250
When vegans say “change to plant-based food” it’s about the most troubling suggestion anyone could hear because, on the one hand it sounds right but on the other it sounds painful. Veganism touches the most sensitive nerve in our body concerning personal survival and peace of mind. We’d rather live the life we know than risk a journey into the unknown.
However much vegans promise good times ahead, however fit and energetic and calm-minded we may seem, basic survival-instinct is the stronger persuader. It overrides logic, compassion, imagination, the lot. At a crucial point, between considering it and actually doing it, comes a dread of leaving behind a big part of our present life. People do hear what we say to them but they don’t always process it, fearing how it might affect them. When they purposely forget what they hear, it’s like tuning out of the voice on the radio or closing a book we don’t like - we avoid unpleasant information. And it’s not that difficult to tune out of ‘vegan talk’ because most other people are doing just that, knowing they don’t HAVE to listen to us.
When I’m talking to someone about all this, because a lot of the information I’m passing on is to do with animal suffering the whole experience of listening to me is unpleasant. I reckon it’s my job to gauge how much unpleasant stuff I let out and how much uplifting stuff I use to sugar the pill. Veganism isn’t only all about giving things up, it’s a lot to do with feeling better about ourselves, feeling more energetic and conscientious and being bale to feel more mentally alert and agile. Dropping habits we’ve been feeling bad about, perhaps for a long time, is compensated by the new habits which take their place and their many advantages. But you won’t be convinced about this unless you’ve tried it out and found out for yourself. At the edge of the water my toe tests the temperature. My friend, already in, shouts to come in. “It’s really warm”.
Oh yes?
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Friday, August 26, 2011
People resisting
249:
I think there’s support for veganism, in theory but not in practice. Ideally our arguments are attractive but for most omnivores they hate the idea of giving up so many things.
The logic goes something like this: we have, within vegan principles, the inspiration of non-violence, just by the sort of food we eat. At every meal I act ethically and think for myself, whereas other people obviously don’t think that’s important - they eat what they like and do and think much the same as everyone else, in regard to food. For them it isn’t important enough to break with convention.
So I have to keep returning to the drawing board to ask myself what it is I’m really facing. It isn’t just a stubborn mob of meat-heads but a difficulty most people see in front of them if they consider it at all, of taking on such a big personal repair plan. They don’t believe that changing the habits of a lifetime is possible. They do know that much of the food they eat isn’t ethically or nutritionally sound, and at the rate of about a thousand meals a year for every year they’ve lived, it spells big time damage to both body and conscience. But who wants to admit they’ve been wrong for that long?
To restore the balance, to make things right, I wouldn’t be suggesting small token changes to the shopping list since it won’t address the problem. It’s a matter of forgoing one’s favourite foods (as well as other commodities) for the sake of a higher principle. In that way one can move over into new thinking. In this case, move to another world, of plant-based foods and non-animal clothing ... and then to never look back.
Put that way it seems like a massive undertaking. But the principles vegans are suggesting not only make a lot of sense but they overturn addictions to dangerous substances, which we laughingly still call ‘food’.
For any one of us this sort of change is both exciting and daunting. As with any addictive substance, getting ‘clean’ is hard ... so usually people take the easy way out, and stick with what they know. They comply with the media and advertising messages, they go along with the displays in food shops and the nutritional advice from so called experts. Common usage of animal foods and commodities prevents the uptake of any negative information concerning animal foods or farm animal treatment. In fact almost every person with any influence in our society, be they spiritual or educational leaders, always remains silent on these issues, simply because they’re ‘users’ themselves. And they, like everyone else, are aware of the general popularity of commodities with animal origin. For them to speak out against any of this would lose them support, big time. It would ruin their position in Society and make for great personal inconvenience.
So much for those leaders of our society who live by higher principles.
I think there’s support for veganism, in theory but not in practice. Ideally our arguments are attractive but for most omnivores they hate the idea of giving up so many things.
The logic goes something like this: we have, within vegan principles, the inspiration of non-violence, just by the sort of food we eat. At every meal I act ethically and think for myself, whereas other people obviously don’t think that’s important - they eat what they like and do and think much the same as everyone else, in regard to food. For them it isn’t important enough to break with convention.
So I have to keep returning to the drawing board to ask myself what it is I’m really facing. It isn’t just a stubborn mob of meat-heads but a difficulty most people see in front of them if they consider it at all, of taking on such a big personal repair plan. They don’t believe that changing the habits of a lifetime is possible. They do know that much of the food they eat isn’t ethically or nutritionally sound, and at the rate of about a thousand meals a year for every year they’ve lived, it spells big time damage to both body and conscience. But who wants to admit they’ve been wrong for that long?
To restore the balance, to make things right, I wouldn’t be suggesting small token changes to the shopping list since it won’t address the problem. It’s a matter of forgoing one’s favourite foods (as well as other commodities) for the sake of a higher principle. In that way one can move over into new thinking. In this case, move to another world, of plant-based foods and non-animal clothing ... and then to never look back.
Put that way it seems like a massive undertaking. But the principles vegans are suggesting not only make a lot of sense but they overturn addictions to dangerous substances, which we laughingly still call ‘food’.
For any one of us this sort of change is both exciting and daunting. As with any addictive substance, getting ‘clean’ is hard ... so usually people take the easy way out, and stick with what they know. They comply with the media and advertising messages, they go along with the displays in food shops and the nutritional advice from so called experts. Common usage of animal foods and commodities prevents the uptake of any negative information concerning animal foods or farm animal treatment. In fact almost every person with any influence in our society, be they spiritual or educational leaders, always remains silent on these issues, simply because they’re ‘users’ themselves. And they, like everyone else, are aware of the general popularity of commodities with animal origin. For them to speak out against any of this would lose them support, big time. It would ruin their position in Society and make for great personal inconvenience.
So much for those leaders of our society who live by higher principles.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Hurting animals
245:
By representing Animal Rights I try to steer clear of sounding ‘right’ about animal cruelty and animal food (despite having no doubts about that myself), since there’s something else important to establish ... the need for empathy between each other. It’s this idea of doing unto others what you’d have done to yourself, which in turn ignites people’s empathy for animals. If we can apply that principle to each other then why not to animals too?
By taking the emphasis away from myself (my own interests and self development) what I have left is empathy. By comparing and contrasting the empathy shown to our dog with our lack of empathy for other animals we can see big contradiction. The last thing we’d want to do to our companions at home is hurt them, because we know them as individuals. It’s the same with other people’s dogs - we don’t have to know them, because each dog has its own personality and we can feel that, and empathise with it. We’re all of us proud of ourselves for being able to do that.
