The Emerging Face Of The Movement
This article summarizes two concurrent studies which were conducted, one for readers and the other for movement groups.
Females are the driving force behind the animal rights movement; among multiple organizations polled females constituted a minimum of 70% of supporters. However, in organizations started in late 70’s and early 80’s, however, female composition is not as high.
The animal movement is also largely white, comprising three-fourths of supporters between 21 and 49 years old. About half of supporters are married, and 80% of supporters are from urban or suburban areas. Supporters are highly educated, 84% college graduates, 25% with masters and PhDs. 80% of supporters are business and professional with a middle income between $25,000-$50,000 per year.
50-70% of activists are absolutely opposed to animals used in research, food and entertainment, while 25% accepted some use under humane conditions, and another 2-7% felt that use was generally acceptable “barring gross abuses.” 45% of the readers sampled considered vivisection “acceptable.” under supervised conditions.
Organized groups were universally absolutely opposed to the use of all animals in research, with the exception of animal rescue societies who allow the use of animals under stringent conditions and only to further vital or urgent medical research not otherwise possible.
89% of readers approve of companion animals, while only about half of the people in organizations believe this is acceptable. Survey respondents feel that too little attention is being paid to issues of companion animals, livestock transportation, farm animals, humane education and school biology experiments. Generally, there were no areas that respondents felt received too much attention, although some people thought that companion animals consumed too much time.
Many feel that work of “smaller, third generation radical outfits” and the established outfits such as the ASPCA and the Humane Society of the U.S. complement each other.
Large animal welfare organizations were thought to be performing better in more recent years, while smaller groups were thought to be even more effective than the major organizations.