What is it like to be a dedicated animal advocate? Mainstream society tends to ignore this issue because it is not comfortable, convenient, or popular. It is easier to call the animal activist names, such as kook, psycho, terrorist, or traitor to their species.
Warning: Those who believe humans to be superior to other life forms will undoubtedly take offense at the passages below, just as Nazis would have been offended by Germans who defended Jews. “How dare you equate them with us!” is a comment I have heard more than once while advocating for nonhumans.
People tend to demonize animals and glorify humans; thus, they often become indignant, even outraged, when the plight of the former is compared with the plight of the latter. But it is important that the feelings and experiences of the average animal rights (AR) activist be communicated.
Issac Bashevis Singer was a Jewish-American novelist and the recipient of the 1978 Nobel Prize for Literature. His words, which touch on the Nazi discussion above, are particularly relevant: “What do they know—all these scholars, all these philosophers, all the leaders of the world … . They have convinced themselves that man, the worst transgressor of all the species, is the crown of creation. All other creatures were created merely to provide him with food, pelts, to be tormented, exterminated. In relation to them, all people are Nazis; for the animals it is an eternal Treblinka.”
I would like to expand on this. True, the world is a hellhole, slaughterhouse, and never-ending Auschwitz from the perspective of nonhumans. But this is also the perspective of many (if not most) dedicated animal activists, whether they publicly admit it or not.
The activist knows it is impossible to eliminate the wall-to-wall human arrogance, the rampant complacency, and the prejudice for anything not human. The problem is just too widespread. She feels helpless, distraught, and often angry. It is an emotional nightmare. Is she an alien? She feels like she comes from a different planet and has been dropped into a place she cannot understand. She is constantly shaking her head in disbelief. How can so many people not care while claiming to be moral? Do they not see their hypocrisy? How can they not recognize what they do to innocent nonhumans while condemning Bin Laden, Jeffrey Dahmer, and others who kill their own precious species?
She quickly realizes that most people do not want to open their eyes. They have no interest in giving up their luxuries: their dead animal food, their fur coats, their zoo exhibits, their animal circus acts, their bullfighting and backyard cockfighting, their inhumane horse races (over 900 thoroughbreds died in 2022 alone), and their fancy cosmetics, which are often tested by mutilating rabbits, guinea pigs, and other victims in labs.
They prefer to ignore the fact that millions of male baby chicks are thrown alive into electric grinding machines because the factory farm system has no use for them. Or, as an alternative, they are dumped into huge plastic bags and piled up like trash, one live chick on top of another until they all suffocate. Most people wish to ignore the fact that a hen lives her entire life in darkness, on a painful wire surface, crammed into a seven-by-nine-inch area while feces falls onto her head. After a hellish, short life, she is murdered—many years before a natural death.
Offensive images and aggressive language slam into the AR activist every day. It is like being sandwiched between two Mack trucks. It is inescapable. The brutal images and words are depicted on billboards and in TV commercials (even those pitching non-animal products such as insurance and vacation packages). They are prevalent in movies and newspaper articles, on plates in restaurants, in grocery stores, in social media posts, and in conversations at the park. Every group imaginable—Democrats, Republicans, capitalists, socialists, and even most environmental groups—seems to be complicit.
Dead animal meals are often served at environmental fundraisers despite the fact that meat is a major cause of climate change. Vice President Al Gore conveniently omitted the discussion of food from his environmental book An Inconvenient Truth. Meat is a taboo subject; it is considered too controversial to be mentioned. Asking members of environmental organizations to eliminate it from their diets or eat less of it might lead to a loss of donations. Meat is a symbol of power and masculinity. As Forbes states, it is “extremely hard to ask people to change their habits.”
Society expects the AR activist to keep a stiff upper lip. She is supposed to suffer in silence. She is expected to tolerate images of corpses and verbal grenades—despite the fact that it seems like every other “offended group” is catered to in today’s woke society. Special groups get “safe zones.” Statues are removed. The names of schools are changed. Some of Dr. Seuss’s books have been discontinued due to problematic content. The list goes on. But the AR activist enjoys no such consideration. She is implicitly told, “Those groups matter, but you and the nonhuman victims can go to hell.”
For those of you who cannot relate to my Nazi analogy, I will provide another example. Let us assume you are trapped on an island with thousands of adults and children. There are fruits, vegetables, and grains to eat, but the brown-haired people (Brunts) believe the redheaded people (Reds) are inferior beings. The Brunts behead the Reds, cut off their limbs, and fry or bake the parts for consumption. The Reds are used in painful lab testing and dissected in middle school science classes. The Brunts make fashionable polka-dot purses out of the freckled skin of Reds and show them off to their peers. There are images of dead Reds (or their body parts) everywhere: on television, in newspapers, and on billboards. The billboards depict so-called yummy images of Red ribs, fried Red legs, and Red Velvet Cake (a delicacy made from the livers, intestines, and tongues of redheads). The place is abuzz with racist talk and well-stocked with subtle messaging that seek to confirm the inferiority of Reds.
Although you are a privileged Brunt (with flowing brunette hair), you empathize with the Reds and want to protect them. You hate the prejudice, arrogance, and suffering, but you are outnumbered. Brunts have all the power. When you speak out, you are marginalized. You are called a kook, a radical, or mentally ill. You become a victim of “cancel culture,” losing your job. If you try to rescue a Red, you will be jailed and possibly tagged as a terrorist. There is no “right to rescue.” If you try to videotape a Red in distress in the “agriculture area” or the “vivisection zone,” you are punished. The torture and annihilation of redheads is legal, and it is designed to occur in secrecy. Videotaping is prohibited. You feel helpless and defeated. You feel like an alien and an outcast.
The government on this island is a Brunt-ocracy. It is of, by, and for the Brunts. Laws, culture, and the political system exist to benefit Brunts. The Reds have no standing in court. Brunts have dominion. Reds are perceived as mere objects, put on the island for the benefit of the Brunts. After all, the sacred doctrine says so. It is argued, “The Supreme Being agrees.”
Brunette mommies and daddies teach their brunette children about the intelligence and goodness of Brunts. Reds are either disparaged or omitted from the conversation. Instructors teach the Brunt children, both implicitly and explicitly, that Reds are lesser and lack free will. They say, “Reds operate due to instinct. They are subordinate.” Reds are raised to be meat, lab victims, articles of clothing, dissection tools, or entertainment for Brunts. They are no more valuable than a lamp or sofa. Apart from their usefulness to Brunts, they are as worthless as trash.
What would it be like to be trapped on this island without the possibility of escape? And without an ability to change the entrenched system? Would you feel rage and sorrow? Would you feel paralyzed and powerless? If so, you can identify with the AR activist’s heart.
______________
Charlotte Laws, Ph.D. is the author of two 2025 books: Omniocracy: A Government that Represents All Living Beings and the eco-thriller, Elevator People. She is also the star of the Netflix show, The Most Hated Man on the Internet. You can follow her on X @CharlotteLaws
Article was published in Z Net magazine on 11/1/2025.