, ‘Why Look at Animals?’, in About Looking, (London: Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative Ltd, 1980), pp. 1-26.
    3. John Passmore, ‘The Treatment of Animals’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 36, 2, 1975, pp. 195-218.
    4. P. Waldau, ‘Religion and Animals’, in P. Singer, ed., In Defense of Animals: The Second Wave, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006), pp. 69-83.
    5. Harriet Ritvo, ‘The Nature of the Beast’, in The Animal Estate: The English and Other Creatures in the Victorian Age, (London: Penguin Books, 1987), pp.1-42.
    6. J. E. Salisbury, ‘Human Beasts and Bestial Humans in the Middle Ages’, in J. Ham and M. Senior, eds., Animal Acts: Configuring the Human in Western History, (New York: Routledge, 1997), pp. 9-21.
    7. Kathleen Kete, ‘The Embourgeoisement of the Beast’, in The Beast in the Boudoir: Petkeeping in Nineteenth-Century Paris, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994), pp. 39-55.
    8. Kay Anderson, ‘Culture and Nature at the Adelaide Zoo: At the Frontiers of ‘Human’ Geography’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 20, 3, 1995, pp. 275-294.
    9. Vicki Croke, ‘The Future: Revolution in Style and Substance’, in The Modern Ark. The Story of Zoos: Past, Present and Future, (New York: Scribner, 1997), pp. 239-254.
    10. Stephen Kellert, ‘Attitudes, Knowledge, and Behaviour toward Wildlife among the Industrial Superpowers: United States, Japan, and Germany’, Journal of Social Issues, 49, 1, 1993, pp. 53-69.
    11. P. J. Asquith, ‘Why Anthropomorphism is Not Metaphor: Crossing Concepts and Cultures in Animal Behaviour Studies’, in R. W. Mitchell, N. S. Thompson and H. L. Miles, eds., Anthropomorphism, Anecdotes and Animals, (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997), pp. 22-34.
    12. Steve Baker, ‘Is It Real or Is It Disney?: Unravelling the Animal System’, in Picturing the Beast: Animals, Identity and Representation, (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993), pp. 165-186. also published in Picturing the Beast, 2nd edition, with a foreword by Carol J Adams, (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2001).
    13. R. Lockwood, ‘Anthropomorphism Is Not A Four-Letter Word’, in R. J. Hoage, ed., Perceptions of Animals in American Culture, (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1989), pp. 41-56.
    14. K. Milton, ‘Anthropomorphism or Egomorphism? The Perception of Non-human Persons by Human Ones’, in J. Knight, ed., Animals in Person: Cultural Perspectives on Human-Animal Intimacy, (Oxford: Berg, 2005), pp. 255-271.


    16. E. Leach, ‘Anthropological Aspects of Language: Animal Categories and Verbal Abuse’, in E. H. Lenneberg, ed., New Directions in the Study of Language, (Cambridge: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 1964), pp. 23-63.
    17. John Halverson, ‘Animal Categories and Terms of Abuse’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Man (New Series), 11, 4, 1976, pp. 505-516.
    18. S. J. Tambiah, ‘Animals are Good to Think and Good to Prohibit’, Ethnology, 8, 4, 1969, pp. 423-459.
    19. Orvar Löfgren, ‘Our Friends in Nature: Class and Animal Symbolism’, Ethnos, 50, 1985, pp. 184-213.
    20. Molly H. Mullin, ‘Mirrors and Windows: Sociocultural Studies of Human-Animal Relationships’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 28, 1999, pp. 201-224.
    21. G. Elder, J. Wolch and J. Emel, ‘Le Pratique Sauvage: Race, Place and the Human-Animal Divide’, in J. Wolch and J. Emel, eds., Animal Geographies: Place, Politics, and Identity in the Nature-Culture Borderlands, (London: Verso, 1998), pp. 72-90.
    22. O. Jones, ‘(Un)ethical Geographies of Human-Non-Human Relations: Encounters, Collectives and Spaces’, in C. Philo and C. Wilbert, eds., Animal Spaces, Beastly Places: New Geographies of Human-Animal Relations, (London: Routledge, 2000), pp. 268-291.
    23. Chris Philo, ‘Animals, Geography, and the City: Notes on Inclusions and Exclusions’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 13, 6, 1995, pp. 655-681.
    24. C. Philo and C. Wilbert, ‘Animal Spaces, Beastly Places’, in C. Philo and C. Wilbert, eds., Animal Spaces, Beastly Places: New Geographies of Human-Animal Relations, (London: Routledge, 2000) pp. 1-34.
    25. Jennifer Wolch, ‘Anima Urbis’, Progress in Human Geography, 26, 6, 2002, pp. 721-742.

