Regarding Hate and Crime

September 30, 2008 | 2 Comments

Your government is more interested in protecting people who abuse animals than in protecting ordinary people:

“[California] Assembly Bill 2296, or the Researcher Protection Act of 2008, makes it a misdemeanor to publish personal information about academic researchers or their family members with the intent to use this information to threaten or attack those researchers.

“The bill also makes it a misdemeanor for protesters to enter researchers’ property for the purpose of interfering with their academic practices.” (source)

So, if ‘intent’ to ‘threaten or attack’ is the issue, then why not make a law like this protect ALL people, not just vivisectors? Hmmm?

As Obama said regarding similar federal legislation years ago:

“I do not want people to think that the threat from these organizations [ALF and ELF] is equivalent to other crimes faced by Americans every day. According to the FBI, there were over 7400 hate crimes committed in 2003 - half of which racially motivated. More directly relevant to this committee, the FBI reports 450 pending environmental crimes cases involving worker endangerment or threats to public health or the environment.” (source)

I think it’s sadly interesting that many feminists and anti-racists would rather spend time criticizing PETA’s marketing campaigns than spending time criticizing the government. If the claim is made that PETA “spits in the face of traditionally marginalized groups,” (source) just stop and take a look at what your own government is doing.

Posted by Elaine Vigneault | Filed Under Animals, Politics, Racism, animal-rights
2 Comments to "Regarding Hate and Crime"

Anti-Racist Vegan Activism Part 4

May 12, 2008 | 7 Comments

This is part four in my series of trying to confront my own white privilege.

Previously:

Now, I’m going to jump ahead in the reading list to Racism and the Animal Rights Movement from Satya magazine (no longer in print, but all the links still work). Here are some key quotations from the piece:

“It’s one thing for a white person to pass out vegan flyers. But attempts by white AR activists to set the agenda for other cultures bears an uncomfortable resemblance to the historical pattern of suppression by dominant nations. Instead of exporting ‘democracy,’ AR activists are exporting their cultural concepts of the proper relationship between human and nonhuman animals.”

“[M]ost large AR organizations, which model themselves after corporations and in fact are characterized by the same ‘institutional racism’: no matter how colorful their brochures, the vast majority of positions of power are held by white people, albeit nice ones who like animals. According to one activist, outreach to communities of color is approached like a marketing challenge, not as a desire to share power.” [...] “Any organization that is not intentionally anti-racist inevitably benefits white people.”

“But the key, the pivotal point is how to embrace other people, how to share power.”

“It’s dangerous when you take an extreme this-is-the-only-way-things-can-change point of view. [...] They need to ask people of color, ‘How can I help you? How can I be your ally? What is it that you need from me?’”

Even better, the essay suggests specific things you can do to foster non-racist and anti-racist attitudes in vegan and animal activism (might I suggest these ideas to other people working to become allies?):

Talk about it
Get anti-racist training
Take responsibility
Strategize with diverse groups
Be thoughtful when planning campaigns
Write diversity into your Mission
Think: location, location, location
Table in neighborhoods of color
Co-sponsor events with diverse groups
Practice affirmative action

Go here to read the whole thing >>

My reaction: This essay is great. The tips are especially helpful. I don’t run an animal rights organization, but I run a vegan website (Vegan Soapbox) and I plan to be a partner in a small vegan business soon (currently writing the business plan). So these tips are wonderful. For example, I will incorporate anti-racism and diversity into our Mission Statement right away.

Now, let me tackle some of the specific problems the essay mentions:

“attempts by white AR activists to set the agenda for other cultures” - I think the way to counter this is to seek out AR people first. One thing I learned in college about female genital mutilation (FGM) is that within each culture that practices it, there’s a group trying to end it. But the mistake that many Western organizations made was that they assumed because the practice was so widespread that no one within the culture was already fighting it. Instead of finding the activists within the culture and arming them with tools and activist soldiers, we invaded, literally (FGM and women’s liberation was used as one rational for the US to invade Afghanistan). The solution to overcoming this kind of colonialism is to seek out the activists within each culture or community and work with them rather than coming in as an outsider and taking control. It’s also probably a more effective strategy, too, to work with the people already fighting the same battle than to work separately.
“model themselves after corporations and in fact are characterized by the same ‘institutional racism’” - There are lots of solutions to this one. Many are listed above: anti-racist training, affirmative action, etc.
“the pivotal point is how to embrace other people, how to share power” - Here’s where I get stuck. Beyond the ideas listed above, how do we share power? It’s one thing to hand someone a microphone, it’s another to actually share power. Half the power I have I don’t even realize, so how am I going to share it? I know, I know, I should learn to recognize it. But, seriously, that could take a lifetime. Is there a quick fix? Is there an easy way to share power? Typical, right? White women doesn’t want to think and wants the answers delivered neatly onto her lap. Well, yeah, sort of. Basically, I just really want your input.