Animal Rights emphasises these strong empathetic bonds we have between ourselves and ‘the creatures’ and it’s likely none of us could purposely de-individualise any animal in order to put it in a special category, thence to inflict cruelty on it. For most of us it would be absurd to try. We certainly couldn’t help to end its life. But that’s exactly what animal farmers force themselves to do. That, after all, is how they make their living, just as many others do in the ‘Animal Industries’.
When I was young I was hiking in the country overnight. In the evening I found a pigeon which had eaten poisoned bait. I looked after it overnight but it was in such obvious pain the next day I took a knife to its throat. I often think of that bird. I always hoped that, at the moment when I had to end its life, that it understood why I did it. But for an animal to face the knife without that sort of reason, that’s quite a thought! And yet billions of animals face unreasonable murder each day, with no kindness and no anaesthetic to ease the pain and terror. When they are about to be executed there’s the smell of death all around them, and the machinery of death along with the all too familiar ‘ubiquitous human’, forcing them forward. To think of just one animal suffering like this, let alone billions of them, is unimaginable.
Humans, who love animals (as they do children) have a strong sense of empathy. But even a felled tree is empathised with more than a farm animal. Humans are good at pretending. They pretend they can feel empathy because they love their dogs and cats. They’re able to empathise and they feel rightly proud of that ... but then, having won a few points in their favour, afford themselves ‘special circumstances’ to be applied to farm animals ... for the sake of ‘essential food’. So, by providing a market for animals they connive in their terrible treatment and their even more terrible death.
By representing Animal Rights I try to steer clear of sounding ‘right’ about animal cruelty and animal food (despite having no doubts about that myself), since there’s something else important to establish ... the need for empathy between each other. It’s this idea of doing unto others what you’d have done to yourself, which in turn ignites people’s empathy for animals. If we can apply that principle to each other then why not to animals too?
By taking the emphasis away from myself (my own interests and self development) what I have left is empathy. By comparing and contrasting the empathy shown to our dog with our lack of empathy for other animals we can see big contradiction. The last thing we’d want to do to our companions at home is hurt them, because we know them as individuals. It’s the same with other people’s dogs - we don’t have to know them, because each dog has its own personality and we can feel that, and empathise with it. We’re all of us proud of ourselves for being able to do that.
Animal Rights emphasises these strong empathetic bonds we have between ourselves and ‘the creatures’ and it’s likely none of us could purposely de-individualise any animal in order to put it in a special category, thence to inflict cruelty on it. For most of us it would be absurd to try. We certainly couldn’t help to end its life. But that’s exactly what animal farmers force themselves to do. That, after all, is how they make their living, just as many others do in the ‘Animal Industries’.
When I was young I was hiking in the country overnight. In the evening I found a pigeon which had eaten poisoned bait. I looked after it overnight but it was in such obvious pain the next day I took a knife to its throat. I often think of that bird. I always hoped that, at the moment when I had to end its life, that it understood why I did it. But for an animal to face the knife without that sort of reason, that’s quite a thought! And yet billions of animals face unreasonable murder each day, with no kindness and no anaesthetic to ease the pain and terror. When they are about to be executed there’s the smell of death all around them, and the machinery of death along with the all too familiar ‘ubiquitous human’, forcing them forward. To think of just one animal suffering like this, let alone billions of them, is unimaginable.
Humans, who love animals (as they do children) have a strong sense of empathy. But even a felled tree is empathised with more than a farm animal. Humans are good at pretending. They pretend they can feel empathy because they love their dogs and cats. They’re able to empathise and they feel rightly proud of that ... but then, having won a few points in their favour, afford themselves ‘special circumstances’ to be applied to farm animals ... for the sake of ‘essential food’. So, by providing a market for animals they connive in their terrible treatment and their even more terrible death.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Ambassadors for animals
241:
For me, being vegan and going public is a bit like the advocate representing a client. I like to think I’m following the instructions of the animals themselves, acting with their approval. As animals themselves aren’t gratuitously violent I imagine they wouldn’t encourage me to be hostile with my adversaries. I like to think animals know the human better than humans know themselves, since they’ve seen the very worst of human behaviour and learnt how to survive it. I like to think they’d advise me to work on my fellow humans in a slow and steady way.
I learn a lot from animals. They don’t draw attention to themselves so neither should I, especially when I’m dealing with hard-rump meat-eaters. I wait, as animals do. I prefer to encourage dialogue by letting others have their say first, if only because I need to earn their go-ahead to have my say ... which might, just might persuade.
Why be so indulgent with the rump? I’d say, because they constitute 99% of our population, most of whom need to be brought on-side. Most of them still love their animal foods, and their leather shoes and much more. Omnivores aren’t going to roll over easily, and are even less likely to if they’re made to feel like cornered rats.
It’s easy to forget just how aggressive otherwise-peaceful people can be when it comes to this subject. But it’s understandable. None of us likes being placed ‘in the wrong’, which is precisely what I find myself doing when talking to non-vegans about using animals. I feel I have no other option … but to be fair, putting people right is also partly me showing off, proving that in this one way I’m superior.
Even though I’m sure I have watertight arguments, I put peoples’ backs up when I start talking about this subject. It’s likely they’ve never heard of ‘abolition-ism’ before and it makes them uneasy, and they negatively react, as a first line of defence. I have to get past the shock of this, by understanding why it comes about in the first place.
They feel insulted by having what has been, up to now, an accepted part of their life made into something wrong. Their aggressive reaction (or pretend naivety) is often a cover-up, because there’s nowhere else for them to go. They can’t get past the ugly facts and there’s pretty much no good arguments for them to use to defend their position. They feel uncomfortable. They feel cornered. They take umbrage. They storm off. And we might think we’ve won the day, but in truth the greater damage has been done ... in that we might have lost them altogether.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Being well informed
240:
This is one broad subject to learn about. It touches on so many things, including ethics, nutrition, environmental concerns and modern husbandry. Animal advocates are expected to be knowledgeable about all of this if they want to speak intelligently about Animal Rights, well, to have a working knowledge anyway. It isn’t enough to cite cruelty to animals as the one reason to be vegan, although that’s my own primary reason. There are in fact so many other reasons and it’s good to be able to speak about each of them.
But I mustn’t kid myself. How ever many arguments I put up and how ever many details I can offer, I’ll always have a difficulty overcoming the initial shock of, “What, no more animal products at all, food, clothes, shoes, zoos?”.
The long list of ‘don’ts’ makes boycotting all things with animal content sound too much to take on, it’s one huge decision and not to be taken lightly. To understand this helps me not get too righteous. On the one hand, for me, it’s simple - I don’t use anything with animal connections but to others it’s daunting. For me, when I’m encountering opposition I have to be confident about what I’m saying, not get too easily rattled. I have to be able to deal with being put on the spot.
