182 N Taylor and H Fraser (see Ben-Ami et al 2014), the international exchange of animals and their body parts, whether for bushmeat (see Bowen-Jones 2003), for medicine, fashion or ornamental reasons (see chapter on the International Trade in Animal Parts herein) Nature While it is tempting to polarise the issues, explaining the nature and extent of animal slaughter is far more complex in some ways Not all readers will, for example, accept the argument that slaughter is institutionalised animal abuse This is because intent to harm is (usually) missing and because there are several layers of welfare statutes in place to ostensibly ‘protect’ animals whose sole purpose is to be farmed for human consumption However, the reality is that this welfare framework serves to turn attention away from the systemic and institutionalised nature of slaughterhouse violence by perpetuating the idea that animal welfare is paramount in the food chain As Regan (2001, p 34) argues, ‘it should not be surprising that the loudest, most powerful voices speaking in the name of animal welfare today are those of individuals who have an interest in perpetuating institutionalized utilization of nonhuman animals By this I mean that those who identify themselves with the cause of animal welfare increasingly are those who speak for the commercial animal agriculture community.’ This goes some way to explaining the ongoing existence and acceptance of slaughterhouses despite widespread claims to take animal welfare seriously, that is, that welfare legislation regarding the rearing and slaughtering of animals is developed within, and broadly supports, the animal industrial complex (AIC); a concept we turn to shortly Carnistic Defenses Slaughterhouse violence to animals is predominantly hidden (see for example, Pachirat 2011; Wicks 2011) and generally accepted While these two points are connected, it is simplistic to assume that it is accepted only because it is out of sight Rather, while removing slaughterhouses and the work that goes on in them from sight is a prerequisite to the acceptance of them, this is but one part of a much larger ideological whole that supports the rearing, breeding, killing and consuming of animals as food As Vialles (1994, p 66) points out, modern cultural sensibilities (see Elias 2000) dictated a need to ‘render invisible what used to be a bloody spectacle’, which allows their