Boganette pointed me to this Adult Privilege Checklist and it got me thinking about "personhood" and how a list for Human Privileges might also be in order. Similar to the children's checklist is might be easier to write it from the perspective of the animal, rather than the human privilege haver, because whilst most human beings do not have their children forcibly removed from them, and most human beings are not held in captivity, some of them (usually the naughty ones) are. Needless to say this applies to animals managed and owned by human beings, NOT to wild ones. Here goes, in no particular order, my attempt:
1. I am forced to reproduce for the monetary gain of others
2. My children are forcibly removed from me
3. When I go missing there is no state of emergency called and no search and rescue teams sent to find me
4.When I am hurt or injured, I may remain that way for extended periods or have my life ended as a means of mitigating my suffering
5. My life can legally be deprived from me.
6. I can be owned by another person, and legally am their property
7. I can be confined at length or for my entire life, in conditions that do not suit me
8. I cannot access food or water without a human providing it for me
9. I cannot access medical treatment without the assistance of a human being
10. I cannot express my pain, anguish, and distress in ways that are clear to other beings.
11. I cannot vote, even though the government makes decisions that affect me and other beings like me
12. I can be physically assaulted in a number of ways without the law becoming involved. If the law is involved the likelihood of a fine or jail time for my abuser is unlikely.
13. I am likely to be smaller than my abuser and if I do retaliate I am likely to be killed.
14. If a human being enters my territory and I defend it against them I am liable to be destroyed.
15. If I wander into another animal's property and am killed by that animal, they or their owner are not responsible for my death
16. I am often yelled at and/or punished for behaving in a way that is normal for my species.
17. People feel it is their right to touch or interact with me and if I react inappropriately I will be punished or put to death
18. I am not given a choice about my living conditions, my food type or amount, or my level of interaction with people or other animals.
19. I am not allowed to perform sexual behaviour that is normal for me and I may well be deprived of the ability to reproduce by being surgically altered.
20. I am not able to own any belongings.
20 seems a good amount. Please note that I do not really believe that giving animals personhood is a practical idea, or even good idea in theory. Much the same way that I think that children need to be guided in a world that wasn't made for them, animals have the same need, as they probably would infringe the rights of others if they did everything that felt right to them. However I do think that animals should have certain rights, e.g. the right to bodily integrity and to perform behaviours that are normal for them, and harmless to others. And just to reiterate, I do believe spaying and neutering is essential to reducing the unwanted animal population, and I don't know of any animal rights activists that would disagree with me.
Friday 29 April 2011
Thursday 21 April 2011
Wednesday 20 April 2011
Shit, I hope I'm not becoming conservative in my old age.
Now as you can probably tell from my last post, I've never been a really militant sort of vegan, though I have always probably more sympathetic to the ALF than their targets. But in the last two months I have visited two animal research facilities (for completely unrelated reasons) and have been quite calm about the whole thing. I still can't shake the NQR* feeling about either place, but I'm not sure they lived up to the idea of animal research facility that I had in my head either.
In fact I didn't even think of one as "that" type of facility until I googled for directions and all these ALF and PETA related thingies popped up.
I've never liked the idea of using animals for research. Yes, even to cure cancer. In fact, maybe especially to cure cancer, because I think curing cancer is like curing old age, I don't think we ever will do it. Murphy's Law says that we already lost the only plant that can produce the compound we need to cure cancer in one of the 100+ rain-forest species we make extinct everyday. Even if it does happen, sometime in the future, we might kill a great many animals in vain until that day finally comes. Either way, I've never been entirely convinced by that "for the greater good" malarchy. Because the "good" is not guaranteed, but pain and suffering are. I especially got angry a couple years back when that beagle farm was on 60 minutes and the guy said that the beagles were "heroes" because they got to save lives. Oh, Hallmark-sentiment-induced vomit. There is nothing warm and fuzzy about animal testing.
So the question of whether I'm becoming a bit more conservative comes from my unexpected lack of discomfort at visiting these facilities. Part of it might come from my knowledge of animal shelters, where animals are killed every day for no good reason other than there isn't a loving home for them. Perhaps animal death for a specific purpose is far better than death for practically no reason at all. It also seems a bit daft to be bringing animals into the world for the specific use of testing when there are so many unwanted ones out their that could be used in their place. And it also makes me wonder why ALF don't target their local SPCA and municipal pound, as I'm sure these facilities put more animals to death each week than any animal testing facility. So whilst I'm not happy that animal testing goes on, I know that far more animals die in shelters and to produce our food, so I guess these things need to be prioritised.
I didn't like the facilities I visited, they had a slaughterhouse vibe about them and I wasn't actually that happy with the condition of the animals that I saw. For animals that had been there their entire lives, they seemed a bit stressed, like this wasn't quite normal for them. Which it of course isn't. Neither place was very clearly sign posted as to what the facilities actually were or what went on there, but they certainly weren't as security conscious as I'd heard such places need to be. So I was left with an uncomfortable feeling in my conscience, but I didn't feel the need to return after hours, free the animals and burn the place down, either. Confused.
