Animal rights activists are frequently discredited as either hypocrites or extremists, but how accurate are those labels? Are all animal rights activists either hypocrites or extremists, and why do these labels keep popping up?
Labeling Animal Rights ActivistsGerman philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer once said, "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." Calling animal rights activists "hypocrites" and "extremists" is part of the first stage of ridicule.
Change is scary, even to well-meaning people. Faced with the possibility that they have been complicit in the suffering and deaths of hundreds of farmed animals over the course of their lifetimes, many people would rather dismiss the thought than consider it seriously. An attack on animal rights activists is an indirect attack on animal rights. If all animal rights activists are either hypocrites or extremists, one does not need to consider the suffering and deaths of those hundreds of animals.
Are Animal Rights Activists Hypocrites?
According to Dictionary.com, a hypocrite is "a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs."
When it comes to animal rights, the label "hypocrite" usually refers to someone who wears leather but protests fur, or someone who eats meat but opposes hunting. Wearing leather and eating meat are inconsistent with animal rights, so these individuals should not be called "animal rights activists." But are they hypocrites? No.
A fur protestor is not necessarily saying they believe in animal rights. She may believe in an animal welfare position where certain uses of animals are acceptable and other uses may be acceptable as long as the animal is treated humanely. A person at a fur protest is just saying she opposes fur. That's all. There is no contradiction between her beliefs and her actions. She can be called a hypocrite only if you see her buying or wearing fur. The same goes for hunting. If a hunt protestor then eats a hamburger on the way home, he is not a hypocrite because he never pretended to support animal rights.
Similarly, a person who brings their cat to the veterinarian while eating meat cannot be called a hypocrite.
Are Animal Rights Activists Extremists?
The definition of "extremist" is "a supporter or advocate of extreme doctrines or practices," and the definition of "extreme" is "of a character or kind farthest removed from the ordinary or average."
Missing from the dictionary definition of "extremist" is the negative connotation and the fact that the term is pejorative. The word is almost always used as a criticism. If you look it up in a thesaurus, the synonyms include "fanatic" and "zealot," hardly words to describe someone who has chosen to peacefully defend the rights of innocent beings.
However, in the case of animal rights, there is nothing wrong with seeking solutions that are "extreme" and far from the ordinary. In the United States, the ordinary treatment of animals causes them to suffer and die on factory farms, in laboratories, on fur farms, in leghold traps, in puppy mills, and in zoos and circuses. An extreme change is needed to save animals from these fates.
Because of the negative connotations of the word "extremist," the term is not appropriate for animal rights activists who are peaceful advocates for a social justice movement.
