Murderer

Jean Dubuffet, Vache et Personnage, 1953, dead butterflies body parts glued on whatever.

JEAN DUBUFFET: THE BUTTERFLY MAN

In the Winter 2007 October, Sarah K. Rich resurrects and analyzes a singular chapter in 1950s art criticism that saw various writers bitterly lament Jean Dubuffet’s use of butterfly wings in collage: “Why does he massacre butterflies to evoke effects he would better achieve with paint and brushes?” “[He] uselessly massacred hundreds of butterflies with which he covered the faces of the monsters that haunt him.” “Poor Dubuffet who, with a hundred massacred butterflies, only knows how to make a rough, ‘informe’ effigy.” “Dubuffet has unleashed himself upon butterflies, seizing their wings and gluing them in a terrible mess … One can’t help but think that butterfly wings — such marvels — are sufficient on their own, in their form and beauty, and that the artist’s process is useless and cruel.” Link

In this article, amongst a lot of other esoteric things which are basically glorifying a mass murderer of animals for his ego and profit, this speciesist writer calls butterflies "things" as if these sentient animal persons were clocks or computer chips:

As the insect that famously change from caterpillar to winged thing, the butterfly always already indicates a changing of form, a shifting of meaning.

Speciesist usage denigrates or discounts nonhuman animals. For example, terming nonhumans “it” erases their gender and groups them with inanimate things. Referring to them as “something” (rather than “someone”) obliterates their sentience and individuality. Pure speciesism leads people to call a brain-dead human “who” but a conscious pig “that” or “which.” Link

Am I saying that a firefly is as fully entitled to moral consideration as a rabbit or a bonobo? Yes. Am I saying that a spider has as much right to life as an egret or a human? Yes. I see no logically consistent reason to say otherwise.
~ Joan Dunayer

Just as racists see individual humans as embodiments of a particular race, speciesists see individual nonhumans as mere species representatives. Speciesism's hallmark trait is denial of nonhuman individuality. In reality, no animal is replaceable. Both physically and mentally, every sentient being is unique. Every lobster, every crow, every housefly is an individual who has a unique life experience and never will exist again. But that's not how abusers see it. For example, the flesh industry. In the flesh industry's view -- and that of flesh-eaters -- chickens, fishes, and other nonhumans can be killed by the billions each year provided that others of their species remain available for future killing.
~ Animal Equality (Joan Dunayer Speech at 2002 Austrian AR Conf)