A brief critique of Cory Lee Wrenn view

In 2013, Corey Lee Wrenn wrote an article entitled “The role of professionalization regarding female exploitation in the Nonhuman Animal rights movement” (Journal of Gender Studies, 2013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2013.806248). In it, she described numerous cases of Peta campaigns and other organizations involved in the nonhuman animal movement, which used nude women and sexual issues, and in her analysis cited the professionalism of these organizations as the reason for adopting such tactics.

I believe that she is wrong in her analysis, because becoming a professional by itself can not be a determining factor in the direction of an organization. The history of social movements is replete with developments and events, all of which have been led and organized by professional organizations; Without the organizational and professional form of the movement being the reason for deviating from their goals. The labor movements were entirely based on an organized and professional leadership and, incidentally, if it were otherwise, they certainly would not have been able to advance. Who can say that Lenin, Because of his professionalism, preferred financial or organizational goals to the interests of the workers, or Marx deviated from their interests when he spoke of the formation and partisanship of the workers?

What determines the nature of an approach, not its organizational and professional form, is the set of beliefs and ideologies that govern that organization. In fact, the socio-political horizon that the leaders of social movements draw for themselves and the analysis of the specific conditions of each period, require certain tactics.

The same is true of the non-human animal rights movement. Contrary to Corey Lee Wrenn view, not only is not professionalization a taboo and a reprehensible factor, but it can also be a necessity in advancing the movement’s goals in a more comprehensive and organized manner. What determines is the belief, ideology, and vision you define for the movement. With or without professionalism, one can be compromising and opportunistic. Your definition of a future world and the nature of current relationships in it will direct your action today. The organization serves this vision, not determines it.

Peta is unable to guide and advance the nonhuman animals movement, not because they are professional, but because they do not believe in the principles of justice, equality, and conflict with the socialist perspective of future relations. Peta carries a capitalist and non-revolutionary thinking about social relations, and it is this view that shapes his relationship with nonhuman animals.