    27. Carol J. Adams, ‘The Sexual Politics of Meat’, in The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory, (New York: Continuum, 1990 [2000]), pp.35-49.
    28. Deborah Slicer, ‘Your Daughter or Your Dog? A Feminist Assessment of the Animal Research Issue’, Hypatia, 6, 1, 1991, pp.108-124.
    29. Josephine Donovan, ‘Animal Rights and Feminist Theory’, Signs, 15, 2, 1990, pp. 350-375.
    30. G. Gaard, ‘Living Interconnections with Animals and Nature’, in G. Gaard, ed., Ecofeminism: Women, Animals, Nature, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1993), pp. 1-12.
    31. Lynda Birke, ‘The Renaming of the Shrew’, in Feminism, Animals and Science: The Naming of the Shrew, (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1994), pp, 131-151.
    32. Donna J. Haraway, ‘Syntactics: The Grammar of Feminism and Technoscience’, in Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium.FemaleMan©_Meets_OncoMouse™ Feminism and Technoscience, (New York: Routledge, 1997), pp.1-16.
    33. Mette Bryld and Nina Lykke, ‘Map of Matrices’, in Cosmodolphins: Feminist Cultural Studies of Technology, Animals and the Sacred, (London: Zed Books, 2000), pp. 25-43.
    34. VOLUME III

    35. Read Bain, ‘The Culture of Canines: A Note on Subhuman Sociology’, Sociology and Social Research, 13, 1928, pp. 545-556.
    36. Ted Benton, ‘Marx on Humans and Animals: Humanism or Naturalism’, in Natural Relations: Ecology, Animal Rights and Social Justice, (London: Verso, 1993), pp. 23-57.
    37. Adrian Franklin, ‘From Modernity to Postmodernity’ in Animals and Modern Cultures: A Sociology of Human-Animal Relations in Modernity, (London: Sage, 1999), pp. 34-61.
    38. David Nibert, ‘The Social Construction of Speciesist Reality’, in Animal Rights/Human Rights: Entanglements of Oppression and Liberation, (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc, 2002), pp. 195-235.
    39. Clifton D. Bryant, ‘The Zoological Connection: Animal-Related Human Behaviour’, Social Forces, 58, 1, 1979, pp. 399-421.
    40. Jay Meddin, ‘Chimpanzees, Symbols and the Reflective Self’, Social Psychology Quarterly, 42, 2, 1979, 99-109.
    41. Arnold Arluke and Clinton R. Sanders, ‘Learning from Animals’, in Regarding Animals, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996), pp. 41-57.
    42. Janet M. Alger and Steven F. Alger, ‘Beyond Mead: Symbolic Interaction between Humans and Felines’, Society and Animals, 5, 1, 1997, pp.65-81.
    43. Olin E. Myers, ‘No Longer the Lonely Species: A Post-Mead Perspective on Animals and Sociology’, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23, 3, 2003, pp. 46-68.
    44. Janet M. Alger and Steven F. Alger, ‘Cat Culture, Human Culture: An Ethnographic Study of a Cat Shelter’, Society and Animals, 7, 3, 1999, pp. 199-218.
    45. Clinton R. Sanders, ‘Actions Speak Louder than Words: Close Relationships between Humans and Nonhuman Animals’, Symbolic Interaction, 26, 3, 2003, pp. 405-426.
    46. Leslie Irvine, ‘Self versus Other: The Core Self’, in If You Tame Me: Understanding Our Connection with Animals, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004), pp. 126-146.
    47. Arnold Arluke, ‘Sacrificial Symbolism in Experimentation: Object or Pet?’, Anthrozoös, 2, 2, 1988, pp. 98-117.
    48. Sue-Ellen Brown, ‘The Human-Animal Bond and Self Psychology: Toward a New Understanding’, Society and Animals, 12, 1, 2004, pp. 67-86.
    49. Glyn M. Collis and June McNicholas, ‘A Theoretical Basis for Health Benefits of Pet Ownership: Attachment versus Psychological Support’, in C. C. Wilson and D. C. Turner, eds., Companion Animals in Human Health, (London: Sage, 1998), pp. 105-122.
    50. Adelma M. Hills, ‘The Motivational Bases of Attitudes toward Animals’, Society and Animals, 1, 2, 1993, pp. 111-128.
    51. David Katz, ‘Introduction: ‘Clever Hans’’, in Animals and Men: Studies in Comparative Psychology, (Melbourne: Penguin Books, 1953), pp. 13-27.
    52. K A. H. Kidd and R. M. Kidd, ‘Seeking a Theory of the Human/Companion Animal Bond’, Anthrozoös, 1, 3, 1987, pp. 140-145.
    53. E. S. Paul, ‘Love of Pets and Love of People’, in A. L. Podberscek, E. S. Paul and J. A. Serpell, eds., Companion Animals and Us: Exploring the Relationships between People and Pets, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 168-186.


    55. James A. Serpell, ‘Pet-Keeping in Non-Western Societies: Some Popular Misconceptions’, Anthrozoös, 1, 3, 1987, pp. 166-174.
    56. Harriet Ritvo, ‘The Emergence of Modern Pet-Keeping’, Anthrozoös, 1, 3, 1987, pp. 158-165.
    57. Yi-Fu Tuan, ‘Introduction’, in Dominance and Affection: The Making of Pets, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984), pp. 1-6.
    58. Marc Shell, ‘The Family Pet’, Representations, 15, 1986, pp. 121-153.
    59. Jean E. Veevers, ‘The Social Meanings of Pets: Alternative Roles for Companion Animals’, Marriage and Family Review, 8, 1, 1985, pp. 11-30.
    60. E. Friedmann, ‘The Role of Pets in Enhancing Human Well-Being: Physiological Effects’, in I. Robinson, ed., The Waltham Book of Human-Animal Interaction: Benefits and Responsibilities of Pet Ownership, (Exeter: Pergamon, 1995), pp. 33-53.
    61. Alan M. Beck and Aaron H. Katcher, ‘Future Directions in Human-Animal Bond Research’, The American Behavioural Scientist, 47, 1, 2003, pp. 79-93.
    62. P. S. Arkow and S. Dow, ‘The Ties That Do Not Bind: A Study of the Human-Animal Bonds that Fail’, in R. Anderson, B. Hart and L. Hart, eds., The Pet Connection: Its Influence on Our Health and Quality if Life, (Minneapolis: Center to Study Human-Animal Relationships and Environments, 1984), pp. 348-354.
    63. J. Swabe, ‘Veterinary Dilemmas: Ambiguity and Ambivalence in Human-Animal Interaction’ in A. L. Podberscek, E. S. Paul and J. A. Serpell, eds., Companion Animals and Us: Exploring the Relationships Between people and Pets, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 292-311.
    64. Leslie Irvine, ‘Pampered or Enslaved? The Moral Dilemmas of Pets’, The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 24, 9, 2004, pp. 5-17.
    65. Eugenia Shanklin, ‘Sustenance and Symbol: Anthropological Studies of Domesticated Animals’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 14, 1985, pp. 375-403.
    66. Stephen Budiansky, ‘Visions of Nature’, in The Covenant of the Wild: Why Animals Chose Domestication, (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1992), pp. 1-17.
    67. T. Ingold, ‘From Trust to Domination: An Alternative History of Human-Animal Relations’, in A. Manning and J. Serpell, eds., Animals and Human Society: Changing Perspectives, (London: Routledge, 1994), pp. 1-22.
    68. Rhoda Wilkie, ‘Sentient Commodities and Productive Paradoxes: The Ambiguous Nature of Human-Livestock Relations in Northeast Scotland’, Journal of Rural Studies, 21, 2, 2005, pp. 213-230.
    69. Matt Cartmill, ‘A View to A Death in the Morning’, in A View to A Death in the Morning: Hunting and Nature through History’, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993), pp. 225-245.
    70. Heidi Dahles, ‘Game Killing and Killing Games: An Anthropologist Looking at Hunting in A Modern Society’, Society and Animals, 1, 2, 1993, pp. 169-184.
    71. W. Thompson, ‘Hanging Tongues: A Sociological Encounter with the Assembly Line’, Qualitative Sociology, 6, 3, 1983, pp. 215-237.
    72. F.A. Ascione, ‘The Abuse of Animals and Human Interpersonal Violence: Making the Connection’, in F. Ascione and P. Arkow, eds., Child Abuse, Domestic Violence, and Animal Abuse: Linking the Circles of Compassion for Prevention and Intervention, (Indiana: Purdue University Press, 1999), pp. 50-61.
    73. Clifton P. Flynn, ‘Acknowledging the "Zoological Connection": A Sociological Analysis of Animal Cruelty’, Society and Animals, 9, 1, 2001, pp. 71-87
    74. Stephanie S. Frommer and Arnold Arluke, ‘Loving them to Death: Blame-Displacing Strategies of Animal Shelter Workers and Surrenderers’, Society and Animals, 7, 1, 1999, pp. 1-16.
    75. Clinton R. Sanders, ‘Killing with Kindness: Veterinary Euthanasia and the Social Construction of Personhood’, Sociological Forum, 10, 2, 1995, pp. 195-214.
    76. Helen Davis, Peter Irwin, Michelle Richardson, Angela O’Brien-Malone, ‘When A Pet Dies: Religious Issues, Euthanasia and Strategies for Coping with Bereavement’, Anthrozoös, 16, 1, 2003, pp. 57-74.