Whatever we feel inside, passionate, angry, well-informed, we don’t need to show it, especially if we’re talking with red necked, vegan-haters. Whatever we think about the person we’re with, if we can maintain a neutral exterior and listen without reacting, and keep our own talk calm, we’ll maybe win some grudging respect … enough to be given the go-ahead to speak more fully. And then, once we’re allowed to voice our opinion and flesh out our arguments, we’ll have a better chance to reach people.
This is one broad subject to learn about. It touches on so many things, including ethics, nutrition, environmental concerns and modern husbandry. Animal advocates are expected to be knowledgeable about all of this if they want to speak intelligently about Animal Rights, well, to have a working knowledge anyway. It isn’t enough to cite cruelty to animals as the one reason to be vegan, although that’s my own primary reason. There are in fact so many other reasons and it’s good to be able to speak about each of them.
But I mustn’t kid myself. How ever many arguments I put up and how ever many details I can offer, I’ll always have a difficulty overcoming the initial shock of, “What, no more animal products at all, food, clothes, shoes, zoos?”.
The long list of ‘don’ts’ makes boycotting all things with animal content sound too much to take on, it’s one huge decision and not to be taken lightly. To understand this helps me not get too righteous. On the one hand, for me, it’s simple - I don’t use anything with animal connections but to others it’s daunting. For me, when I’m encountering opposition I have to be confident about what I’m saying, not get too easily rattled. I have to be able to deal with being put on the spot.
Whatever we feel inside, passionate, angry, well-informed, we don’t need to show it, especially if we’re talking with red necked, vegan-haters. Whatever we think about the person we’re with, if we can maintain a neutral exterior and listen without reacting, and keep our own talk calm, we’ll maybe win some grudging respect … enough to be given the go-ahead to speak more fully. And then, once we’re allowed to voice our opinion and flesh out our arguments, we’ll have a better chance to reach people.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Being friendly, not too pushy
238:
The Animal Rights vegan position is a subject people discuss amongst themselves in order to disparage it, and work out resistant arguments to it. The stock response is that vegan activists are ‘dangerous extremists’.
We are bagged. Doors are closed to us.
But not everyone is closed minded - mainly younger people, having made fewer independent food choices, aren’t as likely to be defensive. But can they rely on information about plant-based diets?
First and foremost we must come across as well informed and concerned about people’s safety, plus have high personal standards, plus a friendly sensitivity. If we are affable enough, some chutzpah can work … as long as we maintain a sense of humour and some familiarity. I don’t try to be best buddy but I do try to be open to any views, ready to ‘take it’ as well as dish it out. People are often wanting to know what I eat, what a vegan diet is, and they’ll put up with a bit of cheek, even to the point where I can send them up for eating ‘dead animals’, but . . . there’s a hairsbreadth between friendly chat and me hitting them with a value-judgement.
I sometimes feel, out of loyalty to the animals, that I should be deadly serious and confront people where ever I can, to show how deeply I feel. But I notice that as soon as I start getting heavy they stop identifying with me. They lose interest and go on the defensive.
Passing on information laden with judgement (and statistics) is dull, and it’s confronting. The connection gets broken. Even in high disagreement I’m trying to maintain a position of equality, showing respect for all views (even wrong ones!). However far apart our views may be our feelings for each other shouldn’t be compromised, so that the human-to-human connections are kept open. We’re never anything else but two individuals chatting about the possibility of reassessing our attitudes (regarding the use of animals in our society) .
If I’m speaking to a room full of strangers, as long as some level of affection is maintained there’s a good chance for constructive, lively interaction. Once I forget the good name of the cause I’m representing communication goes dead.
The best teachers I had at school never lost sight of their students. They had an eye for trouble, they saw everything, they stood no nonsense but never withdrew their affection, and I think that’s how we should be; don’t let anyone get away with the unsustainable or rude but at the same time NO zealotry. And no cowardly tactics either - if I’m asked to explain something and I hide my lack of knowledge behind an emotional rave about animal cruelty I lose credibility. On one level people are very well informed – most adults know more or less what’s going on - but don’t know details. Presumably we do, otherwise we wouldn’t be so keen to talk about this tricky subject. Our strength is in having useful information to impart. If we can’t answer a question and we have the guts to admit it that’s impressive too. We shouldn’t be afraid to lose a skirmish or two. It’s the long term battle we’ve got ahead of us, and that’s mainly a psychological battle anyway, to come out at the end as a person other people can identify with.
The Animal Rights vegan position is a subject people discuss amongst themselves in order to disparage it, and work out resistant arguments to it. The stock response is that vegan activists are ‘dangerous extremists’.
We are bagged. Doors are closed to us.
But not everyone is closed minded - mainly younger people, having made fewer independent food choices, aren’t as likely to be defensive. But can they rely on information about plant-based diets?
First and foremost we must come across as well informed and concerned about people’s safety, plus have high personal standards, plus a friendly sensitivity. If we are affable enough, some chutzpah can work … as long as we maintain a sense of humour and some familiarity. I don’t try to be best buddy but I do try to be open to any views, ready to ‘take it’ as well as dish it out. People are often wanting to know what I eat, what a vegan diet is, and they’ll put up with a bit of cheek, even to the point where I can send them up for eating ‘dead animals’, but . . . there’s a hairsbreadth between friendly chat and me hitting them with a value-judgement.
I sometimes feel, out of loyalty to the animals, that I should be deadly serious and confront people where ever I can, to show how deeply I feel. But I notice that as soon as I start getting heavy they stop identifying with me. They lose interest and go on the defensive.
Passing on information laden with judgement (and statistics) is dull, and it’s confronting. The connection gets broken. Even in high disagreement I’m trying to maintain a position of equality, showing respect for all views (even wrong ones!). However far apart our views may be our feelings for each other shouldn’t be compromised, so that the human-to-human connections are kept open. We’re never anything else but two individuals chatting about the possibility of reassessing our attitudes (regarding the use of animals in our society) .
If I’m speaking to a room full of strangers, as long as some level of affection is maintained there’s a good chance for constructive, lively interaction. Once I forget the good name of the cause I’m representing communication goes dead.
The best teachers I had at school never lost sight of their students. They had an eye for trouble, they saw everything, they stood no nonsense but never withdrew their affection, and I think that’s how we should be; don’t let anyone get away with the unsustainable or rude but at the same time NO zealotry. And no cowardly tactics either - if I’m asked to explain something and I hide my lack of knowledge behind an emotional rave about animal cruelty I lose credibility. On one level people are very well informed – most adults know more or less what’s going on - but don’t know details. Presumably we do, otherwise we wouldn’t be so keen to talk about this tricky subject. Our strength is in having useful information to impart. If we can’t answer a question and we have the guts to admit it that’s impressive too. We shouldn’t be afraid to lose a skirmish or two. It’s the long term battle we’ve got ahead of us, and that’s mainly a psychological battle anyway, to come out at the end as a person other people can identify with.
Friday, August 19, 2011
Persuasion
236:
I’m in a tricky position as a self-appointed advocate for animals, because I’m assuming I have the right to talk about them on account of no longer eating them. Maybe I’m in a strong position but it doesn’t give me the right to advise people what to eat or the right to expect them to agree with me. I need to be invited to speak on this subject and for that I need to earn the listener’s respect and interest (from a starting position of being a likely bore on the subject). I have to be convincing whilst going easy on the moralising.
Sure, I want to be an activist, a communicator and an educator but I also want to be sensitive to people’s problems regarding their food addictions. I can’t assume a role just because I want to.
Some practising vegans don’t want to be activists at all. Animal Rights isn’t a realistic cause for them to promote, because it seems a ‘hopeless case’. They’d rather speak about it only with people they know well.
Others decide to go further and attempt to persuade people to protest, demonstrate or get into direct action. For that you have to believe the cause is worth promoting, despite the seeming lack of interest amongst people. I know that I need to be optimistic that people’s attitudes will eventually change. However, keeping my feet on the ground, realising how unaware 99% of people still are about the level of animal cruelty and the dangers in eating animal foods, I have to cop negative reactions.
Here’s the range, from negative to positive:
“The sun is hot, the water’s cool, the beach is inviting ... who gives a stuff about … what did you say? Animals? You want me to think about what?”
With an attitude like that it’s probably not a good time to be talking about Animal Rights.
Or:
“I don’t agree but I admit it’s a serious issue. I’m listening. I’m ready to consider ... I’ll hear you out”.
Or:
“I agree in theory, I’ll give it a go. I’ll try a plant-based diet”
Or:
“I’m happy eating vegan food, I consider myself a vegan and I’m moving towards political activism”.
At first people have to break down their mistrust and the dislike that precedes us. If I can show an interest in them, trust grows and dislike diminishes, and if there’s a spark of interest or even a question, then we’re in business. (Unless they’re just being polite). An unguarded, intelligent question makes it no longer necessary for us to walk on eggshells - if they take the initiative of asking it makes our job so much less frustrating. However, if I’m the one who takes the initiative, as if putting my foot in the door, it’s likely to be closed in my face. And ‘once bitten twice shy’ - the door’s closed on me for ever.
I’m in a tricky position as a self-appointed advocate for animals, because I’m assuming I have the right to talk about them on account of no longer eating them. Maybe I’m in a strong position but it doesn’t give me the right to advise people what to eat or the right to expect them to agree with me. I need to be invited to speak on this subject and for that I need to earn the listener’s respect and interest (from a starting position of being a likely bore on the subject). I have to be convincing whilst going easy on the moralising.
Sure, I want to be an activist, a communicator and an educator but I also want to be sensitive to people’s problems regarding their food addictions. I can’t assume a role just because I want to.
Some practising vegans don’t want to be activists at all. Animal Rights isn’t a realistic cause for them to promote, because it seems a ‘hopeless case’. They’d rather speak about it only with people they know well.
Others decide to go further and attempt to persuade people to protest, demonstrate or get into direct action. For that you have to believe the cause is worth promoting, despite the seeming lack of interest amongst people. I know that I need to be optimistic that people’s attitudes will eventually change. However, keeping my feet on the ground, realising how unaware 99% of people still are about the level of animal cruelty and the dangers in eating animal foods, I have to cop negative reactions.
Here’s the range, from negative to positive:
“The sun is hot, the water’s cool, the beach is inviting ... who gives a stuff about … what did you say? Animals? You want me to think about what?”
With an attitude like that it’s probably not a good time to be talking about Animal Rights.
Or:
“I don’t agree but I admit it’s a serious issue. I’m listening. I’m ready to consider ... I’ll hear you out”.
Or:
“I agree in theory, I’ll give it a go. I’ll try a plant-based diet”
Or:
“I’m happy eating vegan food, I consider myself a vegan and I’m moving towards political activism”.
At first people have to break down their mistrust and the dislike that precedes us. If I can show an interest in them, trust grows and dislike diminishes, and if there’s a spark of interest or even a question, then we’re in business. (Unless they’re just being polite). An unguarded, intelligent question makes it no longer necessary for us to walk on eggshells - if they take the initiative of asking it makes our job so much less frustrating. However, if I’m the one who takes the initiative, as if putting my foot in the door, it’s likely to be closed in my face. And ‘once bitten twice shy’ - the door’s closed on me for ever.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Going Public
234:
When I start hurling abuse in public it works wonders … in the short term. It unifies my fellow protesters, it makes us all feel good, and sometimes it’s brave of me - if I look scary enough it might strike fear into people’s hearts. But unless I’m willing to continually escalate that approach it loses its power and eventually fizzles out. My big talk and threats are impossible to follow through.
The aim of any Animal Rights protest should be to win people over. It should start with me setting a good example, the same as I’m expecting of others. If I want to ‘go public’ I have to be prepared to get cold shouldered. No surprises if everyone ignores what I say … any excuse will do in order to avoid a ‘spoiler’ like me. It’s possible I might just push through, keep talking ...but perhaps that’s not the point ... gone are the days when we casually bump into people on the street corner and converse with them on serious matters. Today there are no passers-by to talk to. New ideas don’t circulate - we only find new ideas in the media which is tightly controlled when it comes to this subject, with perhaps the Internet being the exception (which is where this blog is found). But anyway, people no longer go searching for new or radical ideas because no one wants the extra aggravation in their life - if it’s Animal Rights or veganism it would mean discovering something highly inconveniencing. So, for us it’s always going to be a long haul, needing a patient, step by step process.
My own first step is to make connection, showing I’m genuine, ready to answer questions and, when there are differences of opinion, bridging the gulf in a non-threatening way. These are my first steps ... to convince others that I only want to help improve their lives and that I’ve got no other agenda.
Sure, I’d like to stand with microphone in hand, in front of a crowd of eager listeners but the days of the soap box are dead. I need to communicate in a more intimate way, in one-to-one conversation about a whole range of related issues. So, when talking casually-almost, when this subject of animal-use comes up (not introduced by me) my first words will probably set the tone of the whole conversation.
It’s obvious that vegans do significant things that others don’t do. That might provoke an interest. I’m in luck if it does.
“You’re a vegan then?”
“Yes”
“Why?”
“It’s something I feel passionately about”
If ever I get this far I’m usually tempted to go into too much detail, but that isn’t necessarily what anyone wants to hear, especially if it sounds like I’m bragging ... as if I’m setting myself apart with superior ethics, etc. As soon as ‘passion’ is mentioned I look like ‘one of those’ (animal-liberationists). They’ll regret asking. Maybe they’ll try to change the subject ... and that’s my reason for not showing my hand too soon.
