The palgrave international handbook of a 189

182

N. Taylor and H. Fraser

(see Ben-Ami et al. 2014), the international exchange of animals and their
body parts, whether for bushmeat (see Bowen-Jones 2003), for medicine,
fashion or ornamental reasons (see chapter on the International Trade in
Animal Parts herein).

Nature
While it is tempting to polarise the issues, explaining the nature and extent of
animal slaughter is far more complex in some ways. Not all readers will, for
example, accept the argument that slaughter is institutionalised animal abuse.
This is because intent to harm is (usually) missing and because there are several
layers of welfare statutes in place to ostensibly ‘protect’ animals whose sole
purpose is to be farmed for human consumption. However, the reality is that
this welfare framework serves to turn attention away from the systemic and
institutionalised nature of slaughterhouse violence by perpetuating the idea
that animal welfare is paramount in the food chain. As Regan (2001, p. 34)
argues, ‘it should not be surprising that the loudest, most powerful voices
speaking in the name of animal welfare today are those of individuals who have
an interest in perpetuating institutionalized utilization of nonhuman animals.
By this I mean that those who identify themselves with the cause of animal
welfare increasingly are those who speak for the commercial animal agriculture
community.’ This goes some way to explaining the ongoing existence and
acceptance of slaughterhouses despite widespread claims to take animal welfare
seriously, that is, that welfare legislation regarding the rearing and slaughtering
of animals is developed within, and broadly supports, the animal industrial
complex (AIC); a concept we turn to shortly.

Carnistic Defenses

Slaughterhouse violence to animals is predominantly hidden (see for example, Pachirat 2011; Wicks 2011) and generally accepted. While these two
points are connected, it is simplistic to assume that it is accepted only because
it is out of sight. Rather, while removing slaughterhouses and the work that
goes on in them from sight is a prerequisite to the acceptance of them, this is
but one part of a much larger ideological whole that supports the rearing,
breeding, killing and consuming of animals as food. As Vialles (1994, p. 66)
points out, modern cultural sensibilities (see Elias 2000) dictated a need to
‘render invisible what used to be a bloody spectacle’, which allows their