Man His Brother's Keeper (1855)

AUTHOR: Alcott, William Andrus

KEYWORDS: animals, women's rights, morality

SUMMARY (Ridvan Askin, edited Deborah Madsen):
The article advocates for animal welfare and women's rights, though by linking the two issues via a demeaning analogy. Alcott presents a general argument for the human duty of care towards fellow beings, including non-human animals. “All can care for all; all can keep all; all can take special care of the feeble” – this is the article's general argumentative thrust. However, Alcott also argues a more specific case, as he specifically urges men to care for women. This argument is based on a belittling speciesism. “Man and woman were doubtless made to care for each other,” Alcott writes, “and even for the animals below them, to say nothing of things inanimate.” He continues with a demeaning analogy between women and domestic animals: “He who is to take care of a domestic dog, or cat or pig, and see that justice is done to him, and that he is uninjured as long at least, as he behaves well, is most undoubtedly to take care of woman. Is the obligation less imperative in the latter case than in the former? Most men virtually deny this” (240). A few lines later, Alcott adds: “If the meanest animal is in any sense our brother, we are to be his keeper, no matter whether male of female; no matter whether in sickness or health; no matter whether in life, health, or reputation. Good kings do not abuse their subjects. They do not murder them – in soul or body – in order to keep them.” Alcott concludes that, as “the Divinely appointed keepers of [their] sisters,” men should strive to support women as much as possible and in every respect, from questions of virtue to those of education, from economic to political matters.

Last updated on May 18th, 2024

SNSF project 100015_204481

@VLS@veganism.social | VeganLiteraryStudies | @veganliterarystudies |