HSUS Promotes Veganism

September 29, 2008 | 2 Comments

The ‘Yes on Prop 2‘ gala dinner - with celebrities and fundraising - was VEGAN.

The measure, of course, assumes people are still eating animals. It deals only with their treatment in factory farming situations. (There was no meat last night — as is the custom at most animal welfare events. The vegan dinner was catered by Madeleine Bistro. And it was good — really.) (source)

So no, the HSUS is not promoting “happy meat.” If anything, they convinced some meat-eaters to eat vegan for one meal.

Yes, I know Prop 2 isn’t going to make a huge difference in many animals’ lives. They will still be slaughtered and eaten. Yes, I wish everyone would go vegan. But that’s not going to happen any time soon.

Prop 2 is a step in the right direction. It gives animals a tiny bit more space so they can turn around in their cages. Prop 2 is a reflection that humans, even the meat-eating ones, are not evil monsters.

Posted by Elaine Vigneault | Filed Under animal-rights, vegan, vegetarian
2 Comments to "HSUS Promotes Veganism"

Anti-Animal Bloggers

September 27, 2008 | 1 Comment

Listen up, I write about feminism whenever I feel like it. I don’t wait until NOW does something I don’t like in order to bring up pro-women discussion on my blog. In fact, if I were to ONLY discuss feminism in the context of “I hate what NOW is doing”, I would merely bolster the anti-feminists (rather than carefully critique the mainstream feminists). I’d be an anti-feminist.

You can do the same. You can choose to blog about animal rights whenever you choose. You don’t have to wait for PETA to do something you dislike. The fact that you ONLY choose to blog about animal rights when PETA does something you dislike makes YOU anti-animal.

Get honest with yourself and your readers.

—

You want to get me to hate on PETA along with you by accusing that I “encourage isms, and reduce people to the status of ‘other,’” well it won’t work. I have already criticized PETA. And I’ve already put my thoughts on the matter of controversial animal advocacy in black and white, numerous times. Samplings:

Does the End Justify the Means?

PETA is well known for outrageous stunts that attract grand media attention. Their success is due to their ability to generate publicity. Publicity is what it’s all about: information distribution. The more people who hear, read, and see the torturous nature of factory farming, fur farming, and vivisection the more they’ll demand compassion.

In the US, sexualization helps promote anything. Naked protesters always get news coverage. We’re a bunch of prudes, us Americans, and we can’t help but be fascinated by nudity. Good marketing demands some use of sexualization.

The problem, however, comes when the message is distorted. PETA’s Fur is Dead: “I’d rather go naked than wear fur” campaign makes sense. The message isn’t lost. But when it comes to milk or KFC sexualization is just an attention grabber. And as an attention grabber, it grabs more attention in the wrong direction.

Larson complains about PETA’s pornographic ads in her article, saying they’re sexploitative and oppressive. She argues that the ads send a dangerous message that shifts men’s power over animals to power over women.

The ads, however, can be viewed as criticism of both animal and women’s objectification, a sort of tongue-in-cheek critique, a post-post-mod understanding or consciousness. I embrace this viewpoint; that’s how I’ve accepted these PETA ads in the past. They’re killing two (clay) birds with one stone. But that view requires an educated, enlightened, and sympathetic audience, not the actual audience. [...]

Ultimately, we must be more careful with our messages. Even when social standards contradict, messages of liberation, whomever they’re for, ought not to confuse. (source)

and

In some small way these ads blur the Madonna/whore dichotomy. These aren’t ads for Playboy or Hustler, these are ads for charity, activism, morality. To use sexuality to promote morality is an interesting twist that has the potential to spread more than just the idea that circuses are immoral. It has the potential to spread the idea that women’s bodies are their own and they’ll use them how they please.

The main argument for these types of ads is: Naked bodies get noticed. Sex is probably the easiest way to market something. Stick a pretty female face on almost any product and it sells better. Show a nude body and get attention.

But again, there’s one of the standard feminists criticisms of porn and the pornification of mainstream media: the images represented are not varied enough. One of the reasons we recognize it as porn is that the story it tells is always the same one. It’s not a liberation of female sexuality if it doesn’t truly represent female sexuality. A proper representation of female sexuality would be much more varied, less traditionally pretty, less staged, less seemingly exploitative. [...]

The rich, old, powerful, white guy who only just realized the systematic oppression of women after watching his daughter harassed at high school isn’t going to automatically apply that lesson to other groups of oppressed people and certainly not to animals. He’s more likely to see racy PeTA ads and think they’re exploitative of women than think “wow, there’s a connection between feminism and animal rights.” He just won’t get the animal rights message at all. For him, the ad only serves to promote mainstream anti-women ideas.

and

PETA’s fat shaming is unacceptable. The campaign should not be “Fight The Fat” and instead should be “Prevent Disease.” While there is a causal link between meat-eating and obesity for many people, there are plenty of fat vegetarians and vegans.[...]
Statements like “fight the fat” are direct attacks on all fat people: meat-eaters AND vegans alike. It’s as though PETA’s campaign thinks “playground mockery” is acceptable when it’s done against fat kids. Well, it’s not. Bullying is wrong. Fat shaming is not OK.
[...]PETA’s ad campaign could very easily be interpreted, particularly to children reading the billboards, to mean ‘fight the fat kids’ and ‘bully the burger-eater.’ PETA should be a bit more careful.(source)

and

“some people argue that there is such a thing as bad publicity. They think vegan education should be as free of any negativity as possible, including associations with sex, violence, or insanity because of the negative social stigma and public controversy.
“But you know what? This is the real world. And the real world includes a few nutjobs. Personally, I don’t really mind them on my team. They’re welcome here. They make things interesting :) (source)

and

“There’s a point where reproducing sexist ads for the purpose of sharing, teaching, and analyzing them for feminist theory simply becomes marketing the ads themselves. For example, I guarantee more Feministing readers clicked the link and learned something from PETA than wrote PETA a letter asking them to use fewer nude or nearly nude campaigns. In fact, I bet if you did a poll of Feministing readers you’d find out that a large portion of them are sexist and/or misogynist men who simply use the site to help find materials they can get off on. They don’t read the analysis, they just look at the pictures.” (source)

and

She put quotes around the word demonstration because she doesn’t think it is truly a demonstration. She thinks it’s a sexist stunt and only a sexist stunt, nothing more. She trivializes the activists by refusing to acknowledge their political speech as speech. She thinks animal rights is just a joke, not something we should seriously consider, so when women get inside cages to protest battery hen cages for egg production, Vanessa won’t call that political activism. [...]

No wonder all she can see is sexism. She truly can’t see the actual message at all. She’s so blinded by her own judgments that she can’t form a serious analysis. Feministing criticism of PETA is too shallow. It winds up silencing women’s voices and ignoring their political and social activism.

Ironically, this shallowness is the best reason that PETA should re-evaluate this type of activism. The sad fact is that most people are too shallow. They don’t ‘get it.’ (source)

and

Liken a woman to a living pig and it’s sexist and evil. But liken a woman to a dead pig and it’s funny and artistic.
Fucking hypocrites. When it comes to ‘women as meat’ analogies PETA is pretty tame.

and

This is not porn; this is political expression. If you are turned on (or turned off) that’s your issue, not hers. She is not intending to arouse and pleasure; she is intending to educate and inspire.
[...] Exactly what kind of feminism thinks women shouldn’t be allowed to use their bodies in legal ways for political and moral expression? What kind of feminism calls active, political women exploited and oppressed and then refuses to listen to them? What kind of feminism says a woman’s political expression is dehumanizing?
Not my kind of feminism.(source)

and… then there was that time when the NY Times interviewed me. Did I say, “Bravo, PETA!” or “I love vegan strip clubs!” NO. I said:

“I think it’s really important that when reviewing and analyzing images of women, we take into account their perspective of what they’re trying to say,”

Posted by Elaine Vigneault | Filed Under Animals, Feminism, vegan, veganism
1 Comment to "Anti-Animal Bloggers"

Vote Yes On Prop 2

September 3, 2008 | 5 Comments

this sheep wants your attention

Californians, please vote yes on Prop 2, which would ban battery cages and gestation crates. It’s a very modest proposal that will simply outlaw some of the most cruel forms of farm animal confinement. From the initiative:

“The purpose of this Act is to prohibit the cruel confinement of farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to tum around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs.” (Read the text of Prop 2 here >>)

If that’s not enough to convince you to vote for it, here are some more reasons:

Prop 2 is good for human animals. It will help prevent some food borne illness (since intensive animal agriculture tends to produce more unsafe meat and other animal products than less intensive animal agriculture).
Prop 2 is good for the environment and wild animals. It will prevent some forms of pollution (since intensive animal agriculture is extremely polluting).

Even if you don’t think this would be a victory for farm animals (because they’ll still become meat for human consumption) you should still vote yes. Here’s why:

Prop 2 is good for animal advocates. A yes vote indicates a public concern for animals. That will inspire more politicians and business people to consider animal rights and welfare as part of their agendas.
Prop 2 is good for farm animals. This initiative won’t be a real victory for farm animals. It’s a tiny step in a long, long road for farm animals. But it’s an improvement. It’s better to do something than nothing.
Prop 2 is good for future farm animals. A “yes on Prop 2″ vote suggests opposition to some forms of animal confinement, but not support of any specific animal use. That is, this is incremental abolition, not welfarism. It will not hinder future animal rights measures.

If you are an animal rights supporter and you don’t feel that this measure is strong enough, please still vote yes. We don’t have to claim this as an animal rights victory. Prop 2 is not truly about animal rights. But we can still vote yes on Prop 2 with a clear conscience that we’re doing the right thing for animals, for human health, and for the environment.

And while I’m on that topic, if you’re not already vegan, please go vegan. Veganism is truly the right thing for animals, for human health, and for the environment.

But stil, some people will vote no. Even people who care deeply about animals. Gary Francione wants Californians to oppose. He suggests that the initiative isn’t good for animals because it’s not enough. It’s too far in the future and it doesn’t ban all the cruel practices involved in intensive animal agriculture. More specifically, he opposes it because it doesn’t fundamentally address animal rights. What surprised me most about his opposition was this reason:

“it is important for animal advocates to send a clear message to the Humane Society of the United States”

I can’t even fathom this line of reasoning. A clear message would be, let’s see, CLEAR. A “no” vote isn’t clear, given that many voters will vote “no.” How is the HSUS supposed to differentiate between the animal exploiter’s “no” vote and the animal advocate’s “no” vote? They can’t. Perhaps if Gary said, ‘Vote no and send a letter to the HSUS explaining why you voted how you did’ then his explanation would make more sense. But he didn’t say that. He just wants you to vote ‘no.’

Francione claims, ” if passed, [the initiative] will only make the public feel better about animal exploitation and will result in increased exploitation.” I highly doubt animal product consumption will increase as a result of Prop 2. There simply isn’t any real evidence to support Francione’s claims that meat consumption will increase.

The people who will “feel better about animal exploitation” after Prop 2 passes are the same people who don’t feel bad enough now to stop. They already eat animal products and they’re not stopping any time soon.

Besides, it’s immoral to deny animals a relief in suffering in order to encourage more people to go vegan. The issues are separate. We can’t base how we treat animals on what we expect humans to do. The animals need our help NOW. And the humans are, well, unpredictable. Will they eat less or more meat, who knows? It’s not truly relevant.

And guess what? You can vote “yes” on Prop 2 and still send a letter to the HSUS telling them you’d rather they spend money on vegan education than on animal welfare measures. You can vote “yes” on Prop 2 and refrain from donating money to the HSUS. You can vote “yes” on Prop 2 and continue working towards abolition. You can vote “yes” on Prop 2 and still do vegan education.

Posted by Elaine Vigneault | Filed Under Animals, Food, Politics, vegan, vegetarian
5 Comments to "Vote Yes On Prop 2"

It’s Not Enough

August 23, 2008 | 2 Comments

It’s not enough to oppose animal exploitation. We must also oppose the protection of animal exploitation. The AETA is an immoral, unpatriotic law that MUST be repealed.

Vegan Eats In Southern Utah’s Cedar City

August 19, 2008 | Leave a Comment

Cedar City, Utah is just a 3 hour drive from Las Vegas, Nevada. Cedar City is a small college town of about 30,000 residents. While the Vegas weather is over 110 degrees, Cedar City is in the 80s and 90s. The town in called “Festival City” because it hosts many festivals throughout the year, including the famous Shakespearean Festival at Southern Utah University.