Usually I meet some provocation:
“You’re what?” ... mock surprise, signs they think I’m mad. It’s meant to make me go on the defensive.
Sometimes it’s a show of guarded interest:
“y….e .. s, go on …”. They hope to pounce on my first foolish statement, then go in for the kill.
So I try to coax them that way - seem vulnerable and a bit innocent. If I don’t seem too eager it’s not hard to lure almost anyone into asking me to explain myself. And that’s really where I want to get to.
I know they want to justify themselves. I know they want to explode my righteous position, but it’s just as likely they’re curious anyway. You can never tell how curious people might be, so tactics aside, I need to be ready for that. It would be such a wasted opportunity if I weren’t.
I need to be prepared to say what I stand for and why, saying it confidently yet casually, informingly yet non-confrontationally – answering in such a way that leaves the other person interested and now better informed, but not put off ... although maybe feeling just a little out-manoeuvred.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Awake
232:
As a vegan I sometimes feel like an alarm clock, resented at first for waking you up but later appreciated for jolting you into the new day, a new way of seeing things ... (or not, as the case may be).
I often feel as if I’ve been thrown against the wall, so my bell no longer works and my timer’s stopped, and that’s because I haven’t learnt how NOT to make myself unpopular. Am I trying to wake people or alarm them?
As a persuader I’m sometimes heavy booted. But surely you understand I’ve got good intentions? I can be a bit pushy, like an old time preacher but that’s because I like talking up Animal Rights and I forget I have to be subtler.
I sit here scratching my head, asking how to get hardened omnivores to like eating vegan food or like animals enough to make a few personal sacrifices. I know I won’t get far by finger wagging or disapproving or making value judgements, nor by “look-at-me-look-at-my-health-aren’t-I-the-clever-one”. But there again I need to be energetic, sure of my arguments and at ease withal.
I can start by killing off the strict, clean-living image of an eater of dull-but-nutritious food. If it has to be about food then I’ll get further by letting my friends taste what I eat, and get them to want to eat that way themselves (and I’m talking here about delicious food that isn’t expensive or exotic). Let them see an attractive lifestyle and hear me enjoy my strong arguments, as if it’s a breeze, as if it’s ridiculous for me to think any other way. Let them be ‘wowed’ at my plan for the Earth’s brilliant future and see why I want to leave behind all those trashy, go-nowhere conventions that others follow.
For that I don’t need to push or seem desperate when I argue my case. I’m already there, safe and sure, and in a different culture with a different sensitivity. I don’t need to draw attention to it by seeming better than anybody else but by coming across as an experimenter. I’m probably showing off a bit (I can’t help it!), but only to present some life-saving ideas as part of a grand plan - and if it seems whacky (this preposterous idea of not using animals for anything) my aim would be to allow the penny to drop, to let the idea do the work for itself. It’s not my job to rush anyone. I’ve no need to prove I’m different or give anyone an excuse to stamp me ‘crazy’. Instead I can simply act like a radio station that can be tuned into at will, with me presenting good ideas for improving the quality of life. If I’m telling a good story it should be able to link issues of social justice with those of living harmlessly. Then I can let people draw their own conclusions.
As an advocate for animals and for human welfare my message should be approximately the same as every vegan throughout the world, a simple, subtle and soft promotion for non-violent progress. For me that’s the great challenge - to find subtler and more persuasive ways of reaching others without using sledge-hammer tactics or the ugliness of such slogans as ‘meat is murder’.
As a vegan I sometimes feel like an alarm clock, resented at first for waking you up but later appreciated for jolting you into the new day, a new way of seeing things ... (or not, as the case may be).
I often feel as if I’ve been thrown against the wall, so my bell no longer works and my timer’s stopped, and that’s because I haven’t learnt how NOT to make myself unpopular. Am I trying to wake people or alarm them?
As a persuader I’m sometimes heavy booted. But surely you understand I’ve got good intentions? I can be a bit pushy, like an old time preacher but that’s because I like talking up Animal Rights and I forget I have to be subtler.
I sit here scratching my head, asking how to get hardened omnivores to like eating vegan food or like animals enough to make a few personal sacrifices. I know I won’t get far by finger wagging or disapproving or making value judgements, nor by “look-at-me-look-at-my-health-aren’t-I-the-clever-one”. But there again I need to be energetic, sure of my arguments and at ease withal.
I can start by killing off the strict, clean-living image of an eater of dull-but-nutritious food. If it has to be about food then I’ll get further by letting my friends taste what I eat, and get them to want to eat that way themselves (and I’m talking here about delicious food that isn’t expensive or exotic). Let them see an attractive lifestyle and hear me enjoy my strong arguments, as if it’s a breeze, as if it’s ridiculous for me to think any other way. Let them be ‘wowed’ at my plan for the Earth’s brilliant future and see why I want to leave behind all those trashy, go-nowhere conventions that others follow.
For that I don’t need to push or seem desperate when I argue my case. I’m already there, safe and sure, and in a different culture with a different sensitivity. I don’t need to draw attention to it by seeming better than anybody else but by coming across as an experimenter. I’m probably showing off a bit (I can’t help it!), but only to present some life-saving ideas as part of a grand plan - and if it seems whacky (this preposterous idea of not using animals for anything) my aim would be to allow the penny to drop, to let the idea do the work for itself. It’s not my job to rush anyone. I’ve no need to prove I’m different or give anyone an excuse to stamp me ‘crazy’. Instead I can simply act like a radio station that can be tuned into at will, with me presenting good ideas for improving the quality of life. If I’m telling a good story it should be able to link issues of social justice with those of living harmlessly. Then I can let people draw their own conclusions.
As an advocate for animals and for human welfare my message should be approximately the same as every vegan throughout the world, a simple, subtle and soft promotion for non-violent progress. For me that’s the great challenge - to find subtler and more persuasive ways of reaching others without using sledge-hammer tactics or the ugliness of such slogans as ‘meat is murder’.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Broken silence
231:
Today information doesn’t have to be restricted, there just needs to be a silence in the media where stories are kept unreported, and in that way people are ‘protected’ from knowing, in this case, that animals are being routinely attacked on a massive scale. With a spineless media, held captive by its advertisers, there’s no way ordinary people can be kept informed - the effect of this silence gives people the impression that nothing bad is actually happening because whatever is happening isn’t worth reporting on.
It might seem incredible that educated and otherwise well informed people know so little about cruelty to farm animals, but it isn’t that surprising when you think of how much conflicting information there is. How can anyone sort out what is true and what isn’t? Most people give up trying to find out and revert to habit.
What we so badly need is one high profile and brave journalist who’ll reveal not only the scale of animal cruelty but the cover-up which, in itself, would be the bigger and more shocking story ... because it involves the duping of the public.
There have been stories published about specific atrocities such as the live export of animals, and there are many organisations who have outed factory farming but none have had the courage to expose the much bigger problem of the entire animal trade. None ever attempts to comprehensively expose the cruelties and combine it with warnings of the widespread health risks associated with consuming animal protein because it’s too big; it’s been considered too ambitious to take on such a broad condemnation since it would not have enough support from the community who make so much use of so many animals. This is why, perhaps, the time is not yet ripe for a writer to surface. If and when the story is told, it might start out with the disastrous health consequences of animal food with the added cruelty factor thrown in for good measure. But the real impact of the story would concern the scale of the cover-up. And I think it’s that which could ultimately outrage people - that they’d been kept in the dark for so long and had been meant to be kept so for many generations to come.
For our kids to be ‘information protected’ like this is bad enough but in a world where so many are dying from lack of food, the cost of wastefully producing vast amounts of food to feed to animals (so they can be eaten) is an obscene waste on a massive scale - it being such an inefficient way to feed people.
The silence, the cover-up and the duping of people seems to be essential for lining the pockets of the Animal Industries. Eventually they must know that the truth will come out ... but I suppose they hope to make their money and then, presumably, just cut and run.
Once exposed, the story of how they’ve diced with the quality of people’s lives for the sake of profit will tell us one thing in particular, that humans are not to be trusted around animals. Both consumers and producers alike contribute to the widespread exploitation of animals, and once that is fully understood then I’m sure the system will fail. And as it fails to provide the animal products people are used to, so the transition to plant-based lifestyles will take place.
It occurs to me that, at this point, vegans would be in a position to provide valuable practical assistance ... but so many things have to happen before that - we first have to learn the truth from a major exposé from one well respected and talented journalist. And before he or she writes that essential story the ground must be laid by ordinary animal advocates, to catch the eye of the public (including that one talented writer who would obviously have to already be vegan).
Today information doesn’t have to be restricted, there just needs to be a silence in the media where stories are kept unreported, and in that way people are ‘protected’ from knowing, in this case, that animals are being routinely attacked on a massive scale. With a spineless media, held captive by its advertisers, there’s no way ordinary people can be kept informed - the effect of this silence gives people the impression that nothing bad is actually happening because whatever is happening isn’t worth reporting on.
It might seem incredible that educated and otherwise well informed people know so little about cruelty to farm animals, but it isn’t that surprising when you think of how much conflicting information there is. How can anyone sort out what is true and what isn’t? Most people give up trying to find out and revert to habit.
What we so badly need is one high profile and brave journalist who’ll reveal not only the scale of animal cruelty but the cover-up which, in itself, would be the bigger and more shocking story ... because it involves the duping of the public.
There have been stories published about specific atrocities such as the live export of animals, and there are many organisations who have outed factory farming but none have had the courage to expose the much bigger problem of the entire animal trade. None ever attempts to comprehensively expose the cruelties and combine it with warnings of the widespread health risks associated with consuming animal protein because it’s too big; it’s been considered too ambitious to take on such a broad condemnation since it would not have enough support from the community who make so much use of so many animals. This is why, perhaps, the time is not yet ripe for a writer to surface. If and when the story is told, it might start out with the disastrous health consequences of animal food with the added cruelty factor thrown in for good measure. But the real impact of the story would concern the scale of the cover-up. And I think it’s that which could ultimately outrage people - that they’d been kept in the dark for so long and had been meant to be kept so for many generations to come.
For our kids to be ‘information protected’ like this is bad enough but in a world where so many are dying from lack of food, the cost of wastefully producing vast amounts of food to feed to animals (so they can be eaten) is an obscene waste on a massive scale - it being such an inefficient way to feed people.
The silence, the cover-up and the duping of people seems to be essential for lining the pockets of the Animal Industries. Eventually they must know that the truth will come out ... but I suppose they hope to make their money and then, presumably, just cut and run.
Once exposed, the story of how they’ve diced with the quality of people’s lives for the sake of profit will tell us one thing in particular, that humans are not to be trusted around animals. Both consumers and producers alike contribute to the widespread exploitation of animals, and once that is fully understood then I’m sure the system will fail. And as it fails to provide the animal products people are used to, so the transition to plant-based lifestyles will take place.
It occurs to me that, at this point, vegans would be in a position to provide valuable practical assistance ... but so many things have to happen before that - we first have to learn the truth from a major exposé from one well respected and talented journalist. And before he or she writes that essential story the ground must be laid by ordinary animal advocates, to catch the eye of the public (including that one talented writer who would obviously have to already be vegan).
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Move to Activism
229
Animal activists make it their business to look where others don’t look. When I looked everything changed for me. What I saw turned me vegan, and I knew others would be like me. They’d be outraged enough to change their eating habits and attitudes to ‘food’-animals, enough to boycott the Industry’s products. But I was wrong. What a shock I got when I saw NO surge of compassion. It made me wonder about people, particularly about parents, politicians, preachers and teachers. Why hadn’t they told me? Then I got angry. Then sad.
Now some decades later I’m wondering why they aren’t telling the kids of today. It’s all common knowledge now, it’s not as if they don’t know. It’s just that they don’t want to know. They don’t want the kids to know either because it would reflect badly on them.
As I moved into adulthood, or at least into a state of independence (cooking my own meals), I began to focus on the job in hand. The shock was gone and I was moving on from blaming ‘those who didn’t tell us’. Activism isn’t about blame. I realise we’ve all got blood on our hands, so bugger blame! Move on. Be pro-active ... no time to waste. Look where others don’t look. Don’t procrastinate - see how the pig is forced to live, drop pork; see the battery system operating, drop eggs; see an abattoir, drop everything that has a face.
As adults with free choice we may look ... look at the face of an animal! If you’ve ever seen an animal at the abattoir, being led into the execution chamber, it’s unforgettable. The noise from her, her despair, the machinery groaning alongside her. It’s one diabolical scene, gut wrenching.
When I first saw it, it was enough to stop me in my tracks, make me check my habits, make me boycott, make me plant-base all my food and move on ... to activism.
And what is activism?
For some time for me it was a huge enough project in itself, changing my food habits but later, when diet was resolved and shoes and clothes sorted out, I looked further and saw something sadder than even the animal cruelty. It was my own loss of faith in human nature, and that, not anger, has fuelled my activism ever since. Giving up on human nature, not seeing the potential in people, is ultimately sad.
Animal activists make it their business to look where others don’t look. When I looked everything changed for me. What I saw turned me vegan, and I knew others would be like me. They’d be outraged enough to change their eating habits and attitudes to ‘food’-animals, enough to boycott the Industry’s products. But I was wrong. What a shock I got when I saw NO surge of compassion. It made me wonder about people, particularly about parents, politicians, preachers and teachers. Why hadn’t they told me? Then I got angry. Then sad.
Now some decades later I’m wondering why they aren’t telling the kids of today. It’s all common knowledge now, it’s not as if they don’t know. It’s just that they don’t want to know. They don’t want the kids to know either because it would reflect badly on them.
As I moved into adulthood, or at least into a state of independence (cooking my own meals), I began to focus on the job in hand. The shock was gone and I was moving on from blaming ‘those who didn’t tell us’. Activism isn’t about blame. I realise we’ve all got blood on our hands, so bugger blame! Move on. Be pro-active ... no time to waste. Look where others don’t look. Don’t procrastinate - see how the pig is forced to live, drop pork; see the battery system operating, drop eggs; see an abattoir, drop everything that has a face.
As adults with free choice we may look ... look at the face of an animal! If you’ve ever seen an animal at the abattoir, being led into the execution chamber, it’s unforgettable. The noise from her, her despair, the machinery groaning alongside her. It’s one diabolical scene, gut wrenching.
When I first saw it, it was enough to stop me in my tracks, make me check my habits, make me boycott, make me plant-base all my food and move on ... to activism.
And what is activism?
For some time for me it was a huge enough project in itself, changing my food habits but later, when diet was resolved and shoes and clothes sorted out, I looked further and saw something sadder than even the animal cruelty. It was my own loss of faith in human nature, and that, not anger, has fuelled my activism ever since. Giving up on human nature, not seeing the potential in people, is ultimately sad.
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
How we routinely hurt animals
228:
Whether predated or a predator, an animal is a free-spirited creature. It’s a self-feeding, social being. It isn’t interested in concrete and steel structures or in helping humans to lead a more comfortable life. But to many humans a free animal is an animal wasted, a waste of good money … and for those who make their money out of farming them it means nothing to have them incarcerated - they’re just a resource. Every customer of every animal product helps to support that way of seeing animals.
Some humans do love animals but most humans also connive at hurting them, by supporting those who take away their freedom of movement, by putting them in pens and cages.
In a way, what we do to animals we do to ourselves. We sell our souls to keep ourselves fed, or more particularly over-fed, and all the rich food we eat ends up killing us. Our addiction to it makes us demand that it should be cheap. In response to customer demand, if the farmer wants to stay in business, he cuts every corner he can - he lets his animals suffer. If it means cutting off animals’ tails, horns, beaks and testicles for easier management of them, then that’s what is done. They are enclosed behind fences, put behind bars, encased in glass boxes as exhibits at zoos, caged, tethered, immobilised and generally treated like machines, and yet it’s strange how we also romanticise them. The farm animal is part of the rural idyll, we see them contentedly grazing the pastures and never get to see indoors, at the darker side, where they are subjected to torture. We never see the equipment used for mutilating them, for cutting bits out of their bodies. We never hear the sizzle of skin under red-hot branding irons. Perhaps we see the double tiered trucks on the highway filled with animals being transported to the abattoir but we’re largely no more aware of their fate than the animals are themselves.
On the farms and especially the factory farms, the psychological torment suffered by the animals is unarguable. But people in general know almost nothing about this – they are ignorant or they pretend to be. We most of us live in towns and cities. We hardly ever go to the country and when we do, we see the pretty farm buildings nestling amongst trees surrounded by green paddocks. We never see the interiors … nor want to. If we get to know, from pictures or TV footage, that the animals are kept in slum conditions (and therefore realise that our food comes from these places) we still don’t react. We aren’t aroused by the possibility that there’s anything wrong going on, let alone anything diabolical. We aren’t encouraged or even allowed to check out conditions on farms.
If you go down to the farm today you’re in for a big surprise - if you ever get to see inside one it would be a case of ‘once seen never forgotten’.
Whether predated or a predator, an animal is a free-spirited creature. It’s a self-feeding, social being. It isn’t interested in concrete and steel structures or in helping humans to lead a more comfortable life. But to many humans a free animal is an animal wasted, a waste of good money … and for those who make their money out of farming them it means nothing to have them incarcerated - they’re just a resource. Every customer of every animal product helps to support that way of seeing animals.
Some humans do love animals but most humans also connive at hurting them, by supporting those who take away their freedom of movement, by putting them in pens and cages.
In a way, what we do to animals we do to ourselves. We sell our souls to keep ourselves fed, or more particularly over-fed, and all the rich food we eat ends up killing us. Our addiction to it makes us demand that it should be cheap. In response to customer demand, if the farmer wants to stay in business, he cuts every corner he can - he lets his animals suffer. If it means cutting off animals’ tails, horns, beaks and testicles for easier management of them, then that’s what is done. They are enclosed behind fences, put behind bars, encased in glass boxes as exhibits at zoos, caged, tethered, immobilised and generally treated like machines, and yet it’s strange how we also romanticise them. The farm animal is part of the rural idyll, we see them contentedly grazing the pastures and never get to see indoors, at the darker side, where they are subjected to torture. We never see the equipment used for mutilating them, for cutting bits out of their bodies. We never hear the sizzle of skin under red-hot branding irons. Perhaps we see the double tiered trucks on the highway filled with animals being transported to the abattoir but we’re largely no more aware of their fate than the animals are themselves.
On the farms and especially the factory farms, the psychological torment suffered by the animals is unarguable. But people in general know almost nothing about this – they are ignorant or they pretend to be. We most of us live in towns and cities. We hardly ever go to the country and when we do, we see the pretty farm buildings nestling amongst trees surrounded by green paddocks. We never see the interiors … nor want to. If we get to know, from pictures or TV footage, that the animals are kept in slum conditions (and therefore realise that our food comes from these places) we still don’t react. We aren’t aroused by the possibility that there’s anything wrong going on, let alone anything diabolical. We aren’t encouraged or even allowed to check out conditions on farms.
If you go down to the farm today you’re in for a big surprise - if you ever get to see inside one it would be a case of ‘once seen never forgotten’.
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Getting ethical
227:
When we’re young, who authorises what we do and how we think and what we eat? Kids follow adults, and they give the same advice they were given as youngsters, based on the principle of ‘Mum knows best’ and ‘Doctor knows best’.
Youth rebels, but the pleasure instinct is so predominant that over food choices there isn’t likely to be many changes made ... unless tradition is rejected on philosophical grounds. If that trumps pleasure then there’s a basis from which our own more ethical decisions can be made.
I think the philosophy behind veganism comes out of a deep enough instinct to rule out animal foods. It won’t tell us what to eat but it will tell us what NOT to.
