To anthropomorphize is, inter alia, to impute human characteristics unto animals. An example is: an animal is content if it gets its food and drink. Or: the pet loves its owner. Like humans, animals have feelings and consciousness, but the appearances of these are often dismissed by humans, as instinctive acts. This denial of similarities is the contrary of anthropomorphization.
Anthropomorphization is often brought as a reproach, because the person who anthropomorphizes, ignores the interests of the animal. The reproach impinges supporters and opponents of animal rights and animal interests.
Particularly, many consumers think that animals have a pleasant stay in the large-scale livestock: the animals are well taken care of technologically: the stable has climate control, and, naturally, the farmer provides food and drink on time, to make the animals pubescent.
What most customers do not realize, is that the animals in the livestock need to scratch, which can be best provided by giving the animal a clean shelter, with sufficient straw and a property in a clean meadow.
In winter, when animals, just like humans, wish to have a shelter inside, the shelter is just sufficient in the biological sector. But, boredom, a state that animals and humans share, is lurking. Luckily, an animal life does not take a long time in practice. A longer stay, inside the intensive livestock, an animal cannot endure, or it gets ill. Just before that time, it goes to slaughter.
This "just-in-time-delivery" is not a characteristic of a sector that cares for animal well-being, but the morbid effect of an indifferent society, in which the animal is made into a thing for profit. To anthropomorphize a bit more, from a sincere involvement, would be very much in the interests of the animal.