On Veganism And Privilege
February 24, 2008
I don’t believe in determinism, I think people can change and have free will. But I’m starting to think there may be some reason to adjust my opinion. This is because of the excuses some people give for refusing to act morally. To wit, I’ll quote Unpopular Vegan Essays:
“Unfortunately, our abstract intelligence and language use can also make our behavior monstrously cruel and immoral, far beyond the capacity of any nonhuman, especially when our agency and responsibility for moral behavior is diminished by living in an immoral society. We are highly social creatures – herd animals, if you will – and our inclination to follow the herd, at least for most of us, is one of our strongest psychological and instinctual drives, and sadly, for most of us, is also much stronger than any sense of morality. So when the herd engages in atrocities, most of us are all too willing to go along, or at least ignore it. In fact, the herd instinct of humans can be found underlying and significantly contributing to virtually all atrocities in history and the present: genocides, slavery, witch-burnings, and the moral status and uses of animals, including their property status and slaughter by the billions.
“Many readers today will say, ‘Yeah, sure, the first three (genocide, slavery, witch-burning) are bad, but the moral status and use of animals is fine as it is.’ I’ll just remind these readers that the societies and people engaging in the first three thought those were ‘fine as they were’ also. Again, humans never engage in activity that we have not ‘rationalized’ in some way. We see the atrocities of other societies and other times clearly, but we tend to be so very blind to the atrocities of our own society and time. Vegans may be upset with this moral blindness of our society until we realize that it is no different than being upset with Hurricane Katrina. Tragic and sad? Certainly it is tragic and sad, but inevitable in a blind, indifferent, and determined Universe nevertheless.”
Daisy claims it’s too much to expect someone in college to ask their cafeteria to provide vegan options. That’s just too much of a burden on poor college students, says Daisy:
“while it’s possible the university would listen and change their menu, there is no guarantee, and anyway, asking him to do that is asking a lot more of him than asking [him] to just not buy meat.”
To which I replied:
“If you can justify inaction based on [an] assertion that it’s too much burden to act morally in immoral situations, then there’s really no hope for the future, is there? None of us ought to do anything to further social change.”
Maybe she’s right.
But her excuse isn’t determinism, it’s privilege. She says vegans are privileged. And she takes issue with me when I claim it’s not the same kind of privilege as standard white privilege.
She says I claimed,
“there is no element of privilege whatsoever to veg*nism”
I never, ever said that. In fact, I wrote this (in the comments here):
“The real privilege is in education.”
“There are certainly cultural barriers, but they are not adequate justifications for not going veg.”
“There are various types of privilege, including education, access to opportunities, freedom from racism, etc. It’s not just about money.”
“Money is not a barrier against boycotting meat products.”
And I wrote this in another article:
“Prejudice and racism exist everywhere and there are no doubt some cultural, financial and other pressures in regards to food and clothing choices. But we can all make some choices to end or reduce animal suffering and animal consumption.”
“There are certainly intersections of race, class, and education regarding veganism. But to attack veganism and to simplify the conversation about those intersections to ‘veganism is white privilege’ is truly offensive.”
You know, I was wrong. Vegans aren’t privileged at all. The privileged position is the one that oppresses. The privileged position is the one that uses power and difference to justify cruelty and oppression. This is a good example of privilege. Sadly, it’s also a good example of determinism:
“It is a documented fact that whenever human beings are given authority over lower-status beings — whether the lower status beings are cattle or women or slaves or prisoners of war — those in authority are unable to contain their vicious impulses and quickly morph into sadistic amoral assholes. This is a cornerstone of patriarchy.”
Privilege is calling unethical behavior that results in oppression, torture, and death a “dietary choice.” Privilege is valuing absence of self-righteousness over actual ethical behavior. Privilege is saying that asking a college cafeteria to provide vegan options is too much of a burden. Privilege is consuming animals. Privilege is the ability to justify inaction on behalf of others.
Comments
29 Responses to “On Veganism And Privilege”
1 Trackbacks to “On Veganism And Privilege”
- On Being Constitutionally Incapable Of Dialogue « Our Descent Into Madness on February 27th, 2008 7:19 pm
[...] Feel like reading this thread? [...]
Got something to say?
