Do vegans anthropomorphize animals? Why do they compare humans and animals?
Created on: October 20, 2026
Last edited on: October 20, 2026
Vegans are often criticized for anthropomorphizing animals. But are vegans actually anthropomorphizing animals when they point out their feelings, needs, and interests? Not necessarily – here we must distinguish between two things: attributing human characteristics to animals that they do not possess, and pointing out real similarities.
What does it mean to anthropomorphize animals?
Anthropomorphizing animals means attributing characteristics, thoughts, feelings, or intentions to them without sufficient evidence. However, not every description of animal sensations is anthropomorphism. Many animals are proven to be capable of experiencing emotions such as pain or fear and forming social bonds. Acknowledging this fact does not mean considering animals to be human.
Why do vegans compare humans and animals?
Humans are animals! Human-animal comparisons are intended to make visible how differently we treat them and help to question whether there is an ethically relevant difference. The crucial point is whether differences can justify what humans do to animals, or whether comparable interests are weighed differently solely based on species. Upon closer inspection, one will not find THE ONE decisive characteristic that all humans possess without exception and that no animal shares.
Comparisons are not about equating humans and animals in every respect. Humans differ from other animals in numerous characteristics. However, we share the central prerequisites for ethical consideration: sentience and own interests, such as the interest in safety.
Human-animal comparisons can therefore help to apply moral standards consistently, instead of valuing similar interests differently based solely on species membership. Those who use the species alone as a justification for unjust treatment have arrived at the form of discrimination known as speciesism.
The decisive difference: Unequal or unjust treatment?
Justice does not mean having to treat everyone the same. A dog, for example, requires different living conditions than a human. A cow should not be allowed to get a driver’s license – just as little as a baby.
Rather, it is about considering interests and needs according to comprehensible criteria. A human may have an interest in political participation that a chicken does not have. Chickens are not humans – but that does not allow us to ignore that both share, among other things, an interest in living that deserves consideration.
Do non-vegans objectify animals?
The accusation of anthropomorphism can also distract from another perceptual distortion: the objectification of animals. Objectification means viewing a sentient being as a commodity or resource rather than an individual with its own interests. When consuming animal products, animals are often classified according to their economic utility: as meat suppliers, milk producers, hatcheries.
This does not mean that every non-vegan person consciously considers animals to be insentient objects. Many people like animals and live with them. Nevertheless, they simultaneously view certain animal species as “livestock” and subordinate their interests to their own without critically questioning this. Therefore, the accusation can also be reversed: non-vegan people can objectify animals.
Conclusion: Anthropomorphism or recognition of interests?
Vegans do not automatically anthropomorphize animals when they point out their needs and interests. Anthropomorphism only occurs when human characteristics are transferred to animals without a sufficient basis.
Human-animal comparisons are ethically useful when they highlight relevant similarities and help to apply moral standards consistently. This is not about identical treatment, but about the appropriate consideration of the respective interests.
➡️ Share our answer: