Search

Copyright of Feministische Studien is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Why and how is it possible to criticize the domestication of so-called »livestock«? A critique of animal domestication means a critique of what is considered as legitimate, valid and »normal« human-animal interaction. Knowledge of the history of domesticated nonhumans is critical knowledge because it cannot accept historical and institutional circumstances as given. However, this knowledge cannot be critical without further theoretical and practical specification and enforcement. The fundamentally dissident attitude of abolitionist speakers and activists challenges the philosophical presuppositions of canonized theorists as well as the previous anthropocentric foundations of political action and thinking - and will continue to do so. In this paper, various possible reasons for critical statements about animal domestication are presented. It is intended to show some levels at which the history of livestock farming can be negotiated and perspectives that can lead to a critical handling of the history of domestication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides information on the concept of solidarity, focusing on antiracist theories and identity politics and commitment to refugees. Topics include livelihood of slavery and job protection, immense distress accompanied by cotton crisis and abolitionists. It also notes works of labor movement activists.

An article is presented on museums, residences, and monuments with historical connections to the slave trade. The author examines the historiography of sites in the US, Cuba, Brazil, and the French and British West Indies where memorials to acts of emancipation may or may not exist in or near their historical locations. A discussion of how and why these memorials were erected at their locations is included, as are generalized evaluations of their funding, structures, and themes. The author presents her findings within a contemporary human rights context for the 21st century.

The article discusses the literary record of the abolition of slavery in America in parallel with the narrative accounts of emancipated serfs in Russia in the same decade of the 1860s. Writings about those in bondage and, later, autobiographical writings of those freed from bondage in both countries are compared. The contributions of Russian writers such as Ivan Turgenev to American abolitionist newspapers are also reviewed. The living conditions, treatment, and rights of those bound in slavery versus those under serfdom are investigated.