Ambivalent Academic made a fascinating observation today about certain parts of the animal rights movement:
What really strikes me is that a lot of this rhetoric reads like snuff-porn.
There is an undercurrent of appetite for the kind of violence they describe. It reads as if they take pleasure in imagining the violence they describe,... and they are inviting the reader to join in that sadistic pleasure. You can almost hear the drool.
I'm sure any sophisticated psychiatrist might have made this sort of observation, but I'm not even an unsophisticated psychiatrist. The images and language at websites such as Camille Marino's is violence-obsessed, and, as AA put it, almost erotic. Marino's loving and frantic depictions of violence are pornographic. Her enemies are portrayed bound, naked, and bloodied. Her use of words and image manipulation is full of masturbatory zeal.
And I don't think she is unique in this. Animal rights activists revel in violent imagery and language like very few other activists movements (save, perhaps, the anti-abortion movement). Their fantasies are far more disturbing than any slaughterhouse or laboratory.