Oh yeah, P.S. this sort of thing does exist in NZ. A lot.
*Not Quite Right - like the reject stores in Melbourne
In fact I didn't even think of one as "that" type of facility until I googled for directions and all these ALF and PETA related thingies popped up.
I've never liked the idea of using animals for research. Yes, even to cure cancer. In fact, maybe especially to cure cancer, because I think curing cancer is like curing old age, I don't think we ever will do it. Murphy's Law says that we already lost the only plant that can produce the compound we need to cure cancer in one of the 100+ rain-forest species we make extinct everyday. Even if it does happen, sometime in the future, we might kill a great many animals in vain until that day finally comes. Either way, I've never been entirely convinced by that "for the greater good" malarchy. Because the "good" is not guaranteed, but pain and suffering are. I especially got angry a couple years back when that beagle farm was on 60 minutes and the guy said that the beagles were "heroes" because they got to save lives. Oh, Hallmark-sentiment-induced vomit. There is nothing warm and fuzzy about animal testing.
So the question of whether I'm becoming a bit more conservative comes from my unexpected lack of discomfort at visiting these facilities. Part of it might come from my knowledge of animal shelters, where animals are killed every day for no good reason other than there isn't a loving home for them. Perhaps animal death for a specific purpose is far better than death for practically no reason at all. It also seems a bit daft to be bringing animals into the world for the specific use of testing when there are so many unwanted ones out their that could be used in their place. And it also makes me wonder why ALF don't target their local SPCA and municipal pound, as I'm sure these facilities put more animals to death each week than any animal testing facility. So whilst I'm not happy that animal testing goes on, I know that far more animals die in shelters and to produce our food, so I guess these things need to be prioritised.
I didn't like the facilities I visited, they had a slaughterhouse vibe about them and I wasn't actually that happy with the condition of the animals that I saw. For animals that had been there their entire lives, they seemed a bit stressed, like this wasn't quite normal for them. Which it of course isn't. Neither place was very clearly sign posted as to what the facilities actually were or what went on there, but they certainly weren't as security conscious as I'd heard such places need to be. So I was left with an uncomfortable feeling in my conscience, but I didn't feel the need to return after hours, free the animals and burn the place down, either. Confused.
Oh yeah, P.S. this sort of thing does exist in NZ. A lot.
*Not Quite Right - like the reject stores in Melbourne
Thursday 14 April 2011
The importance of being a moderate vegan
A lecturer in my undergrad degree once told us of a friend of his who was vegan. He said this friend just ended up very angry at the world and began withdrawing from human society. This, as my lecturer pointed out, was a Very Bad Thing. How can you influence society if you're no longer a part of it? You're certainly no use to anyone as he so eloquently put it: "living in a tree and throwing your crap at people."
With this in mind I think it is so important to be an otherwise normal, productive and functioning member of society as a vegan. We're not all the extreme, brick throwing variety of vegan, who send letter bombs to animal testing faculties and won't eat anything if we didn't grow it ourselves, pick it out of a dumpster or otherwise procure it from a 100 meter radius of our homes. No disrespect meant to any of those people, more power to you, but I think, that type of attitude has done a lot to distance the movement from the general population. Certainly, recent bandwagon jumper Ellen and fad diet promoter Oprah have done more for the mainstream acceptance of the movement than they have.
In this way, veganism suffers from the same elitism that is rampant in the punk rock world. Elitism exists because no one wants to get beaten up by a bully wearing the shirt of their favourite band. But elitism stops punk rock from spreading and being shared with others, which is kind of selfish. As Matt from Punkas.co.nz puts it "punk's worst enemy is itself." Veganism needs to be shared, like Punk Rock - and the benefits are communal. Just like when more people start liking your band, said band is more likely to tour and make albums for your enjoyment, the more vegans there are, the more vegan products will become mainstream and readily available for all!
Telling people about the origins of their food while they're eating, or coming across angry, emotional or irrational when you argue the point of veganism is just going to turn people off to you. People can't stand being preached to, and veganism is no religion. Just explain the facts and be reasonable. Being vegan is totally reasonable. Where's the harm in not eating animals? You don't need to. You won't die.
Similarly, don't let anyone make you feel you're not vegan just because you don't subscribe to EVERY linked ideology, because you drink coke, because you indulge in a vegan treat from an unvegan source (e.g. Popsicle Slushy = totally vegan ingredients, but made by Fonterra. I'd argue that you are sending a message to companies saying that you like their milk free products. Where is the harm in that?) or because you wear sweat shop shoes or eat noodles with palm oil and chocolate that isn't free trade... people spend so much time worrying about what is vegan and what isn't, what's punk and what isn't, that they kind of miss the point entirely.
