Notes
- 1.
- 2.
Other species do not always share the traits we primarily use for perception and communication – not all mammals for example have binocular vision, something which profoundly shapes our (visual) view of the world. Yet there is enormous common ground. And millennia of shared lives has resulted in some species becoming adept at recognizing our meaning. Dogs, particularly, can easily read human gestures (Topál and Gásci 2012). These skills are critical to interspecies communication. Humans, of course, can also build relationality at a distance, by means of technology. Even so, the technologies we have depend upon the human body and its particular capabilities (e.g. vision, hearing).
- 3.
We acknowledge here that there is some degree of domination, in that animals have fewer choices and are located firmly within a sociocultural framework in which animals are, indeed, dominated and abused. Nevertheless, there are possibilities, sometimes, for companion animals to experience pleasure in relatings with us (see Cudworth 2011) – and perhaps even to enjoy shared activities.
- 4.
The hormone oxytocin, for example, often called the “bonding hormone,” is released by both dog and person when they gaze at each other (Nagasawa et al. 2015).
- 5.
However, this perspective could be accused of speaking to the same liberal ontology that we argued against above. What would a politics that can take collectives into account look like (see Holmberg 2015)?
- 6.
There is growing recognition of animal sentience in legislative systems – European legislation, for example, acknowledges animal sentience. But there are also increasing demands for at least some species to be accorded rights broadly analogous to human rights (great apes for instance). For further discussion of the issue of animals and citizenship, see Donaldson and Kymlicka (2011).
References
Acampora, Ralph R. 2006. Corporal compassion: Animal ethics and philosophy of body. Pittsburg: University of Pittsburg Press.
Adams, Carol. 1990. The politics of meat. Cambridge: Polity.
Agamben, Giorgio. 2004. The open: Man and animal. Stanford: University of Stanford Press.
Argent, Gala. 2012. Toward a privileging of the nonverbal communication, corporeal synchrony, and transcendence in humans and horses. In Experiencing animal minds: An anthology of animal-human encounters, eds. Julie A. Smith, and Robert W. Mitchell, 111–128. New York: Columbia University Press.
Bekoff, Marc. 2002. Minding animals: Awareness, emotions and heart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Birke, L. 2003. Who – or what – are the rats (and mice) in the laboratory? Society and Animals 11, 207–224.
Birke, Lynda. 2009. ‘What’s in it for the animals?’ Humanimalia 1(1) [published online].
Birke, L. and Brandt, K. 2009. Mutual corporeality: gender and human-horse relationships. Women’s Studies International Forum. 32: 189–97.
Birke, Lynda, Mette Bryld, and Nina Lykke. 2004. Animal performances: An exploration of intersections between feminist science studies and studies of human/animal relationships. Feminist Theory 5: 167–183.
Birke, Lynda, and Jo Hockenhull. 2015. Journeys together: Horses and humans in partnership. Society and Animals 23: 81–100.
Birke, L., J. Hockenhull, E. Creighton, L. Pinno, J. Mee, and D. Mills. 2011. Horses’ responses to variation in human approach. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 134: 56–63.
Braidotti, Rosi. 2008. Transpositions. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Buller, Henry. 2012. Nourishing communities: Animal vitalities and food quality. In Crossing boundaries: Investigating human-animal relationships, eds. Lynda Birke, and Jo Hockenhull, 51–72. Leiden: Brill.
Butler, Judith. 1993. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of ‘Sex’. London: Routledge.
Cat Ladies. 2008. [Film] Toronto: Chocolate Box Entertainment.
Charles, N. 2014. ‘Animals just love you as you are’: Experiencing Kinship across the species barrier. Sociology 48, 715–730.
Cudworth, Erika. 2011. Social lives with other animals: Tales of sex, death and love. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Davis, Kathy. 2008. Intersectionality as buzzword: A sociology of science perspective on what makes a feminist theory successful. Feminist Theory 9(1): 67–85.
Deckha, Maneesha. 2012. Toward a postcolonial, posthumanist feminist theory: Centralizing race and culture in feminist work on nonhuman animals. Hypatia 27: 527–545.
Despret, Vinciane. 2004. The body we care for: Figures of anthropo-zoo-genesis. Body and Society 10(2–3): 111–134.
Donaldson, Sue, and Will Kymlicka. 2011. Zoopolis: A political theory of animal rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Donovan, Josephine. 2007. Animal rights and feminist theory. In The feminist care tradition in animal ethics, eds. Josephine Donovan, and Carol J. Adams, 58–86. New York: Columbia University Press.
