Animal Metaphors in Discourses of Gender-Based Violence

The Spanish press corroborates and exemplifies the previous research establishing a direct link between the language of the species and violence against women. The well-known “La Manada” case superbly illustrates how men’s understanding of sexual relationships in terms of male predators chasing female prey can lead to gang rape. The five males that created the eponymously named WhatsApp group not only identified themselves with sexual predators, but also behaved as such (Brandariz Portela 2021: 575; Sánchez-Ramos 2021: 43). In their online conversations, which mainly revolved around having sex with women using drugs and even weapons, the youngest friend was explicitly told to sexually assault a female if he wanted to become a wolf: “la prueba de fuego para ser un lobo” (Cedeira 2017: 39). Besides these animal metaphors, the leader of the group displayed a sizable tattoo of a wolf’s paw print on his back, which he had publicly shown on his social media and within the “La Manada” group chat along with sexist remarks (Requeijo and Montero 2016: 1–6). These linguistic and visual symbols framing relationships in terms of a male predator hunting a female prey had fatal consequences, for these five males brutally raped an eighteen-year-old woman, even filming and distributing their sexual exploits through this chat (López Maestre 2020: 203–11). Since the original “La Manada” case, Spanish newspapers have actively reported on similar cases (Brandariz Portela 2021: 575; Sánchez-Ramos 2021: 43). The so-called “la nueva manada” and “la manada de Corea,” named by the males that drugged, raped, and filmed a minor and a disabled woman, respectively, mirror, once again, the dangerous correlation between animal metaphors and gender-based violence (“La nueva manada” 2018: 1; Ollés 2022: 1).

Recent court sentences in Spain similarly reflect the common use of the bestial iconography in episodes of violence against women. Verdicts often document the animal metaphors used by male abusers to degrade their female victims (Arambarri 2019: 2). As documented in judicial excerpts, terms such as “zorra,” “perra,” “rata,” “garrapata,” “foca,” “serpiente,” or “vaca” are constantly targeted at women: “eres una garrapata, rata,” “no vales para nada, te tengo que matar, serpiente, víbora, te voy a cortar el cuello,” or “pedazo de perra, zorra, vaca” (Arambarri 2019: 3). In like manner, the internet provides good insight into the binomial animal metaphors and gender-based violence. Zoomorphic names such as “focas,” “perras,” “zorras,” and “conejas” permeate online communities of the so-called manosphere on sites such as X (formerly Twitter), Reddit, and Facebook (Castrillo 2018: 2; Lacalle et al. 2024: 1–12; Suárez 2017: 2). These animal terms are also at the core of the misogynous incel universe (Tranchese and Sugiura 2021: 2719).

Aware of this dangerous link between the language of the species and abuse against women, several governmental administrations in Spain have recurred to animal images to design campaigns about gender-based violence. In 2006, the town council of Avilés explicitly asked the male batterer what sort of animal he was after listing a series of male beasts that take advantage of their female partners: “El león se aprovecha de su familia. El gallo maltrata a sus semejantes. La mantis asesina a su pareja. ¿Y tú? ¿Qué clase de animal eres …?” (Fernández 2012: 392). In 2014, the city hall of Pontevedra created poster boards displaying photographs of women with the animal names “porca” and “burra” – pig and donkey in Galician – in capital letters (“Puta y Cerda” 2014: 1–5). The street signs, illustrated with the sentences “Tú calla que de esto no sabes, burra” and “mira cómo tienes la casa, cerda,” underscored the dangers of this type of verbal violence (Figure 12.1).

In 2014, to commemorate the International Day against Gender-Based Violence, the government of Spain designed a poster visualizing a woman trapped in a cage that is placed inside the mind of the male abuser to highlight his control (Figure 12.2). The image evokes the idea of a woman as a bird – an animal associated with freedom due to its ability to fly – that has been caught in the dangerous cycle of gender-based violence.