With this in mind I think it is so important to be an otherwise normal, productive and functioning member of society as a vegan. We're not all the extreme, brick throwing variety of vegan, who send letter bombs to animal testing faculties and won't eat anything if we didn't grow it ourselves, pick it out of a dumpster or otherwise procure it from a 100 meter radius of our homes. No disrespect meant to any of those people, more power to you, but I think, that type of attitude has done a lot to distance the movement from the general population. Certainly, recent bandwagon jumper Ellen and fad diet promoter Oprah have done more for the mainstream acceptance of the movement than they have.
In this way, veganism suffers from the same elitism that is rampant in the punk rock world. Elitism exists because no one wants to get beaten up by a bully wearing the shirt of their favourite band. But elitism stops punk rock from spreading and being shared with others, which is kind of selfish. As Matt from Punkas.co.nz puts it "punk's worst enemy is itself." Veganism needs to be shared, like Punk Rock - and the benefits are communal. Just like when more people start liking your band, said band is more likely to tour and make albums for your enjoyment, the more vegans there are, the more vegan products will become mainstream and readily available for all!
Telling people about the origins of their food while they're eating, or coming across angry, emotional or irrational when you argue the point of veganism is just going to turn people off to you. People can't stand being preached to, and veganism is no religion. Just explain the facts and be reasonable. Being vegan is totally reasonable. Where's the harm in not eating animals? You don't need to. You won't die.
Similarly, don't let anyone make you feel you're not vegan just because you don't subscribe to EVERY linked ideology, because you drink coke, because you indulge in a vegan treat from an unvegan source (e.g. Popsicle Slushy = totally vegan ingredients, but made by Fonterra. I'd argue that you are sending a message to companies saying that you like their milk free products. Where is the harm in that?) or because you wear sweat shop shoes or eat noodles with palm oil and chocolate that isn't free trade... people spend so much time worrying about what is vegan and what isn't, what's punk and what isn't, that they kind of miss the point entirely.
Monday 11 April 2011
Introducing: Me!
Ok, so I've resisted writing a blog for some time now, (well, to be honest I have had many failed attempts) mainly because I thought it was meant to be used like a diary, and I thought that was a little self indulgent. And if you write about yourself all the time, I suppose it is. But now I realize it is a tool to facilitate discussion on a given topic that you care a great deal about.
So what do I care about? This was the other struggle I have had, coming up with a coherent theme. But loosley, all the things I do care about do kind of interconnect. I'm a post grad student, a vegan, an evolutionist and I like punk rock music. The relationship between veganism and evolution should be reasonably logical, and punk rock with its left-wing leanings fits in there nicely as well. After all, Greg Graffin of Bad Religion is a zoology Ph.D and Rise Against are a bunch of vegans.
Given my interest in the above things, it will come as no surprise to you that I don't suffer Christianity gladly. It is a problem from my perspective as a vegan, as an evolutionist, and as a punk rocker. From a vegan point of view I disagree with the notion that we are somehow inherently different from, or higher than, other animals, or that we should be given "dominion" over them, evolution never sits comfortably as a subject among a roomful of Christians, and punk rockers generally don't tolerate the authority of some invisible, omnipotent and vengeful deity. Christians or right wing people of any description may not enjoy this blog.
Not all posts will be this well structured or lacking in profanities, I rant too, probably because ranting opinionated prose is the type of stuff I like to read. I like cynicism, sarcasm, facetious bullshit and taking the piss. You might find a vegan recipe, an gig review or a Masterate level analysis on animal welfare. Just depends on the day.
So what do I care about? This was the other struggle I have had, coming up with a coherent theme. But loosley, all the things I do care about do kind of interconnect. I'm a post grad student, a vegan, an evolutionist and I like punk rock music. The relationship between veganism and evolution should be reasonably logical, and punk rock with its left-wing leanings fits in there nicely as well. After all, Greg Graffin of Bad Religion is a zoology Ph.D and Rise Against are a bunch of vegans.
Given my interest in the above things, it will come as no surprise to you that I don't suffer Christianity gladly. It is a problem from my perspective as a vegan, as an evolutionist, and as a punk rocker. From a vegan point of view I disagree with the notion that we are somehow inherently different from, or higher than, other animals, or that we should be given "dominion" over them, evolution never sits comfortably as a subject among a roomful of Christians, and punk rockers generally don't tolerate the authority of some invisible, omnipotent and vengeful deity. Christians or right wing people of any description may not enjoy this blog.
Not all posts will be this well structured or lacking in profanities, I rant too, probably because ranting opinionated prose is the type of stuff I like to read. I like cynicism, sarcasm, facetious bullshit and taking the piss. You might find a vegan recipe, an gig review or a Masterate level analysis on animal welfare. Just depends on the day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)