Afterword

In this chapter, the author discusses questions related to prisoner and animal rights movements, framing them within the limits of the legal and political frameworks. These, for the most part, remain intractably connected to welfarist/reformist and abolitionist prisoner and animal liberation movements that tend to be based upon ultimately unstable human–animal divisions. Acknowledging the limitations of hierarchical, taxonomic, humanist, and speciesist carceral logics is fundamental to moving forward in developing what C. J. Kim and Irus Braverman put forward as meaningful &s;multi-optic&s; post-humanist ways of thinking needed to challenge the everyday norms of violence intrinsic to industrial production in the United States. The author continues her discussion of the potential for a non-anthropocentric ethics in seeking justice for incarcerated humans and captive animals. C. Rasmussen troubles the assumption that &s;seeing&s; something violent or troubling transforms peoples&s; ethical sensibilities or leads to particular forms of political action.

Animal Law and Welfare · Geographies of human-animal interactions · Philosophy · Posthumanist Ethics and Activism