—

Reminder for commenters: Please share your thoughts if you’re interested in anti-racist vegan activism.

But if you’re not interested in anti-racist vegan activism, please comment elsewhere. If you’re not pro-vegan or vegan-neutral and anti-racist, I’m not interested in what you have to say. Say it elsewhere. This space is not for bashing on vegans. Likewise, this space is not for claiming that confronting racism within the animals rights movements is a waste of time. Furthermore, the fact that I’m confronting racism within AR is NOT “proof” that animal rights is anti-human. There are plenty of anti-racist vegans and anti-racist animal advocates out there!

Example of a good comment: “I’ve got some ideas of how to end racism within AR. Here they are…”
Example of a bad comment: “PETA is stupid.” or “These are all trivial issues.”

Posted by Elaine Vigneault | Filed Under Racism, veganism
7 Comments to "Anti-Racist Vegan Activism Part 4"

Bugging Out Over Veganism & Privilege

April 29, 2008 | 4 Comments

A warning: I will get a little defensive through this, so I apologize now. If you’re not interested in hearing me out here, please go read another post. People seem to like my most recent list of 15 ways to be frugal and vegan or my video about how to go vegan.

Lovely.

Someone named Drew tried to leave this comment (which was caught in the spam trap and which I did not free from the trap):

Your right- it’s not a “white privilege”- it’s a rich privilege. The majority of food grown today with the use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers consist of a very low nutritional value. To receive the full benefits of vegetables, lots, especially now, of cold cash is needed. Living off of PB&J will only get you to the doctors office- oh wait, no money for that either.

It is quite apparent you have never visited a poor neighborhood’s grocery store. When I visit the south, I have to stock up on food prior to leaving the Atl airport. Most is wilted, out dated and definitely contains minute amounts of nutrition.

I’m a vegetarian and it is not offensive in the least to tell me that I participate in a “white privilege”. Instead of becoming offensive, which is extremely irrational, I instead show individuals how to grow vegetables any way they can.

Your argument is extremely invalid. To counter an invalid argument, all I can type is- “she’s ignorant since she’s a blond”

This comment was left in response to this post, Veg*ns are Varied, which makes the point that latest polls show that the majority of veg*ns are people of color.

So, let’s deconstruct, a bit.

1. “it’s not a white privilege - it’s a rich privilege”

Nope. Veganism isn’t about privilege. Veganism is about abstaining from using animals as much as possible.

That said, there are certainly elements of white privilege in all things white people do. It’s basically the definition of the term “white privilege.” So, for example, some animal advocacy exhibits white supremacy. See Vegans of Color or Sistah Vegan for more on that.

But veganism is simply about abstaining from animal use. And anyone can do that. Like I’ve said over and over before, you don’t have to shop at Whole Foods to be a vegan. You can shop at the regular grocery store.

2. “The majority of food grown today with the use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers consist of a very low nutritional value. To receive the full benefits of vegetables, lots, especially now, of cold cash is needed.”

Where does this assumption that omnivores don’t need to eat fruits and vegetables come from? News flash: if you don’t eat 5 servings of fruits and vegetables a day, your health is going to suffer. It doesn’t matter if you’re a vegan or an omnivore. You HAVE to eat fruits and veggies.

Yeah, healthy, organic food is expensive for everyone. But there’s no special tax for vegans. We all have to pay it.

And news flash: food stamps and WIC can be used on vegan items. You can even use them at some farmer’s markets. Lots of people think WIC is just milk and cheese, but no. Eligible vegan WIC foods: cereal, infant formula, dried beans, peanut butter, juice. How do I know this? Because when I was earning $12k a year in college, my sister was preggers and we went grocery shopping together to help save on the bills. And yes, she maintained a healthy vegetarian diet through her pregnancy and has a very healthy child as a result, who is now 8 years old.