The Shakespearean Festival lasts practically all Summer long and contains a wide variety of plays, both by William Shakespeare and by other playwrights. There are plays about twice a day every day except Sunday. There are often three plays to choose from at each time slot since there are three theaters. In addition, there is a free “Greenshow” an hour before some evening plays and there are backstage tours, costume tours, and more.

During my visit last year, I had just recently become vegan. Though I’d been vegetarian almost my entire life, I was still getting accustomed to veganism and the lack of a dairy crutch can sometimes make eating out difficult. Moreover, I wasn’t familiar with Cedar City and all its offerings. So I ate many of my meals in my motel room with the aid of a grocery store, a mini-fridge, and a microwave. (A boxed package of Indian curried potatoes or canned vegetarian chili and microwave rice became my travel dinner staples.)

This time, however, I found some good vegan eat’n in Cedar City:

WOW Eatery
http://www.woweatery.com/
5 North Main Street, Cedar City, Utah
435-586-7334

Located upstairs in the shopping center with Boomers and Cafe Orleans, WOW features an almost entirely vegetarian menu. All but one item on the menu can be made vegan and most are vegan without modification necessary. The menu is mostly sandwiches and lunch items with some desserts and drinks.

Pluses:

Vegan-Friendly Menu: Wonderful menu for vegetarians and vegans. Only one item is not vegetarian. All items can be made vegan.
Healthy Food: Tasty bread and yummy sandwiches that are homemade and healthy.
Friendly Staff: Many of the people who work there are very nice and helpful.
Clean and Organized: The restauarant definitely isn’t run by a ‘dirty hippy.’ This place is clean and has a bit of style.
Reasonable Prices: The prices might seem a tad high for locals or anyone on a tight budget, but for out-of-towners used to shopping at Whole Foods or big city restaurants, the prices are more than fair. And they offer discounts for various groups, so if you’re low on dough, ask about discounts.

Minuses:

Limited Hours: Right now, WOW is only open for lunch. They aren’t open for breakfast. As of this writing, they aren’t open for dinner, but they plan to open for dinner soon. Also, they aren’t open on Sundays.
Some Items Lack Flavor: Some menu items could use better spicing (For example, lentil tacos needed some chilie powder, salt, lemon juice, and/or something. They were a bit bland.) But many menu items are very tasty as they are (Eden Sandwich and WOW sandwich are great.) Also, if you want salt and pepper, ask for it because it’s not on the tables.
Not Dog-Friendly: There is no outdoor space.
No Beer

Cafe Orleans
http://www.cafeorleans.org/
5 North Main Street, Cedar City, Utah
435-867-6437

This New Orleans themed restaurants offers two excellent options for vegans: 1) Okra Gumbo and 2) Red Beans and Rice. Both are prepared with a vegetable stock rather than a ham bone or a meaty stock. They are truly tasty dishes that satisfy both a craving for NOLA food as well as a vegan (which is rare even in the Crescent City).

Other vegetarian and vegan options include items that aren’t quite so Orleanian: veggie kababs, tofu stuffed bell pepper, pasta, garden salad, steamed veggies, and more. (I have a suspicsion the etouffee can be vegan. Basically, I think their kitchen is vegan-friendly and you could order many items as vegan simply by omitting the optional dead animal.)

Pluses:

For Real: Authentic Cajun and New Orleanian cuisine. Even the decor and the menu phrasing clues those in the know that this isn’t an average cajun ’style’ restaurant; this place is run by someone who is actually from New Orleans.
Plentiful Veg*n Options: A vegetarian section on the menu. In addition, there are vegetarian or vegan items listed elsewhere on the menu.
Popular: People really seem to like this place. It’s bound to be a hit for any group of diverse eaters and is probably a good option for groups that contain both herbivores and carnivores.
Knowledgable: Our food servers seemed knowledgeable. They understood the word “vegan” and even recommended against the pre-buttered garlic bread.
Tasty Food: I scarfed down the meals I ate at Cafe Orleans. I highly recommend the okra gumbo and the red beans.

