He uses real examples from people who worked in those settings to discuss the behind-the-scene aspects and the actual situations (Hawthorne, 2011, p. 41 & 43). Other than injuries caused by semi-conscious animals, workers often get harasses and threaten to lose their jobs or their illegal status in the country. Hawthorne points out that animals are sentience beings which should be treated appropriately and respectfully. However, in the face of profits, the companies choose to ignore these facts. It is also important to realize that becoming a vegetarian does not stop the exploitation of human workers (Hawthorne, 2011, p .44). In farms, workers are required to work in the sun, and most of the time, they do not have access to water due to the pressure to meet a certain quota. He encourages readers to think about the food they eat each day and how it end up on their table (Hawthorne, 2011, p. …show more content…
Although he sometimes touches on how humans play a role in it, a majority of the article devotes to nonhuman animals. On the other hand, because Hawthorne (2011) focuses primarily on human exploitation, reading both articles can gain valuable and insightful knowledge on the topic which looks at the problems from both sides of the argument. Similar beliefs are seen in both articles which are interesting. In Hawthorne’s (2011) article, she advocates that the “organic” label on food does not necessarily mean that the animals are treated as a subject (p. 44). Likewise, Torres (2007) argues, just because humans are treating nonhuman animals better, it does not justify the actions and make this experience “humane” (p. 21). They are both trying to convey an important message which it is nearly impossible to find a reason to treat any sentience beings without respects and deny their