What We Eat Is Who We Are: The Role of Ethnic Attachment as an Ideological Base of Animal Exploitation

ABSTRACT

Current research supports the idea that attitudes toward animals, including their rights and treatment, relate to other social and ideological views. In this study, I explored whether attitudes toward animals relate to wider ideological beliefs and important social identities in Serbia. I conducted two surveys to identify these relationships. In the first study, a sample (n = 321) from the general population completed a questionnaire asking about their attitudes toward animals, their acceptance of authority and societal order (right-wing authoritarianism), their preference for social hierarchy (social dominance orientation), and the importance of their social identities (gender, ethnicity, religion). I found that participants who were less supportive of animal rights also endorsed authoritarianism and relations of social dominance between groups to a larger extent. Furthermore, those who identified more strongly with gender, ethnicity, and religion also expressed more negative attitudes toward animals. In the second study, I surveyed undergraduate students in Serbia (n = 207) to determine the role of ethnic attachment as an ideological basis for attitudes toward animals. Perceptions of vegetarianism as an alternative lifestyle and a threat to the local traditions mediated the effects of ethnic attachment on both attitudes toward animals and meat consumption. However, this was true only for participants who prioritized group needs over individual needs (collectivists). In contrast, those with individualist views were more likely to endorse discrimination on the basis of species, regardless of their ethnocentrism. The findings show that attitudes toward animals correlated with endorsement of social hierarchies and with valuing the superiority of the ethnic ingroup. Attitudes toward animals thus relate to wider ideological views, in particular perceiving vegetarianism as a threat to the traditional values. I also discuss the implications of the findings for the study of human–animal relations.

KEYWORDS:

• Attitudes
• ethnic identity
• human–animal interaction
• meat consumption
• speciesism
• Western Balkans

Acknowledgements

I thank my students Marija Sretenović and Anastasija Budžak for their help with data collection. I also thank Milica Ranković from the Society for the Protection of Animals and Development of Civic Consciousness “Phoenix” and Snežana Milovanović from Sloboda za životinje – udruženje za zaštitu i prava životinja for sharing the survey link through their networks. Finally, I thank the reviewers and the editor for their comments which helped improve the manuscript.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 A human ethics committee had not yet been established at my university, so it was not possible to obtain ethical approval before the study. However, I followed the European Commission’s (2019) “Guidance: How to complete your ethics self-assessment.”

2 Valid fit indices were not available, as the model included all paths and thus the number of degrees of freedom was 0. Therefore, the path analysis should be interpreted only as a tool to examine the relations between the predictors and criterion variables and not in the sense of model-testing.