Frost, Samantha. 2010. Reconsidering the turn to biology in feminist theory. Feminist Theory 15: 307–326.
Gaard, Greta. 2011. Ecofeminism revisited: Rejecting essentialism and re-placing species in a material feminist environmentalism. Feminist Formations 23: 26–53.
Game, Ann. 2001. Riding: Embodying the centaur. Body and Society 7: 1–12.
Haraway, Donna. 2003. The companion species manifesto: Dogs, people and significant otherness. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press.
Haraway, Donna. 2008. When species meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Hayward, Eva. 2010. FingeryEyes, impressions of cup corals. Cultural Anthropology 25(4): 577–599.
Higgin, Marc. 2012. On being guided by dogs. In Crossing boundaries: Investigating human-animal interactions, eds. Lynda Birke, Jo Hockenhull, 73–89. Leiden: Brill.
Holmberg, Tora. 2008. Discussions on biology. Gender scholars talk about bodily matters. Crossroads of Knowledge, no. 6, Centre for Gender Research: Uppsala University.
Holmberg, Tora. 2011. Mortal love. Care practices in animal experimentation. Feminist Theory 12(2): 147–163.
Holmberg, Tora. 2014. Sensuous governance: Assessing urban animal hoarding. Housing, Theory and Society 31(4): 464–479.
Holmberg, Tora. 2015. Urban animals. Crowding in zoocities. London: Routledge.
Irvine, Leslie. 2004. If you tame me: Understanding our connection with animals. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Lagarde, Julien, Christian Peham, Theresia Licka and J.A. Scott Kelso. 2005. Coordination dynamics of the horse-rider system. Journal of Motor Behavior 37: 418–424.
Lykke, Nina. 2005. Nya perspektiv på intersektionalitet. Problem och möjligheter. Kvinnovetenskaplig Tidskrift 2–3: 7–17.
McWeeny, Jennifer. 2014. Topographies of flesh: Women, nonhuman animals, and the embodiment of connection and difference. Hypatia 29: 269–286.
Nagasawa, Miho, Shouhei Mitsui, Shiori En, Nobuyo Ohtani, Mitsuaki Ohta, Yasuo Sakuma, Tatsushi Onaka, Kazutaka Mogi, and Takefumi Kikusui. 2015. Oxytocin-gaze positive Loop and the coevolution of human-dog bonds. Science 348(6232): 333–336.
Peggs, Kay. 2012. Animals and sociology. Basingstoke: Palgrave McMillan.
Redmalm, David. 2013. An animal without an animal within. The powers of pet keeping. PhD Dissertation. Örebro University: Örebro.
Sanders, Clinton R. 1999. Understanding Dogs. Living and Working with Canine Companions, Temple University Press: Philadelphia.
Shildrick, Margrit. 2010. Some reflections on the socio-cultural and bioscientific limits of bodily integrity. Body and Society 16(3): 11–22.
Skeggs, Beverley. 2001. Feminist Ethnography. In A handbook of ethnography, eds. Paul Atkinson, Amanda Coffey, Sara Delamont, John Lofland, Lyn Lofland, 426–443. London: Sage.
Smart, Carol. 2011. Ways of knowing: Crossing species boundaries. Methodological Innovations Online 6(3): 27–38.
Smith, Stephen. 2011. Becoming horse in the duration of the moment: The trainer’s challenge. Phenomenology and Practice 5(1): 7–26.
Spivak, Gayatri C. 2006. In other worlds. Essays in cultural politics. London: Routledge.
Stuart, Susan A. J. 2013. The union of two nervous systems: Neurophenomenology, enkinaesthesia, and the alexander technique. Constructivist Foundations 8: 314–323.
Topál, J. and Gásci, M. 2012. Lessons we should learn from our unique relationship with dogs: an ethological approach. In: Crossing Boundaries: Investigating Human-Animal Relationships, L. Birke & J. Hockenhull (eds), 161–186. Leiden: Brill.
Wemelsfelder, Françoise. 2012. A science of friendly pigs ... carving out a conceptual space for addressing animals as sentient beings. In Crossing boundaries: Investigating human-animal relationships, eds. Lynda Birke, and Jo Hockenhull, 223–249. Leiden: Brill.
Wolfe, Cary. 2003. Animal rites: American culture, the discourse of species, and posthumanist theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Birke, L., Holmberg, T. (2018). Intersections: The Animal Question Meets Feminist Theory. In: Åsberg, C., Braidotti, R. (eds) A Feminist Companion to the Posthumanities. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62140-1_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62140-1_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-62138-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-62140-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)