And seriously, would you rather eat low nutritional food that’s been filtered through a hormone and antibiotic filled, sick, sad, and tortured cow or would you rather eat straight from the source? Think about it: if the human-grade food is low, what do you think the livestock-grade food’s nutritional value is? Why do you think beef is so cheap? Because that’s what omnivorism is: getting your nutrients filtered through the flesh of animals. Cows get calcium the same place vegans get it - from leafy greens.

3. “Living off of PB&J will only get you to the doctors office- oh wait, no money for that either.”

I’ve never suggested living off PB&J. I said when I was in the Corps and they didn’t have vegetarian options, I ate PB&J for a few weeks until they started providing me with real food. Other things I’ve done when money is tight:

Potatoes, potatoes, potatoes.
Bean burritos, bean soups, beans, beans, beans.
Soup - there’s that story about how you start to make a soup thinking you have nothing in the cupboard and you wind up with a full, hearty soup. Well, it’s true.
Whatever fruit is on sale.
Shop at places I despise (wal-mart).

I’ve also done things that aren’t as healthy: top ramen, pizzas… My point is that I have been pretty poor in my past and I’ve known poor vegetarians. So, it can be done.

4. “It is quite apparent you have never visited a poor neighborhood’s grocery store. When I visit the south, I have to stock up on food prior to leaving the Atl airport. Most is wilted, out dated and definitely contains minute amounts of nutrition.”

OK, well here we’ve got an issue. Because statements about all groceries in all poor neighborhoods are going to be sweeping generalizations and have errors. I grew up poor, but no, I didn’t grow up in the south. I grew up in California. There’s plenty of agriculture in California, so I’m sure I had more access to fresh fruits and veggies at reasonable prices than people who live further away from them.

And here in New York, I’m no longer poor and don’t live in a poor neighborhood. But, FYI, there are vegan restaurants in poor neighborhoods and there are groceries and green markets all around. Examples: here, here, here, and here.

5. I’m a vegetarian and it is not offensive in the least to tell me that I participate in a “white privilege”.

Well, that’s your deal. I am not you and you are not me. I happen to think it is offensive, particularly given that so many people of color are vegetarian or vegan. Saying “vegetarianism is white privilege” ignores Hindu and Buddhist vegetarians. Saying “vegetarianism is white privilege” pretends that the majority of non-white people in the world eat meat, when in fact many eat plant-based diets and many practice vegetarianism for practical or religious reasons.

Furthermore, saying veg*nism is a class issue ignores the fact that historically veg*nism has been close to the default lifestyle for poor people because animal products have traditionally been more expensive than plant products. The only reason veg*nism may now be a class issue is that industrial farming has made animal products cheaper, because of the cruel nature of industrial style farming that treats animals as expendable commodities.

6. Instead of becoming offensive, which is extremely irrational, I instead show individuals how to grow vegetables any way they can.

Showing people how to grow their own food is great. I advocate growing your own food too if you can. But defending my beliefs and my identity is not irrational. Debunking untrue stereotypes about veg*ns is not irrational. Speaking the truth is rational.

7. Your argument is extremely invalid. To counter an invalid argument, all I can type is- “she’s ignorant since she’s a blond”

I’m not even going to bother.

Posted by Elaine Vigneault | Filed Under Animals, Food, Racism, veganism
4 Comments to "Bugging Out Over Veganism & Privilege"

Anti-Racist Vegan Activism Part 3

April 19, 2008 | 1 Comment

Photo by blmurch

This is the third part of my anti-racist vegan activism series examines Race and Ethnicity in Vegan and Animal Analysis from Sistah Vegan.

Summary of part 1 in my anti-racist vegan activism series: White animal advocates can be allies instead of leaders. We are allies to animals in animal activism and we are allies to people of color in anti-racist activism. It will require constant vigilance, not to silence ourselves in precarious race or ethnicity-based situations, but rather to silence the parts of ourselves that are acting like imperialists. We ought to be open to criticism, not from anti-animal perspectives, but from anti-colonialism perspectives. We must engage. We must not censor ourselves entirely; we must merely accept criticism and learn from it. If we do not engage, no one learns and no animal’s life is spared. But our engagement is as allies, aiding and inspiring, not dominating or demanding.

Summary of part 2: This is a true challenge: How to advocate for animals without causing new or remembered trauma? While I often feel that animals’ suffering is more intense I cannot know it for certainty, partially due to the blinders of white privilege and partially due to the human condition of being isolated from the world by our own minds’ subjective experience. The same reason I argue we should be agnostic about animal suffering and there’s no need to prove that all animals experience pain (and for the record, fish and lobsters DO feel pain - it’s a FACT) in order to abstain from causing potential pain, for they are similar enough to humans not to justify oppression of them simply because of our differences and the ability we have to oppress them, we should also be agnostic about the suffering in other humans created by some animal advocacy. So we should take people who say they’ve been traumatized at their word and we should listen to their voices. In all efforts for social change, as allies, we should listen to the voices of those whose lives we seek to improve. That includes listening to the screams and cries of caged and tortured animals as well as the screams and cries of people who say they are traumatized by certain animal advocacy demonstrations, analogies, and other efforts.

To see the entire reading list, go here. To read the first part, go here. To read the second part, go here.

Lastly before I being with my analysis, this is a learning process. I am not a teacher here; I am a facilitator. I’m processing these thoughts myself and inviting you to comment and critique if you, too, are interested in anti-racist vegan activism.

Sistah Vegan asks, in Race and Ethnicity in Vegan and Animal Analysis:

[H]ow does one address situations like the below and ignore “race and ethnicity”?:

“Wow, interesting that this Vegetarian festival is 95% white though the city is very ethnically diverse?”, or

“Interesting that a majority of black people disagreed with the PETA Animal Liberation Project”, or

“Why have all the top selling books that have been written about veganism, ‘ethical consumption’ and animal rights have been by whites (mostly male)?”

Sistah Vegan’s essay does a few things:

It highlights the fact that there are interlocking systems of oppression and that animal rights is only one kind of oppression. She wants vegans to concern themselves also with “classism, globalization, neocolonialism, racism and 1st worldism.”
It acknowledges that race is a social construction but that the construction has real life consequences.

The remedies are:

Vegans should ask themselves the kinds of questions above when doing and fostering vegan activism.
Vegan consumption should include fair trade and other responsible choices.

Here are my thoughts:

These are great questions to ask and they serve as a good reminder that when doing and fostering vegan activism, white vegans need to pay particular attention to people of color to include them, to listen to their voices and criticism, and to seek out their opinions and ideas. This is why we need to find websites like Vegans of Color, read them, and promote them.

I absolutely agree with Sistah Vegan regarding nonessentials like coffee or chocolate. Absolutely, these things should be purchased carefully and a responsible consumer should only purchase fair trade items or shouldn’t buy them at all. And I’m all for promoting sustainable, local, fair, organic, and otherwise ethical food, clothing, and other consumption choices.

However, I’m cautious about creating too much of an overlap between veganism and other ethical consumption practices. (And here I go into a tangent that’s got little to do with anti-racist vegan activism, but is relevant here.) Veganism is about animals, first and foremost. And already there is too much misinformation about veganism. I don’t want to confuse the issues too much. However, vegans can obviously be activists in other areas, too, like environmentalism, health promotion, feminism, anti-racism, etc.

Sistah Vegan does not suggest that we extend the definition of vegan, but others have, so I will address that idea here. First, the definition of vegan used by me and wikipedia:

vegan: person who seeks to exclude the use of animals for food, clothing, or any other purpose.

My definition is a shortened version of the definition provided by the Vegan Society, the people who coined the term ‘vegan’:

A vegan is someone who tries to avoid - as far as is possible and practical - all forms of exploitation of animals for food, clothing or any other purpose. This is for the benefit of people, animals and the environment. Vegan eat a plant-based diet free from all animal products, such as meat, animal milks, eggs, honey and gelatine. They also avoid animal products like leather, wool and silk for clothing or other purposes.

Regardless of the intent of veganism, whether it’s for animals, environment, health or whatnot, veganism describes a lifestyle absent of something. It is like atheism in that the word can only be understood in the context of a default lifestyle of something present. For many vegans, the word veganism describes a philosophy that regard animals’ interests as ethically relevant. But the basic meaning of the word is as practice (action) and not as philosophy (thought), and as practice, it is the practice of avoiding animal use for food, clothing, entertainment and so forth.

I’m wary about extending the definition of vegan to include sustainable, fair trade and other types of ethical consumption for a few reasons:

Veganism is about excluding animal uses whereas these other terms are about including particular types of actions.
The definitions of sustainable, fair trade, local, organic, and similar consumption practices are not concrete. They are not nearly as rigid or fixed as the definition of vegan and they are actually somewhat nebulous. Different organizations define the terms differently and there is not enough consistency.
When talking about nonessetials like coffee or chocolate, people are really just drawing their lines where they want. One could easily argue that a true ethical consumer wouldn’t purchase coffee or chocolate at all, much less fair trade. Personally, I’ll buy the fair trade stuff, but I shouldn’t fool myself into thinking that’s acting ethically. That’s merely acting as a “responsible” consumer.
It’s very difficult to tackle all the issues all at once. I think it’s fair to expect most people to only adopt one new consumption practice at a time, not all together.
Sometimes these types of consumption practices conflict. For example, should you buy the fair trade milk chocolate or the non fair trade vegan chocolate? The true ethical choice would be neither. But sometimes it’s not chocolate, sometimes it’s something you really need, like a warm, winter coat. Should you buy the fur coat made by well-treated adults or the vegan coat made by child labor? I think it’s more ethical to buy the vegan item because the harm caused by nonvegan items is direct, that is, there is NO possible way to create a cruelty-free fur coat. Fur, by definition, is cruel because it is someone else’s skin. However, the vegan coat could be made by well-treated adults instead of child labor. The coat, itself, is not the issue. The issue is how the coat is made. (These, of course, are absurd hypotheticals, and you can usually just go to a second-hand store and absolve yourself of all these controversies.)
Veganism isn’t about consumption. Veganism is about not participating in animal use. It’s often about respecting animals’ interests and about abolishing their status as the property of humans. In this way, it’s important to recognize interlocking oppressions, but none of these oppressions, except veganism, can be solved through ethical consumption practices. Our consumption practices when it comes to fair trade or sustainability are more about us having clean hands than about actually ending oppression. Other types of activism is needed for that, which is why anti-racists aren’t usually just asking people to simply partake in a boycott, but animal rights activists are often simply encouraging veganism. If everyone went 100% vegan and refused to partake in animal use, animal oppression would end.

Ultimately, I think animal advocates should embrace other forms of activism and should partake in anti-racist and anti-imperialist activism. But mostly, when doing and fostering vegan activism, white vegans need to pay particular attention to people of color to include them, to listen to their voices and criticism, and to seek out the opinions and ideas of people of color, as well as people working for social change in other movements. Their experience and perspectives are vital and, when working towards the same goals,* can foster great change.

—
*Vegans should not necessarily listen to the perspectives of anti-vegans working for social change in other arenas. Anti-vegans are not our allies.

Posted by Elaine Vigneault | Filed Under Racism, veganism
1 Comment to "Anti-Racist Vegan Activism Part 3"

Anti-Racist Vegan Activism Part 2

April 14, 2008 | 6 Comments

The second part of my new anti-racist vegan activism series examines Unresolved Trauma from Experiencing Racism (and not experiencing it): Challenges to AR from Sistah Vegan. (To see the entire reading list, go here. To read the first part, go here.)

Edit: This is a learning process for both of us. I am not a teacher here, I am a facilitator. I’m processing these thoughts myself and inviting you to comment and critique.*

Here is the essence of “Unresolved Trauma”:

I’m saddened by how traumatized my loved one, a woman in her 60s, is from growing up in an intensely racist society. She was extremely emotional about why she didn’t think black slavery should be equated with non-human animal suffering. [...] For her, she saw the PETA ad as suggesting that blacks are “animals”. Her perception of “animal” is connected to being called or seen as “dirty” or a “nigger”. [...] my loved one [...] is stuck in the trauma of growing up as a black poor girl in the inner-city of Hartford, CT in a time of overt racism in America. It is absolutely impossible for me to explain to her the concept of speciesism because she has been so thoroughly traumatized by racism and what it “means” for someone to suggest that “her suffering” is the same as an “animal”.

For her, “animal” has a different “meaning” than it does for many people like myself. You should have seen the hurt, anger and sadness in her eyes as she tried to tell me why “animals” cannot be paralleled to the experiences of people who have lived through racism, genocide of their people, etc. [emphasis added]

I have seen this hurt in others when I’ve made slavery analogies, comparing groups of oppressed persons to groups of oppressed animals. I’ve said:

[PETA] started a campaign a few years ago that showed the similarities between slavery (and other oppression) and animal exploitation. The similarities are striking and they make a good case.

However, people who do not believe animals deserve liberation are offended by the comparison. Someone who thinks it’s OK to chain up an animal will probably not be persuaded that it’s not OK by showing them how we used to chain up people, too. [...]

Some people who think it’s OK to eat meat get offended when you use “human” words, like when you call ‘meat’ ‘flesh’ or when you call ’slaughter’ ‘execution’ or ‘murder.’ They are offended because they don’t see the similarity. They think there’s nothing in common between human forced labor and animal forced labor. They really, truly don’t get it.

A better argument [against comparing oppressions] is that because there are so many racists, misogynists, bigots and other people who do not believe in the liberation of any group of beings dissimilar to their own group, comparisons between enslaved, oppressed, disenfranchised, and otherwise non-powerful groups of beings possibly damages all liberation movements. People are naturally afraid of change. They tend to handle small, gradual change better than large, sweeping change. They tend to accept those most similar and then slowly extend that range of tolerance, compassion, and acceptance outward.

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.

[...] Lots of people who ‘get it’ in one way don’t get it in other ways. It’s like they have blinders on and only see this or that section of oppressive behavior. We’re all guilty of it, actually. I write my blog from my own experience and my experience is white, middle class, educated female in the US. I’m not going to really understand racism the same way as a person who experiences it.

In the past, I’ve been on the fence. I will make the slavery analogy at times, but it’s rare indeed, because whenever I bring it up, it evokes tremendous anti-animal rhetoric as well as the hurt Sistah Vegan describes.

Some people understand it and for them the analogy is worthwhile: it can inspire animal-friendly lifestyle changes or animal activism, and it can inspire anti-racist or anti-sexist activism as well. For those who don’t understand it, the analogy might be useless. It’s difficult to tell because the exposure the this idea of connected oppressions, even if hurtful, might later develop into understanding.

They say our minds need to be exposed to a new idea multiple times before we actually consider it, so the first few exposures might not be productive, but the end result could be worthwhile. And, sadly, our minds remember vivid memories better than subtle ones, so the controversial and even sometimes hurtful exposures to new ideas tend to form lasting memories. That is, an exposure to a vivid sexy or violent PETA demonstration or ad is more likely to be remembered than exposure to a quiet, subtle, and polite vegan. Indeed the very reason the vegan stereotype is of a judgmental, self-righteous, loud, and rude person is because that particular minority vegan is more memorable than the majority of vegans who defy that stereotype.

The challenge, of course, is to turn those vivid and sometimes hurtful memories into something positive that benefits both humans and animals.

Sistah Vegan’s approach:

I tried to get her to go deeper into this; to suggest that we look at the meaning of “animal” in a way that hasn’t been tainted by her experiences with racism. However, it wasn’t successful and she is too damn scarred and traumatized and simultaneously too “stoic” and most likely embarassed to ever consider going to trauma therapy so she can move past her anti-oppression philosophies as “only for humans” and move into a philosophy of social justice for humans, non-human animals and the planet.

I can understand why someone with her trauma would not see the speciesism they are engaging in yet CLEARLY oppose human injustices. My loved one is fervently against sexism, homophobia, religious intolerance, racism, classism– anything that has to do with making life “hell” for humans, she is opposed to. She “get’s it.” However, her own trauma with racism and the meaning she has applied to “animals”, shows me how powerful the trauma of surviving vicious racism can be in this country and how her own suffering from an unacknowledged trauma (and need for therapy with a black female specialist who “gets it”) prevents her from embracing compassion for animals and humans simultaneously. [emphasis added]

This is a true challenge. How to advocate for animals without causing new or remembered trauma?

Even animal advocates are traumatized. Purely the act of knowing and seeing animal suffering is trauma. I cry every single day for animals. Every day. When I write these posts here and at Vegan Soapbox, sometimes I cry. when I preview expose videos to post on Vegan Soapbox, I cry. When I think about animals suffering on factory farms, on death row in animal shelters, abandoned and locked in foreclosed homes, on fur farms, in canned hunts, in laboratories, in zoos and circuses, in exotic animal trade, and everywhere animals suffer. The knowledge of how animals suffer and the knowledge of the limitless cruelty of which humans are capable of inflicting upon both human animals and nonhuman animals alike is traumatic.

There is far too much trauma in the world for human minds to comprehend without compartmentalizing, prioritizing, rationalizing, desensitizing, and expressing. We ALL do it. From Sistah Vegan:

It is my belief that this is what absence of healing of trauma from racism (not to mention heterosexism, sexism, classism, ableism, etc) does to many who have the potential to “see” the interconnectedness of human, non-human animal and environmental suffering. Maybe the same can be said for many white identified people who have experienced intense trauma from witnessing non-human animals and the environment suffer from culturally accepted institutionalized speciesism in the USA, but are unable to “see” past non-human suffering. The result of this particular trauma seems to be an inability for many to reflect on how other traumas— such as surviving ongoing institutional and overt racism– prevent a group of other people from sympathizing and empathizing with non-human animal suffering.