Minuses:

Website: The website menu isn’t complete. It doesn’t list the many vegetarian options. They are on the printed menu in the restaurant, though. And if you ask the servers, they’ll tell you about specific dishes. If in doubt, call ahead. Moreover, the website lists an old address. They’ve moved and are now located on Main Street.
No Beer: They don’t serve alcohol. (You might consider that a plus, though.)
Not Dog-Friendly: There is no outdoor space.
Closed on Sundays: Like many places in Southern Utah, this restaurant is closed on Sundays. Just get an order or red beans on Saturday and store in your motel mini-fridge to eat on Sunday :)
Not Dog-Friendly: There is no outdoor space. (I wonder if they might add a few tables out front next Summer.)
Dead Animal Centric: The menu can be a bit disturbing for vegans because it features quite a bit of dead animal. They even serve veal.

LaCasa Don Miguel
453 South Main Street, Cedar City, Utah
435-586-6855

Pluses:

Open on Sundays: One of the few places in Cedar City that’s open on Sundays.
Alcohol: They serve beer!
Vegetarian Options: While they’re not so familiar with veganism, they’re just fine with vegetarianism. If you’re vegan, be very specific. There’s unmentioned cheese and sour cream in many items and if you don’t specifically order it without, you’ll have to scrape if off or send it back.
Very Friendly: There’s a mother-daughter team who works here or owns the place. They and the rest of the staff are very, very friendly. I’ve eaten here a few times and it’s always been a pleasure.
Low Prices: This place is very reasonable. And since you get free chips and salsa, you don’t need to order (and pay for) much food.

Minuses:

Menu Isn’t Precise: The menu won’t mention the cheese or sour cream. Ask about it.
Cleanliness: They could use a deep cleaning. The place isn’t kept up as well as it should be.
No Outdoor: Though there is plenty of room for tables outside, there aren’t any. Thus, should your company include a dog, you’ll be relegated to take-out.

The Pastry Pub
86 University Street/ West Center, Cedar City, Utah
435-867-1400

The menu says “no substitutions” in many places, but if you ask, you can have a vegetarian or meat sandwich or wrap customized to become vegan.

The Grind Coffee House
19 North Main Street, Cedar City, Utah
435-867-5333

They carry soy milk. So you can get a soy mocha, soy latte, or just a regular coffee with soy. Or if you’re not into coffee, they’ve got tea and some juices. Though it’s usually pretty easy to be vegan at coffee houses, the fact that this place carries soy speaks to their accommodating and enlightened nature.

More Cedar City Vegan and Vegetarian Options:
I haven’t tried these out personally yet, but they’re on my list to try during my next visit.

Lucky Buffet
84 North Main Street #101
435-865-8986
Well located on Main Street. Since it’s a buffet, it’s likely got at least a few options for vegetarians and vegans.

Ninja Japanese Steakhouse & Sushi
1180 Sage Dr #A
435-867-5577
The advertisements for this place included a menu that listed many vegetarian options. Moreover, most sushi restaurants can easily make vegan sushi, such as avocado rolls, cucumber rolls, vegetable tempura rolls, and more.

Chains & Fast Food:
These are the old standbys for when there’s nothing else available at that time or day, at that price point, or in that quick time-frame.

Subway
667 South Main Street
2645 North Canyon Ranch Drive (inside Love’s Travel Stop)
1485 West 200 North
1190 South Sage Drive
With four locations in Cedar City, Subway is practically a sure bet. For vegetarians, order the veggie sub. For vegans, get the veggie sub minus cheese on Italian bread.

Carl’s Jr.
2645 North Canyon Ranch Drive
(inside Love’s Travel Stop)
Most Carl’s Jr. locations offer a salad bar, baked potatoes, and a few other vegan meals. If you’re on a budget or in a rush, this might be a good choice.

Del Taco
1733 Royal Hunte Drive
Just like Carl’s Jr., this is a good option if you’re budget is tight or if you’re in a hurry. Get a plain bean burrito without cheese or customize another menu item to omit the meat and dairy.

Taco Bell
775 West 200 North
Same as Del Taco - get it without cheese, meat, sour cream, etc.

Wendy’s
1225 West 200 North
For baked potatoes or salads.

There are also a wide variety of pizza places and I’m sure most or all can do a vegan pizza.
For a complete list of restaurants in Cedar City, check the official Cedar City website >>

(This post crossposted at Vegan Soapbox.)

Posted by Elaine Vigneault | Filed Under Las Vegas, Travel, cedar city, restaurants, utah, vegan, vegan restaurants
Leave a Comment to "Vegan Eats In Southern Utah’s Cedar City"