      VOLUME V

    78. Mary Midgley, ‘Have We A Nature?’, in Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature’, (London: Methuen, 1978), pp. 3-24.
    79. Ingold, ‘Introduction’, in T. Ingold, ed., What is An Animal?, (London: Routledge, 1994), pp. 1-16.
    80. Marian S. Dawkins, ‘Through Your Eyes Only?’, in Through Our Eyes Only: The Search for Animal Consciousness, (Oxford: W.H. Freeman Spektrum, 1993), pp. 1-16.
    81. Donald R. Griffin, ‘The Significance of Animal Consciousness’, in Animal Minds, (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992), pp. 233-260.
    82. William A. Hillix and Duane M. Rumbaugh, ‘An Overview of Animal Language’, in Animal Bodies, Human Minds: Ape, Dolphin, and Parrot Language Skills, (New York: Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, 2004), pp. 9-24.
    83. C. Wolfe, ‘In The Shadow of Wittgenstein’s Lion: Language, Ethics, and the Question of the Animal’, in C. Wolfe, ed., Zoontologies: The Question of the Animal, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003), pp. 1- 57.
    84. Peter Singer, ‘All Animals are Equal…’, in Animal Liberation, (London: Pimlico, 1995), pp. 1-23.
    85. Piers Beirne, ‘The Use and Abuse of Animals in Criminology: A Brief History and Current Review’, Social Justice, 22, 1, 1995, pp. 5-31.
    86. Gary L. Francione, ‘The Problem: "Unnecessary" Suffering and the "Humane" Treatment of Property’, in Animals, Property, and the Law, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1995), pp. 17-32.
    87. David Favre, ‘Equitable Self-Ownership for Animals’, Duke Law Journal, 50, 2, 2000, pp. 473-502.
    88. Steven M. Wise, ‘One Step at A Time’, in Drawing the Line: Science and the Case for Animal Rights, (Cambridge: Perseus Books, 2002), pp. 9-34.
    89. Robert Garner, ‘Political Ideologies and the Moral Status of Animals’, Journal of Political Ideologies, 8, 2, 2003, pp. 233-246.
    90. D. J. Wolfson and M. Sullivan, ‘Foxes in the Hen House: Animals, Agribusiness, and the Law: A Modern American Fable’, in C. R. Sunstein and M. C. Nussbaum, eds., Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 205-233.
    91. Jerrold Tannenbaum, ‘Veterinary Medical Ethics: A Focus of Conflicting Interests’, Journal of Social Issues, 49, 1, 1993, pp. 143-156.
    92. Brenda Almond, ‘Commodifying Animals: Ethical Issues in Genetic Engineering of Animals’, Health, Risk and Society, 2, 1, 2000, pp.95-105.
    93. Nick Brown and Mike Michael, ‘Risky Creatures: Institutional Species Boundary Change in Biotechnology Regulation’, Health, Risk and Society, 6, 3, 2004, pp. 207-222.
    94. J. Burkhardt, ‘The Inevitability of Animal Biotechnology? Ethics and the Scientific Attitude’, in A. Holland and A. Johnson, eds., Animal Biotechnology and Ethics, (London: Chapman and Hall, 1998), pp. 114-132.
    95. Phil Macnaghten, ‘Animals in their Nature: A Case Study on Public Attitudes to Animals, Genetic Modification and ‘Nature’’, Sociology, 38, 3, 2004, pp. 533-551.


    Rhoda Wilkie is Lecturer in Sociology at the University of Aberdeen. She writes in the area of animal –human interactions.

    David Inglis is Senior Lecturer in Sociology at the University of Aberdeen. He writes in the areas of social theory and the sociology of culture, with especial reference to the nature/culture interface. He is author of numerous books in these areas, including Confronting Culture: Sociological Vistas, and Culture and Everyday Life (also published by Routledge).