Indeed, there are times when I’ve said (to myself, not aloud, this is a first) to people upset by comparisons between oppressions, Your trauma is emotional, it’s often memory or knowledge; the animals’ trauma is their reality NOW. I think animals’ suffering is more intense, thus I make it my priority. This is why I react more strongly to a white person who criticizes the slavery analogy than to a person of color who criticizes the slavery analogy, because the offense to the white person is, in my opinion, pretty superficial. The white person’s experience of racism is not nearly as traumatic as the person of color’s.

I haven’t said this aloud because I know such a statement evokes more trauma for people whose definition of ‘animal’ requires a hierarchy wherein humans are above all other species and thus any comparison between humans and animals is, by definition, a slur on humans. They often react like this:

[E]quating a hateful, violent organization like the KKK to the AKC [...] essentially trivializes the crimes of the KKK; it also trivializes their victims by equating them with dogs and trivializes their suffering by equating systematic hate crimes, lynchings, intimidation and discrimination with docking a dog’s tail.

Here the writer makes four mistakes:

Instead of viewing the ad (seen here) as raising the status of animals to humans, and acknowledging human status isn’t so great for a good deal of people, the writer assumes the ad lowers the status of humans to animals,
The writer doesn’t fully consider the implications of the ad: that the AKC (American Kennel Club) is not simply a “benign organization” that “judges pedigree dogs”, but rather an organization that supports, finances, and profits from puppy mills, which are an extreme abuse of animals,
Ignores the racial progress we’ve made that allows the negative social effect of comparing the KKK to any other organization; the mere fact that the KKK elicits such negative reactions in any decent human being shows the intent of the ad is to smear the AKC, not to smear people of color,
Intent matters. (It’s not everything, but it should count for something.) Even those offended by the ad can recognize the intent of the ad to help dogs. The intent is not to harm humans.

(All of the above commentary about the PETA ad is explanation, not justification. I’m not sure if it’s justified or not. Originally, I thought it was, but if more and more people say the ad hurts them, I’m just not sure.)

But more importantly, the reason I shouldn’t say animals’ suffering is more intense is because I am not in the minds’ of others. I cannot feel how they feel and I cannot rightfully compare sufferings of sentient beings outside of myself. I cannot know that the human experience of racism isn’t just as or more intensely felt than the nonhuman animal’s experience of speciesim. I cannot know that physical brutality is more damaging than emotional brutality. My experience is mostly as oppressor and ally. I am only in the position of the oppressed as a woman, past experiences as a poor person, and currently as a person with vilified perspectives (atheist, liberal, vegan).

So, while I often feel that animals’ suffering is more intense I cannot know it for certainty, partially due to the blinders of white privilege and partially due to the human condition of being isolated from the world by our own minds’ subjective experience. The same reason I argue we should be agnostic about animal suffering and there’s no need to prove that all animals experience pain in order to abstain from causing potential pain, for they are similar enough to humans not to justify oppression of them simply by differences, we should also be agnostic about the suffering in other humans created by animal activism. So we should take people who say they’ve been traumatized at their word and we should listen to their voices.

In all efforts for social change, as allies, we should listen to the voices of those whose lives we seek to improve.

Sistah Vegan concludes:

I am all about open-ended honesty to work through and abolish speciesism, racism, sexism, etc. Though my attempt is to understand all sides’ perceptions and reactions to “injustice”, I too am still healing from the trauma of racism and have A LOT to learn— or rather unlearn– about the anger, fear, hate, suffering, etc that drive the fragmentation of justice movements that could come together as one..

I too have a lot to learn and unlearn. Let’s do it together.

—

*Open to comment and criticism, however, commenters should be truly interested in anti-racist vegan activism.

I am NOT interested in hearing from people who aren’t involved in either movement. Likewise, I won’t tolerate discussions that sound like this “Well animals aren’t as important as people, so we should forget about animal activism and focus of racism.” That doesn’t help.

Posted by Elaine Vigneault | Filed Under Racism, veganism
6 Comments to "Anti-Racist Vegan Activism Part 2"