Links
- Vegan Outreach
- Swanky Veg
- Pets Named Otis
- Prosper
- Farm Sanctuary
- Alas, a blog
- Week of Vegan
- The Blog Bloke
- Diary of a Goldfish
- Daughter of the Ring of Fire
- Woman’s Prison Association
- Hugo Schwyzer
- Susie Bright
- PETA
- Lorelle on WordPress
- Life In The UP
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Vegans of Color
- Sistah Vegan
- Beth Owens
- The Adventure Granny
- View Entire Blogroll
Important Message:
Order a FREE vegetarian starter kit at GoVeg.com
I wasn’t trying to say that vegans are privileged, but that privileged people have a significantly easier time being vegans. Food is one of the areas that many oppressed groups get hit hardest, especially in the US. Consequently, I don’t think veganism is a viable option for everyone in the US. Those of us who have that option should exercise it — you and I do, to different extents. We should also fight to make it an option for everybody. But we won’t get there by simply denying that the barriers don’t exist, and/or blaming the people who face them.
I also don’t think it makes sense to decree veganism as the only moral way to eat. That might be an irrevocable difference of opinion, but I don’t think that, say, keeping chickens for their eggs is immoral.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Why I’ve been virtually absent a while.
And by “keeping chickens” I mean keeping a small number of them, healthy and well-fed and with plenty of room, by the way.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Why I’ve been virtually absent a while.
Daisy,
I’d like to respond to two of your points.
1. “I also don’t think it makes sense to decree veganism as the only moral way to eat.”
I’d like to shift the focus from eating to harming and killing. This is my proposition: “It is wrong to enagage in easily avoidable harm to other living beings.” If you agree with that premise, then I take it you would agree that to the extent one can go vegan, they should.
If so, then it’s a matter of: To what extent can people go vegan? I think most independent adults in the U.S. (and probably the developed world in general) can significantly reduce their intake of meat, dairy, and eggs - right this minute, at no cost, possibly saving money in the short and long run, and possibly improving their health. An additional side-effect of such a change would be a cleaner environment, which helps all living beings. Furthermore, as each person moves toward veganism, it makes it easier for the next person: As demand for vegan products grows, the cost of vegan products decreases and the quality of availabilty of vegan products decreases. But note that vegan staples such as vegetables, fruit, legumes, and whole grains can be accquired quite cheaply. It’s mostly the processed products that are relatively expensive.
Most of the people I know who unquestionably have the means and knowledge to go completely vegan aren’t even making an effort to reduce their consumption of animal products. If you agree with my proposition that unnecessarily harming and killing sentient beings is wrong, perhaps we can agree that we should strive to get these people to reduce the unnecessary killing that they are now choosing to do.
I don’t want to get into blame. I am far more interested in solutions. How does one convince the average middle or upper class citizen of a large metropolitan area - where there are tons of vegan substitutes for nearly every popular animal product available - to stop killing animals for pleasure, or out of habit. I’m all ears. I don’t mean that in a snotty, rhetorical way - I am truly open to any sincere suggestions.
#2. “I don’t think that, say, keeping chickens for their eggs is immoral.”
Wild jungle fowl, the pristine ancestors of modern laying hens, lay about 20 eggs per year. That’s how many they need to lay to perpetuate the species. After laying a clutch of eggs in the spring, their bodies take a breather. It requires energy and materials to create an egg - those come from the hen’s body.
Through centuries of breeding, we have greatly ramped up hens’ “productivity” - strictly for human benefit, but at a cost to the hens’ well-being and comfort. It is the same as a powerful alien race manipulating your body so that you had a period every three days, because they wanted your eggs. Even if you didn’t know you had been manipulated, and even if you didn’t know they wanted your eggs, I’m sure you can see that this would still be exploitation.
I have no reason to doubt that your hens have ample room and are well-fed. I presume they have areas for dust-bathing and sun-bathing, get plenty of outdoor time each day, have varied underbrush in which they can explore, have private places in which to build nests, and have acess to nest-building materials. Ideally, they’d probably like to be led by a rooster, also. Even more ideally, these roosters would communicate with other roosters in a super-network of flocks, each one with a rooster at the helm. These eons-old desires have not been bred out of chickens.
Also, you should leave some eggs for the hens. Hens sometimes ingest their own eggs, probably - as best we know - to re-absorb calicum and other nutrients that are lost through the egg-laying process. Furthermore, as farmers found out centuries ago, taking all of a hen’s eggs coerces her to produce more.
Where were your hens born? Did they have a mother communicating with them even when in the shell, and welcoming them into the world? Or were they hatched in an incubator? What became of the male chicks at the hatchery?
I fully agree with the premise that humans can genuinely love and respect chickens.But we cannot manipulate hens’ bodies or their environments to make them produce more eggs because we like their eggs. We should not value hens for their egg-laying capabilities, but simply because they *are*. If no hen ever layed one egg “for us,” our love and respect for them should not change one iota. When that day comes, we might be within shouting distance of a truly harmonious and peaceful world.
Daisy wrote: “I also don’t think it makes sense to decree veganism as the only moral way to eat. ”
I sensed this was the real issue. You disagree with me on a fundamental level about whether or not it’s OK to use our power to control the lives of animals to our benefit, not theirs.
You think humane eggs are OK. I disagree.
Just as I would not like to be kept in someone’s backyard my entire life in order to produce food for them, I’m certain many chickens would prefer to live a life free of force and coercion.
Elaine,
I sensed this was the real issue. You disagree with me on a fundamental level about whether or not it’s OK to use our power to control the lives of animals to our benefit, not theirs.
I don’t think it’s the real issue, actually. It’s true that we disagree there, but I know, read, and respect many vegans, some of whom share your stance.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Why I’ve been virtually absent a while.
Hi Gary,
I’d like to shift the focus from eating to harming and killing. This is my proposition: “It is wrong to enagage in easily avoidable harm to other living beings.” If you agree with that premise, then I take it you would agree that to the extent one can go vegan, they should.
Overall, yes. Firstly, I appreciate your caveat “to the extent one can go vegan.” I agree that most adults in the US can reduce their consumption of animals products — they certainly should. Where I disagree with Elaine is that we hold all people to one standard, since some are considerably more able than others to change their diets (i.e., privileged versus oppressed). People in privileged positions (white people, wealthy people), participate in and benefit from the system that privileges them, while oppressed people are hurt by it; holding oppressed groups culpable for their oppression is not okay.
Secondly, I still don’t think all ways of using animals are immoral. I see your reasoning and I respect your position. I stand with you unequivocally against factory farming, against torture, against gross mistreatment, against industrialized production.
Where I lose you is in your thinking that small-scale, ethical, sustainable, use of (partnership with?) animals is wrong (if that is in fact what you are saying). I agree with you that selective breeding to change animals’ bodies is wrong, but now that it’s done, what are we suppose to do? Neither farm hens nor dairy cows can fend for themselves in the wild. I think the most moral thing to do, at this point in history, is to give those animals the best lives we can under human care. Because of the ways we’ve engineered them, and in order to make it a feasible venture, that will include human use of eggs and milk. As long as that happens in considerate, sustainable ways, I think it’s fine.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Why I’ve been virtually absent a while.
Hi Daisy,
I’d like to answer your question about what we do with the genetically-modifed animals now that we’ve created them. The answer is stop breeding them. Since the country is not going to suddenly go vegan, the remaining animals will, unfortunately, be slaughtered for consumption. But as people reduce their intake of animal products, eventually to zero, the demand for breeding new animals fated to be slaughtered will decrease accordingly.
>>> People in privileged positions (white people, wealthy people), participate in and benefit from the system that privileges them, while oppressed people are hurt by it; holding oppressed groups culpable for their oppression is not okay.<<<
I wholeheartedly agree. However, I believe nearly all of us in the U.S. can sharply reduce our intake of animal products right now at no extra cost, and with only minor, temporary inconvenience. Balancing that out is the improved health that usually comes with an increase in consumption of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes, and the peace of mind that results from not engaging in avoidable harm to animals, and from adopting a diet that is in line with deep-seated morals.
This conversion can be sped up through education and advocacy, each of us doing what we can to reach out to our unique audiences, so that they can end, as much as practically possible, their participation in the exploitation of animals.
Hi Daisy,
I just thought of couple more things. You said “I stand with you unequivocally against factory farming, against torture, against gross mistreatment, against industrialized production.” I appreciate that. Does that mean that you, for example, avoid most store-bought and restaurant baked goods, since they almost certainly involve all the aforementioned transgressions?
Also - if you are against gross mistreatment of animals, do know that most sources of meat, dairy and eggs involve some of that. If a veterinarian cut off your dog’s or cat’s testicles without painkillers, his/her behavior would be considered gross mistreatment. S/he might lose her license. Yet this is done every day on large and small farms.
Almost all dairy farms - including small Amish farms and organic farms that tout their attention to animal welfare - steal baby calves from their mothers. That, to me, is gross mistreatment. How do you feel about that practice? The cows are also forced to have babies every year so they’ll continuously pump out milk. Is that humane or cruel? Respectful or exploitative?
Modern broiler chickens - free-range or not - are genetically engineered to be obese and unnaturally top-heavy, and to grow at hyper fast rates. This causes chronic pain and huge strains on the bird’s internal organs. The chickens are killed at only seven weeks old! Some are still peeping!
To save costs, farmers starve their animals for one to four days before slaughter, because there would not be enough time for the animals’ food to be converted to profitable meat, milk, or eggs. Gross mistreatment. And a flagrant violation of the golden rule. Imagine the animals’ suffering.
You can probably see where I’m going with this. The best way to ensure that you are not contributing to gross mistreatment of animals, and other cruelties, is to go vegan. I can tell that you have concern for animals’ welfare. Choosing to go vegan is a logical extension of that concern, and a profound way to respect animals and to refrain from participating in their exploitation.
Daisy, you’re twisting my words. I am not holding everyone to the same standard and thereby expecting everyone to go vegan.You’re setting up a straw Elaine to tear down.
Where we disagree: You think it’s too much of a burden to expect people to go out of their way at all. I think people who eat ethically, regardless of how privileged they are, MUST go out of their way to eat ethically. And I don’t think it’s too much to ask a college cafeteria to provide vegan options. Our society is not set up to accept and accommodate vegans.
You think it’s too much of a burden to expect people to go out of their way at all.
No, I don’t. That’s a straw-Daisy. All I think is that there is a meaningful difference between people who barely have to go out of their way (like me), and people who would have to do a lot more. I think that people who can do these things easily have to acknowledge how lucky we are. That’s all.
And I don’t think it’s too much to ask a college cafeteria to provide vegan options.
I never said the cafeteria shouldn’t provide vegan options — it absolutely should. What I said was that it doesn’t. If I went to school there, I would ask them to. My school’s cafeteria does have vegan options — any on-campus student there can easily go veg*an. Which puts them in different position from the kids at my friend’s school.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Videos Of Venus Flytraps
I’d like to answer your question about what we do with the genetically-modifed animals now that we’ve created them. The answer is stop breeding them. Since the country is not going to suddenly go vegan, the remaining animals will, unfortunately, be slaughtered for consumption. But as people reduce their intake of animal products, eventually to zero, the demand for breeding new animals fated to be slaughtered will decrease accordingly.
Okay.
However, I believe nearly all of us in the U.S. can sharply reduce our intake of animal products right now at no extra cost, and with only minor, temporary inconvenience.
I think everyone should do that to the extent that they are able. If everyone can be vegan, great. But it will be a lot harder for some people than others. People stuck on hostile campuses are one example. A much better example are poor people stuck in inner cities, some of whom may have trouble accessing even standard, corporate supermarkets.
Also: yes, I know all about food production, where animal products come from, factory farming, etc. I’m vegetarian, I buy as much local food as possible, I only buy local/ethical eggs, and any other animal products I get local/ethical whenever possible. I’m fortunate to live in a town that’s friendly to sustainable/veg*n eating, so there is some infrastructure in place to make this relatively easy for me.
The best way to ensure that you are not contributing to gross mistreatment of animals, and other cruelties, is to go vegan. I can tell that you have concern for animals’ welfare. Choosing to go vegan is a logical extension of that concern, and a profound way to respect animals and to refrain from participating in their exploitation.
I agree. Is this a campaign to try to get me to go vegan? I acknowledge that it is ideal, and that my diet is only one step in the transition to fully ethical eating. That said, though: aimal welfare is one part of ethical eating. If you’re buying plant products at a supermarket, where they are wrapped in plastic, were shipped from thousands of miles away, very likely grown by people in terrible conditions, it’s a flat-out lie to think your diet is completely ethical. It is more ethical. My diet, too, is more ethical than the average. Unless all your food comes from organic family farms within 100 miles of your house, more ethical is all you can do.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Videos Of Venus Flytraps
An addendum: “very likely grown by people in terrible conditions” (especially coffee and products that are picked by migrant workers), or, if not, grown on a monocropping factory farm, by machines, with fertilizers that are contaminating river systems, etc., etc…
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Videos Of Venus Flytraps
Everyone, with the exception of some inmates, children, and hospitalized people, can go vegan. There are no absolute barriers. They are all a matter of degree. Like I said, every grocery store has a produce section. And there are organizations that can help people in poverty or people like your friend. Even food stamps and WIC are opening up their programs to include more vegan foods.
And Daisy, veganism is not the same as the local food movement or the sustainable food movement (or organic or raw…). Veganism is about animals. The other two are not. Please do not confuse animal rights with environmentalism or public health. Certainly some behaviors overlap between the movements, but they are NOT the same movements.
Veganism includes the moral imperative to abstain from harming animals. The other movements do not include moral imperatives. There are more shades of gray in the other movements.
Hi Daisy,
I agree wholeheartedly that ethical eating goes beyond veganism. There are many things we can and should do, to the extent practical, to minimize our contribution to environmental destuction, unfair labor conditions, and so forth. You make excellent points.
But veganism is huge. Animal agriculture involves mass-killing, grotesque re-shaping and re-engineering of animals’ bodies, separating babies from mothers on a grand scale - the scope and intensity of harm intentionally inflicted on sentient beings is almost incomprehensible. And the positive side-effects of people going vegan, including a sharp reduction in the amount of land used for grain and the amount of native flora and fauna displaced by ranching, and a chance for fish populations to recover - that’s huge, also.
>>> Is this a campaign to try to get me to go vegan? <<< Ha. My “campaign,” if you will, is to try to get everybody to be as vegan as they can be, and to treat animals (and humans) with kindness and respect.
I don’t know your particular situation, but let me ask: Are there times for you when it’s impossible, practically speaking, to eat vegan for a day? Maybe you travel to remote areas a lot, or are at the mercy of others who make food decisions for you. As Elaine pointed out, our society pushes meat and dairy; it does not generally cater to vegans. Although things are slowly but steadily improving.I understand that some people are stuck in tough situations and at this point in time may be frustrated in their efforts to have an ethical, vegan diet. I’m not going to get on anyone’s case if they’re truly making an effort. There are plenty of people making absolutely no effort at all, and I’d rather that people who are making an effort work on those who aren’t.
Where I think we differ is in our judgment of what constitutes an “ethical” animal product. Virtually all animals grown for food in this part of the world have been intensively bred to over-produce - for our benefit and at their expense. Dairy farms deprive calves of their mothers. Farmed animals are usually starved before slaughter. Slaughterhouses are hellish. “Food” animals are almost always killed long before the end of their natural lifespan; chickens are killed when the equivalent of small children. And the killing is done entirely for profit and human pleasure. I don’t consider that ethical.
Also keep in mind that all those free-ranging cows and chickens displace local wildlife. Cows, when not native to an area, tend to do extensive damage to ecosystems.
Again, I don’t know your particular situation, but I find very often that people in our society who have dropped but not eliminated their animal product intake want to hang on to that last bit of carnivorism for a variety of reasons that aren’t ethically compelling: They’re afraid of not getting enough protein, they’ll miss a comfort food, and so on. Those are insignificant concerns compared to sparing animals from being exploited all their brief lives and then being killed. Give it some thought, if you will.
My thanks/apologies to Elaine for letting us use up so much comment bandwith.
Veganism is about animals. The other two are not. Please do not confuse animal rights with environmentalism or public health. Certainly some behaviors overlap between the movements, but they are NOT the same movements.
Okay, Elaine. I frequently merge them because they’re both part of “ethical eating” (a phrase you use), and because they’re very related for me, and because all the activists I’ve worked with have connected them, and because, well, they are connected (in terms of policy, goals, ideology, etc). But if you don’t want your thinking to be conflated with sustainability, okay, but don’t claim you’re eating “ethically” if you’re only doing it in one area food production.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Videos Of Venus Flytraps
The other movements do not include moral imperatives. There are more shades of gray in the other movements.
They absolutely include moral imperatives, actually. The moral imperative to not destroy the world. The moral imperative to not destroy our species. The moral imperative to not exploit other people. The moral imperative to fight predatory multinationals. Etc., etc. (I’m not being snarky; I do consider every one of those serious moral issues.)
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Videos Of Venus Flytraps
Gary — once again, I know all about food production and factory farming. I don’t think any of that is remotely ethical. What I was referring, as an example of ethical animal products, was a family keeping well-tended chickens in their backyard, as my neighbors do.
Give it some thought, if you will.
You’ve been very polite, but what’s with the recurring condescending attitude here? I have given it thought. I have forced my family to have turkey-free Thanksgiving. I have sobbed over photos of chickens in stacked cages. I have sobbed over footage of kill floors. I have compared factory farming to war crimes. Believe me, I have given it thought.
But I balance my thoughts about animal welfare with my thoughts about sustainability, capitalism, pollution, etc. I think it’s more ethical to eat eggs from right here than soybeans grown in deforested lots in Amazonia.
Oh hey, a question that just occurred to me, which I ask sincerely and in good faith — what do animal rights vegans feed their companion animals? ‘Cause there’s some vile, factory-farmed stuff in dog food.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Videos Of Venus Flytraps
Daisy,
One (veganism) is based on the rights of currently living beings. Animals who don’t deserve to be tortured, killed, separated from their families, etc. The other is based on the rights of future living beings along with an assumption that our efforts of sustainability will save them.
I grant they are related, but please don’t act as though it’s OK to torture cows for milk if you drive a hybrid. Don’t act like there’s enough moral flexibility to cage chickens for eggs so long as you buy local, organic tomatoes.
And please don’t ignore the involved efforts to act morally. I completely agree with you that we have a moral imperative not to exploit other people. But a) I don’t think it’s OK to kill animals in order to not exploit people, and b) it’s so very difficult to not consume anything that hasn’t exploited someone but it’s very easy to not consume anything that hasn’t come from an animal. For instance, packaged foods must label ingredients, not human exploitation. It’s easy to read a label and tell if it’s part cow. It’s not so easy to read a label and tell if some people’s rights were violated, their land was taken, they were exposed to pesticides or they were otherwise exploited.
I think Gary has said some great stuff here, too.
I agree, Elaine — that’s all true. Although… Is it really too much to ask people to research where the food was grown, and by whom? People have free will, after all. Is it too much to ask people to expend a little effort to eat ethically?
I grant they are related, but please don’t act as though it’s OK to torture cows for milk if you drive a hybrid. Don’t act like there’s enough moral flexibility to cage chickens for eggs so long as you buy local, organic tomatoes.
I wouldn’t. But please don’t act as though it’s okay to buy tomatoes picked by incredibly poor, exploited, abuse workers (including young children) just because you don’t eat eggs. I’m not convinced that one is better than the other (tortured chickens, tortured people). If I have to choose (and we all do), I side with the people, at the expense of some animals; you side with the animals, at the expense of some people. Fair enough.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Do try this at home!
And please don’t ignore the involved efforts to act morally.
Can I just point out, by the way, that this actually verbatim what I have been saying all along about veganism, and which you’re now saying about sustainability? Very interesting turn.
One (veganism) is based on the rights of currently living beings.
…
Unlike sustainability. Because migrant workers and farmers and fishers and all the creatures in Dead Zone (in the Gulf of Mexico) are not living beings.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Do try this at home!
(didn’t close my tag; sorry about that)
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..Do try this at home!
No problemo, Daisy. It happens.
You wrote;
“please don’t act as though it’s okay to buy tomatoes picked by incredibly poor, exploited, abuse workers (including young children) just because you don’t eat eggs. I’m not convinced that one is better than the other (tortured chickens, tortured people).”
And you have a valid point. I’ve been thinking about it more lately and here are a few things I think about that:
a) the people, though they are exploited and abused, are not killed. They don’t take tiny, baby male tomato pickers and grind up them up into hog food, pet food, and other nasty things. This isn’t to say one form of abuse is worse than another, but it is to point out a significant difference.
b) the humans do still have some level of free will and choice, regardless of how limited it is. They are not, as far as I know, forced to pick tomatoes at gunpoint.
c) from the consumer’s perspective, it’s much easier to boycott animal products than it is to boycott products that involve human exploitation. For example, food and clothing are usually labeled and it’s fairly easy to discern what is and what is not an animal product.
d) from the consumer’s perspective, vegetarianism is almost an intuitive reaction. When children realize meat comes from animals, many are horrified. They immediate understand the ethical consequences of eating meat. When you try to explain how workers are exploited to produce certain foods, the connections are not quite as clear. Children need more convincing.
None of those reasons invalidate your point, Daisy. But your earlier point, that it takes extraordinary effort to eat ethically, is far more relevant to claims about humans than to claims about animals. That is, going vegan is a simpler ethical action and is much easier to promote widely than going local/ organic/ sustainable…
Hey, I’m glad we have some more common ground here . It’s pretty unusual for people disagreeing here online to end up at this point instead of the Godwin point, so I find that heartening.
Point A is certainly true, but doesn’t that also apply to, say, dairy cows? It’s true that migrant workers aren’t in concentration camps, but the conditions can be truly awful, especially since the workers are often in the US illegally, and so totally outside of regulations and the various protections that documented workers can access.
About B — that’s true. Although I have heard of workers being sexually harassed or raped at gunpoint or other threat of violence, and I don’t think that’s particularly rare. Once again, they’re often undocumented, and extremely poor, so they have no recourse in that kind of situation.
On C, I concur completely. But, as I imagine you yourself might say, the fact that it takes some work isn’t an excuse not to do it if you can afford to. A lot of people can’t buy ethical clothing, for example, which is more expensive because the workers are being compensated properly.
On D, though, I flat-out disagree. It’s certainly true that vegetarianism is an intuitive response to the abuse of animals, but I’m quite sure that buying other ethical products is intuitive too. There is no reason whatsoever that a child would respond emotionally to a photograph of a tortured cow and not to a photograph of a torture person. Just like with animals, people can ignore or rationalize things, but I don’t think there is any getting around the emotional response for the vast majority of people, including children.
Have you ever read about the heartbreaking things that have happened to small-time farmers who went up against Monsanto, for example? That stuff will make you cry.
It’s true that it’s a little more cerebral with organic and local food, but the exploitation stuff is totally emotional.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..The Many-Headed Goddess, Part 3: On Mutilation And Mysticism, Chesed And Gevurah
That is, going vegan is a simpler ethical action and is much easier to promote widely than going local/ organic/ sustainable…
That’s true, but (any you will disagree with me here), I think going local/organic/sustainable is actually more important, from my admittedly anthropocentric perspective. That is, if all food production were local, organic, and sustainable, we would actually eliminate worker exploitation as well as all environmental consequences associated with food production, and toxins from pesticides and preservatives, and nutrient loss during shipping and freezing. If everyone were vegan, but it was still an industrialized, capitalist, unsustainable system, we would still have worker exploitation, still be messing up the environment in myriad ways (thereby harming wild animals), still be contributing to global warming, still be taking in toxins from pesticides and preservatives, still be losing nutrients in transport. Furthermore, while animals would still be slaughtered in the first scenario, they would all be healthy, kept in good conditions, etc., and, because our current levels of animal use are seriously wasteful and unsustainable, there would also be far fewer animals suffering. So the first situation seems clearly preferable to me.
It’s not a zero-sum game, though, fortunately. We can and should advocate both. But that is why I choose sustainability over veganism when I need to.
Daisy Bond’s last blog post..The Many-Headed Goddess, Part 3: On Mutilation And Mysticism, Chesed And Gevurah
A: Dairy cows sons and sometimes daughters are usually turned into veal calves.
D: I know of many children who went vegetarian when they realized where meat came from. I know of no children who boycott certain foods because of human exploitation. That’s just my personal experience and your millage may differ, but if you’re going to discount my argument simply because it doesn’t sound right to you, please offer some evidence of your claim.
“I think going local/organic/sustainable is actually more important”
Which is exactly why you think it’s too much of a burden to go vegan, because you don’t see it as all that important.
I think our conversation is over.
I know of many children who went vegetarian when they realized where meat came from. I know of no children who boycott certain foods because of human exploitation.
I’m happy to say that I knew a few kids that don’t eat certain foods and from certain places because of the explotation behind the food, said kids also being veg*ns. Me and my friends talk to kids (and my kids) about the explotation of farm workers, and help them to put thought into who is picking their food, (which connects to fair wages too).
also, you said something to the effect that tomoto pickers are not held at gunpoint-when there have been in fact cases of farm workers being held against their will in farm settings, and in cases of debt slavery.
“there have been in fact cases of farm workers being held against their will in farm settings, and in cases of debt slavery.”
You’re absolutely right.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/16/8329/