The reintegration of animals and slaughter into discourses of meat eating

  • J. GutjahrEmail author


In my paper I analyze, how the slaughter of nonhuman animals is legitimated and framed in recent media discourses on ‘responsible’ meat consumption, and which role these phenomena play concerning ambivalences in the human-animal relationship. In modernity, specific strategies and social techniques have rendered the animals, which are killed within the system of meat production, invisible, and have served to cover up the violence against them. Recently, however, there is a new movement towards re-visualization of animals within the meat-production process. Here, contrary to regular discourses on meat-eating, the animal is very much present, and consumers actively acknowledge the fact, that animals have to be killed for their food. Through analyzing the content of depictions of German media and popular culture dealing with the process of (‘do-it-yourself’) slaughter and ‘responsible’ meat consumption, I will show, that the new visualization of animals and slaughter is embedded in a set of complex and ideological strategies, and that those phenomena can be interpreted as a reaction to current debates on the issues of intensive animal husbandry and meat consumption.


meat consumption ‘happy meat’ ambivalences in the human-animal relationship 


  1. Adams, C.J. (2010). The sexual politics of meat. A feminist-vegetarian critical theory. Continuum, New York/London, USA/UK, 339 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Anonymous (2011). Available at
  3. Anonymous (2012a). Pro vs. Contra: Mit gutem Gewissen Tiere essen. Available at:
  4. Anonymous (2012b). Deutschland - Internetmetzger. Available at
  5. Augustin, M. (2012). ‘Der Wurst in die Augen schauen’. Dennis Buchmann verkauft Fleisch von Schweinen, die man sich im Internet und auf der Packung ansehen kann. Available at,-Der-Wurst-in-die-Augen-schauen-_arid,5306084.html.
  6. Breithut, J. (2010). Fleischkonsum oder Vegetarismus. Immer noch Lust auf Wurst? Available at
  7. Buschka, S., Gutjahr, J. and Sebastian, M. (2013). Gewalt an Tieren. In: Gudehus, C. and Christ, M. (eds.) Gewalt. Ein interdisziplinares Handbuch. Verlag J.B. Metzler, Stuttgart/Weimar, Germany.Google Scholar
  8. Dickhaut, S. (2010). Wir sind dann mal Schwein - ein Wochenende im Porkcamp. Available at
  9. Erk, D. (2011). Pork Camp ‘Das Gegenteil von Massentierhaltung’. Available at:
  10. Fiddes, N. (1991). Meat. A natural symbol. Routledge, New York, NY, USA, 272 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Grossarth, J. (2012). Internet-Metzger Buchmann im Gespräch, Der Wurst ein Gesicht geben’. Available at:
  12. Heinz, B. and Lee, R. (1998). Getting down to the meat: the symbolic construction of meat consumption. Communication Studies 49(1): 86–99.Google Scholar
  13. Joy, M. (2009). Why we love dogs, eat pigs, and wear cows: an introduction to carnism. Conari Press, San Francisco, CA, USA, 208 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Joy, M. (2011). Understanding neocarnism: how vegan advocates can appreciate and respond to ‘happy meat’, locavorism, and ‘paleo dieting’. Available at:
  15. Melican, B. (2010). Porkcamp. Available at:
  16. Morgan, K. and Cole, M. (2011). The discursive representation of nonhuman animals in a culture of denial. In: Carter, R. and Charles, N. (ed.) Humans and other animals: critical perspectives. Palgrave, London, UK, pp. 112–132.Google Scholar
  17. Parry, J. (2009). Oryx and crake and the new nostalgia for meat. Society & Animals 17(3): 241–256.Google Scholar
  18. Parry, J. (2010). Gender and slaughter in popular gastronomy. Feminism & Psychology 20(3): 381–396. Petrus, K. (2013). Tiere als fragmentierte Subjekte. Available at
  19. Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 312 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Wageningen Academic Publishers 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Group for Society and Animals Studies, Institute of SociologyUniversity of HamburgHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations