In The New York Times, “Farm Boy” Nicholas Kristof “Reflects” on time spent murdering innocent, sentient beings:

Then there were the geese, the most admirable creatures I’ve ever met. We raised Chinese white geese, a common breed, and they have distinctive personalities. They mate for life and adhere to family values that would shame most of those who dine on them.

While one of our geese was sitting on her eggs, her gander would go out foraging for food—and if he found some delicacy, he would rush back to give it to his mate. Sometimes I would offer males a dish of corn to fatten them up—but it was impossible, for they would take it all home to their true loves.

Once a month or so, we would slaughter the geese. When I was 10 years old, my job was to lock the geese in the barn and then rush and grab one. Then I would take it out and hold it by its wings on the chopping block while my Dad or someone else swung the ax.

The 150 geese knew that something dreadful was happening and would cower in a far corner of the barn, and run away in terror as I approached. Then I would grab one and carry it away as it screeched and struggled in my arms.

Very often, one goose would bravely step away from the panicked flock and walk tremulously toward me. It would be the mate of the one I had caught, male or female, and it would step right up to me, protesting pitifully. It would be frightened out of its wits, but still determined to stand with and comfort its lover.

He goes on to say,

So, yes, I eat meat (even, hesitantly, goose). But I draw the line at animals being raised in cruel conditions.

How very generous of you, Mr. Kristof.

(more…)

A “real” feminist wouldn’t employ such a silly argument in defense of PETA’s campaigns, whether sexist or not:

MJ: One question I did have. I really do appreciate the work PETA has done but it has gotten a lot of criticism for using women in some of its ads. A lot of times in bikinis, or scantily clad, I think there was a striptease campaign that came online recently. What do you say to people who criticize PETA and say that it’s not women-friendly, that it denigrates women?

IN: Well, it’s rubbish because the organization is run by a woman, who is me. I marched in the earliest of rallies, I am an adamant feminist, but I’m not a prude and I think you can go to the beach and see people who are in less than you can in a PETA ad.

Let me guess: you also have a Black Friend ™, such that none of PETA’s campaigns could possibly be racist, either?

Seriously, this is such a ridiculous argument that I need only two words to refute it: Ann Coulter. Women are not immune from misogyny, you see. Sometimes, they’re even more vicious in their hatred of other women than are their male peers; because of the common (mis)perception that “women cannot be sexist,” women are oftentimes granted license to act in an even more misogynistic manner than their male counterparts. It’s not often that you hear a man argue that women’s suffrage was a mistake - yet Ann Coulter has posited as much, and she still manages to get speaking gigs.

You go on to say:

Our people are all volunteers, no one has asked a woman to take off her clothes. I’ve done it myself, we’ve all marched naked if we want to, and I think that it’s very restrictive and in fact wrong. I would expect someone in, say, Iran to tell us that we should cover up, but I don’t expect women or men in this country to criticize women who wish to use their bodies in a form of political statement, to tell them, you need to cover yourself up. There’s this idea of ‘naughty bits’ and I just think it’s funny more than anything else. It’s not sexist, it may be sexual, but no. No woman has ever been paid to strip. She has decided to use her body as a political instrument. That’s her prerogative and I think it is anti-feminist to dare to tell her that she needs to put her clothes back on.

Certainly, I agree that it’s “anti-feminist to dare to tell [a woman] that she needs to put her clothes back on”; however, there’s a difference between allowing your supporters to use their naked bodies as “political instrument[s]” and taking advantage of your [female] supporters’ willingness to get naked for the animals by playing into cultural stereotypes regarding gender roles, beauty, sex, class, race, etc. As I noted in my defense of your “Breast is Best” campaign, PETA does have a despicable habit of pornifying women in their photo/print campaigns while simultaneously portraying men as full human beings, complete with agency and personalities.

In PETA’s world, women are more likely to pose in the nude than men; and, if you were to objectively compare the PETA print campaigns which feature nude men and women, you’d see that the portrayals are drastically different. Strip away PETA’s logo and slogans, and the women’s photos look like they were pulled straight out of a recent edition of Playboy. Young, white, thin, feminine, (conventionally) attractive women are displayed on all fours, backs arched, gazes vacant, faces and torsos turned away from the camera, submissive in posture, ready for a good fuckin’. In contrast, the men’s shots are fun, funny, inspiring, humorous, and full of personality.

Yes, you can be sexual without being sexist; just look at these campaigns featuring naked men as proof:

(more…)

Via the Arizona chapter of the Sierra Club, by way of Deb at Invisible Voices, an eloquent illustration of intersecting “isms.” In this case, racism/xenophobia (”ZOMG! ILLEGAL ALIENZ!!!1!!1!”) and speciesism (”ZUH? THERE ARE ANIMALS ON TEH BORDER?”):

The Border Campaign of the Sierra Club – Grand Canyon Chapter has completed a 20 minute video about the environmental effects of the current border policy, “Wild Versus Wall.” This video covers the ecological effects of enforcement and infrastructure in the four states that share boundaries with Mexico.

Tucson-based filmmaker Steev Hise has been working on the film since January, 2007. He traveled to Texas and California during the spring to interview land managers, scientists, and activists who are working to limit the ecological impacts of border wall construction.

“I have been covering border issues in southern Arizona for a while,” said Hise. “One of the great things about this project was traveling to other places along the border and to see how people concerned about the recent border militarization have the same outlook as people do here. They are also trying to stop the Department of Homeland Security from running roughshod over natural resources and constitutional rights.”

Hise also gathered footage from a diverse array of sources, including some of the Border Patrol’s own employment videos, which show agents blazing along on off-road vehicles. Numerous photographers contributed images of the rich ecosystems and species that are impacted by border infrastructure projects and local biologists lent their eyes and ears to the factual background of the habitats at stake.

Order your DVD today! Send $20 to 738 N. 5th Ave., Suite 214, Tucson, AZ 85705. Be sure to include Wall vs. Wild in the memo line of the check.

Understandably, the Sierra Club focuses on the environmental impact of the border wall, since that’s what they do and all. Even so, this is an area that’s ripe for coalition building between pro-immigration/anti-racist and environmental/animal advocacy groups, since they share a somewhat similar goal: sensible immigration policy, specifically pertaining to border security.

The Center for Biological Diversity has has written extensively about the US-Mexico border wall; Google search here.

(Crossposted from.)

———————–

Tagged: sierra club arizona border wall border fence immigration racism xenophobia speciesism center for biological diversity animals animal rights animal welfare wildlife video environment

Update, 10/16/08: Ann @ Feministing linked to this piece, but over at Smite Me!, where it was originally posted. In response, I clarified my position a bit, particularly the whole “sex sells” angle, which I believed she misinterpreted. Go check it out.

———————

Update, 9/27/08: Mary Martin @ Animal Person discusses Ben & Jerry’s obtuse response to the campaign, as well as The Today Show’s take on the kerfluffle. Hint: you may want to write them about their weak attempts at “journalism.” Because, like it or not, many Americans’ sole provider of mainstream media news may very well consist of inane newstainment programs such as The Today Show.

———————

Hey! Feminists! You want to know why PETA continues to engage in (possibly) sexist, racist, classist, sizeist and otherwise “offensive” and “controversial” campaigns?

I’ll give you a hint:

In the top screenshot, a Google search for the terms PETA + “breast milk,” which returned 51,900 hits.

In the bottom screenshot, a Google search for the terms PETA + Hormel + pigs, which returned 11,500 hits.

(more…)

Via Noemi @ Vegans of Color, PETA’s latest publicity stunt: pro-vegan ads on, of all places, the US-Mexico border fence:

While many view the contentious border fence as a government fiasco, an animal rights group sees a rare opportunity.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals plans today to announce an unusual marketing pitch to the U.S. government: Rent us space on the fence for billboards warning illegal border crossers there is more to fear than the Border Patrol.

The billboards, in English and Spanish, would offer the caution: “If the Border Patrol Doesn’t Get You, the Chicken and Burgers Will — Go Vegan.”

“We think that Mexicans and other immigrants should be warned if they cross into the U.S. they are putting their health at risk by leaving behind a healthier, staple diet of corn tortillas, beans, rice, fruits and vegetables,” said Lindsay Rajt, assistant manager of PETA’s vegan campaigns.

The Department of Homeland Security is working to meet a deadline to complete 670 miles of fencing and other barriers on the Southwest border by Dec. 31. The fencing operation has run into stiff opposition by landowners fighting government efforts to obtain their land through condemnation.

PETA says its billboards would picture “fit and trim” Mexicans in their own country, where their diet is more in line with the group’s mission. Another image on the sign would portray obese American children and adults “gorging on meaty, fat- and cholesterol-packed American food.”

PETA’S offer to the feds is expected to arrive in a letter to Border Patrol officials today.

But a government spokesman in Washington said the request will be rejected because it would limit visibility through the fence. And Border Patrol does not allow advertising on its property or installations, the officials added.

“The fencing being put in place is, in many cases, mesh fencing to allow our officers to see what’s happening on the other side and to better secure the border,” said Michael Friel, a spokesman for U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

One property owner on the Texas-Mexico border laughed at PETA’s proposal.

“I think it’s ridiculous,” said Noel Benavides, who is contesting the construction of a fence dividing his family’s 145-acre ranch in Roma on the Rio Grande. “I can’t see the point of something like that.”

But Rajt said the rent money they’d pay would help offset the huge costs of the fencing — and the advertising message “might even be frightening enough to deter people from crossing into the U.S.”

PETA has often been criticized for its aggressive animal rights crusades. It’s used billboards to push many of its controversial positions such as “Buck Cruelty: Say NO to horse-drawn carriage rides” or “Feeding Kids Meat Is Child Abuse.”

(more…)

This is how Anthony Pagor, Dale Meyer, Brandon Meyer and Justin Williams of Eldorado, