The Dilemma of Dog Advocacy: A Reflection on Speciesism and Animal Liberation
When I see people speaking out against dog abuse, I feel torn. It stirs a deep internal conflict within me. On one hand, I truly appreciate the compassion being shown toward an animal species—any step toward compassion is a step in the right direction. But at the same time, I cannot ignore how distant most of these efforts are from the broader concept of animal liberation. This contradiction makes me uncomfortable and so I pause and reflect.
Recently, I witnessed a large protest against dog abuse. It was heartening to see so many people passionately speaking out for dogs, demanding justice and stricter laws against those who harm them. The protest gained significant traction, with social media flooded with messages condemning cruelty. However, as I looked deeper—reading through comment sections on viral reels and observing the lack of engagement from vegan communities—I realized that most participants were non-vegans. Some of the posters at the protest carried messages like “Every Life Counts” and “Stop Animal Abuse.” These statements, at face value, resonate with the core principles of animal rights. But do they truly believe that every life counts? Or does this compassion extend only to certain animals, while others continue to be exploited without question?
This leads to my first dilemma: should I support such movements? One perspective suggests that within the larger struggle for animal liberation, protests against dog abuse are a subset—an entry point for people to start thinking about animal suffering. In that sense, lending support might be a good idea. However, the other perspective reveals a more unsettling truth. These movements often reinforce a speciesist worldview, where humans continue to determine which animals deserve moral consideration and which do not. The fact that a dog’s suffering can evoke outrage while the suffering of a hen or goat is normalized speaks volumes. I find myself inclined to focus on this deeper issue because, ultimately, this selective compassion is what enables the very system of exploitation we are fighting against.
The widespread support for dog advocacy also highlights another key issue: convenience. Unlike veganism, which challenges people to reflect on their daily choices, advocating for dogs does not disrupt the status quo. It does not demand personal accountability. It does not force people to question their habits or their participation in a system that thrives on animal exploitation. It is easy to rally behind dog welfare because it aligns with what society already considers acceptable. But true justice should not be dictated by convenience or social acceptability—it should be rooted in principle.
Another important aspect is the creation of an easy villain. Those who abuse dogs are rightly condemned, and they should face consequences. However, this dynamic allows society to direct all its moral outrage at a small group of individuals while ignoring the systemic exploitation that exists on a much larger scale. The public can point fingers at those who kick or harm a stray dog and feel good about standing against cruelty—without ever having to examine the industries that cause immense suffering to more than trillions of animals every year. It is easier to unite against an external ‘enemy’ than to engage in deep self-reflection about our own choices.
I want to be clear: I am not saying that speaking up for dogs is wrong. Any movement that calls for compassion is valuable in its own way. But if we truly care about justice, we must be willing to ask uncomfortable questions. Why does our compassion have limits? Why do we celebrate kindness toward some animals while funding the mass scale suffering of others? And most importantly, how can we expand our circle of moral concern so that all sentient beings are treated with dignity and respect?
I understand that my perspective may be unpopular. It is far easier to go along with mainstream narratives than to challenge them. But after much reflection, I feel compelled to express this. If our goal is genuine animal liberation, we must push beyond selective empathy and confront the deeper biases that shape our understanding of who deserves moral consideration. Only then can we move towards true justice—not just for dogs, but for all animals.
