NTT creates a hierarchy with disabled people below them. It appeals to ableism and devalues disabled people - perpetuating the very same speciesism that you’re trying to combat.
Sorry I hadn’t responded.
There’s a very good chance when you’re doing NTT that you get endlesss reductions to a specific trait.
We must also remember that disability liberation is being fought for very hardly, and it’s only recently in history have they been afforded any rights, so while there is a chance you can bring up the status of animal people, you end up bringing the status of disabled people down if they don’t regard them on the same level as non-disabled people. Considering that the liberation of animal people and disabled people intersect, you end up doing a very half-assed job - if any at all in my experience.
I need to re-read the part in this book called Cripping Animal Ethics. The book is Sunaura Taylor’s Beasts of Burden. It intersects speciesism and ableism/animal and disability liberation. I’d suggest reading the entirety of it - it’s a fantastic book. If I get around to re-reading the part I need and making notes of it, I’ll share those notes with you. You want to at least read to the part where (in Cripping Animal Ethics) the author talks about NTT, otherwise known as “the argument from marginal cases”.
https://b-ok.cc/book/5420846/fda868
Short video with transcription on the her work: https://www.justwondering.io/animal-disability-liberation-with-sunaura-taylor
edit: I’m sorry I can’t do better right now than just suggesting you read Beasts of Burden. :p
Yeah, I think it's not good to refer to people as things when one of the major things oppressing nonhumans is their commodification and the denial of their personhood
we discussed it in the theory channel on the vcj discord, because it comes up in Beasts of Burden. I haven't had time to read it yet, so I don't really have much to add sadly
Question: What is the difference between Ask Yourself's Name The Trait and the Argument from marginal cases?