東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Legal (Im)Personhoods: An Ecofeminis...

Muller, Stephanie Marek.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Legal (Im)Personhoods: An Ecofeminist Engagement with the Rhetorics of Animal Rights Law.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Legal (Im)Personhoods: An Ecofeminist Engagement with the Rhetorics of Animal Rights Law./
作者:	Muller, Stephanie Marek.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2018,
面頁冊數:	303 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 81-09, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International81-09B.
標題:	Rhetoric. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10935776
ISBN:	9781392363782

Legal (Im)Personhoods: An Ecofeminist Engagement with the Rhetorics of Animal Rights Law.
Muller, Stephanie Marek.

Legal (Im)Personhoods: An Ecofeminist Engagement with the Rhetorics of Animal Rights Law. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2018 - 303 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 81-09, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Utah, 2018.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

This dissertation interrogates competing rhetorics of animal rights law within the U.S. American legal system. It critiques legal discourses that undermine an ultimate goal of total liberation across species lines and offers an alternative way of knowing/critiquing/practicing animal rights legal discourse.Chapter 1 situates this dissertation within a U.S. American context. It offers a microhistory of animal law; clarifies distinctions between a "welfare" and "rights" approach; highlights diversity issues within the animal rights movement; defends "the law" as a liberatory arena; and argues that animal liberationists must grapple with their own ideological insufficiencies to promote justice.Chapter 2 advocates for Ecofeminist Legal Theory, defined through principles drawn from ecofeminism, feminist legal studies, and critical animal studies. Methodologically, it invokes ideological rhetorical criticism.Chapter 3 interrogates Steven Wise's Nonhuman Rights Project. It commends Wise's critique of animals' legal "thing-hood" under the Rule of Law and his call for the "legal personhood" of certain animals. However, the colonial tenor of Wise's rhetoric is based on troubling preferences for cognitive prowess and sufficient similarity.Chapter 4 examines animal rights advocate and lawyer Gary Francione, inventor of "vegan abolitionism." The abolitionist stance is a more complex approach to animal law that bases legal personhood in sentience alone and promotes veganism as a moral baseline. However, Francione remains bound to troubling colonial conceptions of a "good" body. Chapter 5 investigates Earth Jurisprudence, a legal paradigm drawn from radical environmentalist thought. It would grant personhood to animals, plants, and even natural objects. I commend Earth Jurisprudence for its ecocentric approach to law but problematize both its lack of pragmatism and its strategic pivoting from questions relating to animals that fall outside visions of pristine wilderness.Chapter 6 offers an alternative approach to rhetorical criticisms of animal rights law: a Vegan Ontology. It appropriates "the good" from previous chapters and puts them in conversation with ecofeminist legal principles. It advocates for pro-animal judicial decisions at the highest possible institutional levels and for grassroots activism that encourages shifts in everyday discourse about interspecies justice.

ISBN: 9781392363782Subjects--Topical Terms:

516647
Rhetoric.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Animal rights

Legal (Im)Personhoods: An Ecofeminist Engagement with the Rhetorics of Animal Rights Law.
LDR:03578nmm a2200385 4500 001 2272287
005 20201105110012.5
008 220629s2018 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781392363782
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10935776
035 $a AAI10935776
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Muller, Stephanie Marek. $3 3549722
245 1 0 $a Legal (Im)Personhoods: An Ecofeminist Engagement with the Rhetorics of Animal Rights Law.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2018
300 $a 303 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 81-09, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Hasian, Marouf.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Utah, 2018.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a This dissertation interrogates competing rhetorics of animal rights law within the U.S. American legal system. It critiques legal discourses that undermine an ultimate goal of total liberation across species lines and offers an alternative way of knowing/critiquing/practicing animal rights legal discourse.Chapter 1 situates this dissertation within a U.S. American context. It offers a microhistory of animal law; clarifies distinctions between a "welfare" and "rights" approach; highlights diversity issues within the animal rights movement; defends "the law" as a liberatory arena; and argues that animal liberationists must grapple with their own ideological insufficiencies to promote justice.Chapter 2 advocates for Ecofeminist Legal Theory, defined through principles drawn from ecofeminism, feminist legal studies, and critical animal studies. Methodologically, it invokes ideological rhetorical criticism.Chapter 3 interrogates Steven Wise's Nonhuman Rights Project. It commends Wise's critique of animals' legal "thing-hood" under the Rule of Law and his call for the "legal personhood" of certain animals. However, the colonial tenor of Wise's rhetoric is based on troubling preferences for cognitive prowess and sufficient similarity.Chapter 4 examines animal rights advocate and lawyer Gary Francione, inventor of "vegan abolitionism." The abolitionist stance is a more complex approach to animal law that bases legal personhood in sentience alone and promotes veganism as a moral baseline. However, Francione remains bound to troubling colonial conceptions of a "good" body. Chapter 5 investigates Earth Jurisprudence, a legal paradigm drawn from radical environmentalist thought. It would grant personhood to animals, plants, and even natural objects. I commend Earth Jurisprudence for its ecocentric approach to law but problematize both its lack of pragmatism and its strategic pivoting from questions relating to animals that fall outside visions of pristine wilderness.Chapter 6 offers an alternative approach to rhetorical criticisms of animal rights law: a Vegan Ontology. It appropriates "the good" from previous chapters and puts them in conversation with ecofeminist legal principles. It advocates for pro-animal judicial decisions at the highest possible institutional levels and for grassroots activism that encourages shifts in everyday discourse about interspecies justice.
590 $a School code: 0240.
650 4 $a Rhetoric. $3 516647
650 4 $a Communication. $3 524709
650 4 $a Environmental studies. $3 2122803
653 $a Animal rights
653 $a Critical animal studies
653 $a Ecofeminism
653 $a Law
653 $a Rhetoric
653 $a Vegan
690 $a 0681
690 $a 0459
690 $a 0477
710 2 $a The University of Utah. $b Communication. $3 1676360
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 81-09B.
790 $a 0240
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2018
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10935776