From a plant-based platform, underscored by a non-violent approach to everything else we do, food choices become more straight forward. By outlining what NOT to eat vegans don’t usually become obese or develop ill health from their diet - rubbish food and fast food is filtered out. By avoiding rich snacks, cakes and confections, along with meat itself, the body isn’t exposed to the saturated fats, cholesterol, high salt and sugar contents so characteristic of animal foods.
Although we might miss out on fashion gear such as leather goods, wool, silk and fur, we aren’t lured by so much expensive merchandise. Our feet might get wet from wearing fabric shoes or in the cold weather we may have to wear a few more layers of cotton, and that might be inconvenient, but when you think of the suffering we save the animals - the loss of the sheep’s own woollen coat or the cow’s own skin.
For omnivores life is made messy from taking part in the business of the Animal Industry. If you feel ashamed of abattoirs and cages and barbed wire you can break free of it all by becoming vegan. Our own instinctive compassion is the best ethical guide here - if what we buy hurts animals we have no justification for buying it in the first place?
When we’re young, who authorises what we do and how we think and what we eat? Kids follow adults, and they give the same advice they were given as youngsters, based on the principle of ‘Mum knows best’ and ‘Doctor knows best’.
Youth rebels, but the pleasure instinct is so predominant that over food choices there isn’t likely to be many changes made ... unless tradition is rejected on philosophical grounds. If that trumps pleasure then there’s a basis from which our own more ethical decisions can be made.
I think the philosophy behind veganism comes out of a deep enough instinct to rule out animal foods. It won’t tell us what to eat but it will tell us what NOT to.
From a plant-based platform, underscored by a non-violent approach to everything else we do, food choices become more straight forward. By outlining what NOT to eat vegans don’t usually become obese or develop ill health from their diet - rubbish food and fast food is filtered out. By avoiding rich snacks, cakes and confections, along with meat itself, the body isn’t exposed to the saturated fats, cholesterol, high salt and sugar contents so characteristic of animal foods.
Although we might miss out on fashion gear such as leather goods, wool, silk and fur, we aren’t lured by so much expensive merchandise. Our feet might get wet from wearing fabric shoes or in the cold weather we may have to wear a few more layers of cotton, and that might be inconvenient, but when you think of the suffering we save the animals - the loss of the sheep’s own woollen coat or the cow’s own skin.
For omnivores life is made messy from taking part in the business of the Animal Industry. If you feel ashamed of abattoirs and cages and barbed wire you can break free of it all by becoming vegan. Our own instinctive compassion is the best ethical guide here - if what we buy hurts animals we have no justification for buying it in the first place?
Friday, August 5, 2011
An egg starter to numb the conscience
225:
So here’s the state of things at present. We have billions of humans eating foods produced by animals, unwilling to consider the feelings of those animals. Perhaps they’re pushing animal rights onto the back burner, because they’re more concerned with money worries, family matters, job insecurity, global warming, ill health, etc ... there’s so much to think about, and with no relief in sight ... so people open the fridge and choose their favourite food as a pick-me-up.
We eat for pleasure and diversion, despite the negative health pay-back or sting-in-the-tail, conscience-killing knowledge that things aren’t quite right. We know what happens down the road, at the abattoir. They have to happen so our fridges can be stocked with yummy stuff.
After sunrise at the abattoir the killing begins. Can we hear it when we’re eating our breakfast, cracking the shell of our breakfast egg? Can we imagine what’s going on, or remember the egg we saw on TV last night, dropping from a live caged animal in a squalid battery farm? Despite all that we eat that very egg.
There are no eggs left in the carton - I must a new carton. The cycle continues.
Less obviously, in our cupboard, there are products with eggy ingredients, appetising products ... so here’s the state of things ... we see the cruelty (on TV) and forget it, because it’s inconvenient to bring it to mind - we want our eggs, we’ll soon be buying more eggs. And as we slip into the habits of daily life we think less and less about what we’re doing.
Small children are good at thinking - they often express horror at the way animals are treated. They often want to say something, but at each meal their resistance is slowly worn down. But for a while there may be empathy and it may re-emerge later, when their conscience wakes from a long sleep.
Young people have a much cleaner slate than adults. They’ve got more excuse since they’ve never had any real freedom to choose their own food. Their conscience is clearer. Guilt hasn’t bitten so deeply. And it follows that as their independence develops they’re freer to experiment with new foods, and move away from the habits of their parents’ generation ... even to try out a vegan diet.
If an adult doesn’t consult their conscience over eating animals the senses will call all the shots. We’ll allow our senses to betray our body until our health goes down the tube. Simply by not making our own decisions, eating what our mothers fed us without questioning it, what chance do we have later in life? It’s easier to follow the crowd.
So here’s the state of things at present. We have billions of humans eating foods produced by animals, unwilling to consider the feelings of those animals. Perhaps they’re pushing animal rights onto the back burner, because they’re more concerned with money worries, family matters, job insecurity, global warming, ill health, etc ... there’s so much to think about, and with no relief in sight ... so people open the fridge and choose their favourite food as a pick-me-up.
We eat for pleasure and diversion, despite the negative health pay-back or sting-in-the-tail, conscience-killing knowledge that things aren’t quite right. We know what happens down the road, at the abattoir. They have to happen so our fridges can be stocked with yummy stuff.
After sunrise at the abattoir the killing begins. Can we hear it when we’re eating our breakfast, cracking the shell of our breakfast egg? Can we imagine what’s going on, or remember the egg we saw on TV last night, dropping from a live caged animal in a squalid battery farm? Despite all that we eat that very egg.
There are no eggs left in the carton - I must a new carton. The cycle continues.
Less obviously, in our cupboard, there are products with eggy ingredients, appetising products ... so here’s the state of things ... we see the cruelty (on TV) and forget it, because it’s inconvenient to bring it to mind - we want our eggs, we’ll soon be buying more eggs. And as we slip into the habits of daily life we think less and less about what we’re doing.
Small children are good at thinking - they often express horror at the way animals are treated. They often want to say something, but at each meal their resistance is slowly worn down. But for a while there may be empathy and it may re-emerge later, when their conscience wakes from a long sleep.
Young people have a much cleaner slate than adults. They’ve got more excuse since they’ve never had any real freedom to choose their own food. Their conscience is clearer. Guilt hasn’t bitten so deeply. And it follows that as their independence develops they’re freer to experiment with new foods, and move away from the habits of their parents’ generation ... even to try out a vegan diet.
If an adult doesn’t consult their conscience over eating animals the senses will call all the shots. We’ll allow our senses to betray our body until our health goes down the tube. Simply by not making our own decisions, eating what our mothers fed us without questioning it, what chance do we have later in life? It’s easier to follow the crowd.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)