The Andalusian administration along with the Women’s Institute launched “No seas animal” in 2018 (Figure 12.3). The campaign, focused on the most common forms of harassment women experience, used six images of men wearing masks of different animals, namely, an octopus, a rooster, a pig, a vulture, a sparrow, and an owl. Each of these animalized representations stood for a type of unacceptable and dangerous behavior. Hence, the octopus symbolizes the man that physically harasses women. The rooster and the pig epitomize those who make sexual compliments and misogynistic remarks to women on the streets. The vulture and sparrow represent sexual predators while the owl is the stalker. With the slogans “estos comportamientos son propios de animales” and “ayúdanos a que la fauna callejera se extinga,” the campaign tackled gender abuse through the iconography of the bestial masculine.

In 2019 the government of Murcia designed “Zorra. No vales para nada. Duele leerlo. Imagínate vivirlo” (Valenzuela 2019: 1). The campaign brought to the fore the damage caused through this animal slur by showing a man with his wide-open mouth yelling “zorra” (Figure 12.4).

Figurative fauna has been linked to the promotion of negative attitudes and violent behaviors toward the animalized subject (Cikara et al. 2015: 540–7; Haslam et al. 2011: 311–21; Prazmo 2020: 16–23). Along with their dehumanizing effect, zoomorphic tropes often entail notions of danger given that animals, unless domesticated or tamed, pose a threat to people (Haslam et al. 2011: 319; López-Rodríguez 2009: 65). Animal metaphors fall within the scope of the so-called “control metaphors,” which are often employed to regulate behaviors and exert power over certain social groups (Pérez 2001: 180).1 The PEOPLE ARE ANIMALS metaphor (Kövecses 2002) is rooted in the folk cognitive model of the Great Chain of Being (Lakoff and Turner 1989; Lovejoy 1936). Pictured as a chain vertically extended, this hierarchical organization assigns a place for everything in the universe in a strict hierarchical system in which each being has its place depending on its qualities and behavior. The more perfect the being is, the higher it stands on the chain. At the top is God, epitome of perfection, followed by humans; then, animals, plants, and, finally, inanimate objects. Considering this mental framework, the conceptualization of people as animals implies a downward movement in the chain, in other words, a degradation of humans to the category of the irrational and instinctual beast. As a corollary, most animal-related metaphors applied to humans express undesirable characteristics of people (Talebinejad and Dastjerdi 2009). As a corollary, the iconography of the bestial feminine is recurrent in cases of gender-based violence where the male perpetrator reduces his female victim to the category of the irrational and sexual beast to justify his control and abuse over her.

Although both men and women are prone to animalization, the former tend to be identified with fierce, big, predatory beasts (for example, wolf, bear, tiger, or bull) whereas the latter to docile, small, domestic creatures (for example, hen, chick, kitten, or bunny) (López-Rodríguez 2014: 138–46; Nilsen 1996: 257–69). This imbalance in the codification of gender through animal symbols mirrors long-held sexist beliefs about the social role of men and women. At the same time, it also fosters ideas of male (sexual) dominance and female submission. This ideology imbued through faunistic tropes can have important repercussions in the way individuals think and behave toward the opposite sex. As a matter of fact, metaphors are not mere linguistic artifacts, but rather cognitive mechanisms that influence people’s thoughts and actions (Lakoff and Johnson 1980: 10). As carriers of conceptual meanings, cultural values, and ideologies, animal symbols not only provide iconographic references to comprehend people but may also force individuals to see something through a specific lens (Goatly 2006: 15–19). This may lead to a distorted vision of reality that can lead people to believe in and commit to certain actions, and as Fairclough points out, “[w]hen we see the world with a particular metaphor, it then forms basis of our action […] our perception of the world and behaviour will change according to the use of a particular metaphor” (1995: 67).

Seeing women as animals not only deprives them of their human condition and rational capacity but also reduces them to their anatomy and biological function (Reynolds and Haslam 2011: 59–62). In fact, most animal metaphors applied to women highlight their physical attributes and sexual urges (López-Rodríguez 2009: 90–4). This emphasis on women’s sexual desirability and activity may certainly account for the frequent animalization of females in episodes of gender-based violence, both in the real and fictional worlds.