Bestialitatis and the New Ethics on “Human” Animals

Article
First Online:
  • 26 Downloads

Abstract

This article discusses how the legal systems in several Western countries, with a special focus on Italy, address our present day animal rights movement and how these legal systems can faithfully reflect the movement’s values as well as promote them in a manner that will ultimately change the rights themselves and their cultural context: this is an extremely interesting issue for the semiotic study of the “humanization of animals”. Therefore, I will summarize several semiotic arguments using the model of the four ontologies by Philippe Descola and the concept of prospectivism by Eduardo Viveiros De Castro. I expect several important changes will come about thanks to the ties between philosophical animal rights discourse and legal discourse and I also believe that the two most interesting issues will be animal labor and reproduction. I will concentrate on the debate over zoophilia laws in Denmark, Germany and Italy in order to propose a way to understand the threshold which separates humans and animals in our naturalistic ontology. Nowadays, “becoming animals” and “becoming humans” seem to be two central and open-ended semiotic processes: legal rights and animal rights philosophy help bring several issues into focus such as animal subjectivity and informed consent.

Keywords

Semiotics of culture Semiotics of law Zoophilia Descola’s ontologies Animal rights 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

References at the foot of the pages are those of the Italian translation

  1. 1.
    Bassano, Giuditta. 2017. Attenti al cane. Dalla bestia da soma alla personalità giuridica. In Zoosemiotica 2.0, ed. Gianfranco Marrone, 327–339. Palermo: Museo Pasqualino.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bassano, Giuditta. 2017. Semiotique e droit. In Sémiotique en interface, ed. Amir Biglari, Nathalie Roelens. Paris: Kìmé (in print).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Caffo, Leonardo. 2013. Il maiale non fa la rivoluzione. Manifesto per un antispecismo debole. Casale Monferrato: Sonda.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cecchelin, Giulia, and Bartoletti, Roberta. 2017. Le relazioni tra umani e animali nella comunicazione del pet food. In Zoosemiotica 2.0, ed. Gianfranco Marrone, 395–407. Palermo: Museo Pasqualino.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Connolly, Kate. 2012. German to ban Bestiality under animal welfare law, The Guardian. 27 November.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Contardi, Serena. 2013. Disgusto e animalità. Brevi note sulla zooerastia. Asinus Novus. https://asinusnovus.net/2013/04/16/disgusto-e-animalita-brevi-nota-sulla-zooerastia/. Accessed 28 Sept 2017.
  7. 7.
    Contardi, Serena. 2013. Teriofobia for dummies. Asinus Novus. https://asinusnovus.net/2012/07/10/teriofobia-for-dummies/. Accessed 26 Sept 2017.
  8. 8.
    D’amico, Margherita. 2015. Violenze sugli animali, tra follia e mercato del porno. Repubblica. 1 August.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D’amico, Margherita. 2015. Alle radici della zooerastia. Parla il neuropsichiatra. Repubblica. 1 August.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Descola, Philippe. 2005. Par-delà nature et culture; Tr. it. it. Oltre natura e cultura. Firenze: Seid 2014.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fabbri, Paolo. 2000. Elogio di Babele. Roma: Meltemi.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Felicetti, Gianluca. 2004. Animali non bestie. Difendere i diritti, denunciare i maltrattamenti. Milano: Ambiente.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Francione, Gary, and Anna E. Charlton. 2015. Animal rights: The abolitionist approach. Providence: Exemplar Press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Galofaro, Francesco. 2009. Eluana Englaro. La contesa sulla fine della vita. Milano: Booklet.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Garcia, Feliks. 2016. Most bestiality is legal, declares Canada’s Supreme Court. Indipendent. 9 June.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gasparre, Annalisa. 2013. La frontiera del “porno” dei delitti contro gli animali. Roma: Aracne.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gasparre, Annalisa. 2015. Diritti degli animali. Antologia di casi giudiziari oltre la lente dei mass media. Frosinone: Key.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gasperetti, Flavia. 2016. Non si sevizia un gattino, Rivista Studio. http://www.rivistastudio.com/standard/serial-killer-gatti/. Accessed 30 Sept 2017.
  19. 19.
    Giannitrapani, Alice. 2017. Ristoranti bestiali. In Zoosemiotica 2.0, ed. Gianfranco Marrone, 425–436. Palermo: Museo Pasqualino.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Goodman, Nelson. 1978. Ways of worldmaking, Tr. it. Vedere e costruire il mondo, Roma-Bari: Laterza 2008.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Greimas, Algirdas Julien.1976. Sémiotique et sciences sociales. Paris: Seuil. It. tr. Semiotica e scienze sociali. Torino: Centro scientifico Editore 1991.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hoffman, Thomas. 2014. Denmark moves to ban bestiality—but is sex with animals really so bad? Science Nordic. 14 October.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Iacub, Marcela. 2011. Confessions d’une mangeuse de viande. Medusa: It. tr. Confessioni di una mangiatrice di carne. Milano.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Landowski, Eric. 1989. La société réfléchie. Essais de sociosémiotique, Paris: Seuil. Tr. it. it. La società riflessa. Roma: Meltemi 1999.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lévi Strauss, Claude. 1962. Le totémisme aujourd’hui, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. It. tr. Il totemismo oggi. Milano: Et. Al. 2010.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mangiapane, Francesco. 2017. They think the world of you. Analisi di un romanzo di J.R. Ackerley. In Zoosemiotica 2.0, ed. Gianfranco Marrone, 569–593. Palermo: Museo Pasqualino.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mannucci, Antonio, and Mario Tallacchini (eds.) 2001. Per un codice degli animali. Commenti sulla normativa vigente. Milano: Giuffré.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Marrone, Gianfranco (ed.). 2012. Semiotica della natura. Milano, Udine: Mimesis.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Marrone, Gianfranco (ed.). 2015. Dire la natura. Roma: Aracne.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Marrone, Gianfranco (ed.). 2017. Zoosemiotica 2.0. Palermo: Museo Pasqualino.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Marsciani, Francesco. 1998. Le goût et le Nouveau Monde. Nouveaux Actes Sémiotiques 55–56: 88–101.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mazzoni, Cosimo. M. 2012. La questione dei diritti degli animali. In Trattato di biopolitica. La questione animale. ed. S. Castignone, L. Lombardi Vallauri, 281–308. Milano: Giuffré.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mazzucchelli, Francesco. 2017. Il coniglio: buono da mangiare o da coccolare? In Zoosemiotica 2.0, ed. Gianfranco Marrone, 77–93. Palermo: Museo Pasqualino.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Migliore, Tiziana. 2015. Sul prospettivismo. In Dire la natura, ed. Gianfranco Marrone, 205–221. Roma: Aracne.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Minerva, Francesca. 2015. Conscientious objection in Italy. Journal of Medical Ethics 41(2): 160–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Regan, Tom. 1983. The Case for Animal Rights. Los Angeles: University of California Press. It. tr. I diritti animali, Milano: Garzanti 1990.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Regan, Tom. 2003. Empty Cages. Facing the Challenge of Animal Rights. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing. It. Tr. Gabbie vuote. La sfida dei diritti animali, Casale Monferrato: Sonda 2009.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Regan, Tom. 2013. Why Sex with Animals Violates Their Rights. Allcreatures.org. http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/ar-sex-with-animals.html. Accessed 30 Sept 2017.
  39. 39.
    Rescigno, Francesca. 2005. I diritti degli animali. Da res a soggetti, Torino: Giappichelli.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rollin, Bernard. 1981. Animal Rights and Human Morality. New York: Prometheus Books. It. tr. Diritti degli animali ed etica umana. Milano: Ariele 2010.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Singer, Peter. 1975. Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for our Treatment of Animals. New York: New York Review. It. tr. Liberazione animale, Milano: Arnoldo Mondadori, 1991.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Singer, Peter, 2001. Heavy Petting. Prospect Magazine, April 62. https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/issues/62. Accessed 21 Sept 2017.
  43. 43.
    Troiano, Ciro. 2004. Crimini sessuali contro gli animali. Caratteristiche, comportamento e profili di politica criminale. In Impronte, XXXI, (4), May, 2–49.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    «Udtalelse om menneskers seksuelle omgang med dyr » , Det Dyreetiske Råd, 2006, Justitsministeriet, København. http://detdyreetiskeraad.dk/udtalelser/udtalelse/pub/hent-fil/publication/udtalelse-om-menneskers-seksuelle-omgang-med-dyr-2006/.
  45. 45.
    Ventura Bordenca, Ilaria. 2017. Altri cibi. Il packaging degli alimenti veg. In Zoosemiotica 2.0, ed. Gianfranco Marrone, 437–449. Palermo: Museo Pasqualino.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Viveiros de Castro, Eduardo.1998. Les pronoms cosmologiques et le perspectivisme amérindien. In Gilles Deleuze. Une vie philosophique, ed. Eric Alliez. Paris: Les Empêcheurs de penser en rond. Tr. it. In Mondi multipli II. Lo splendore dei mondi, ed. Serena Consigliere: 19–50. Pompei: Kaiak.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IULM UniversityMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations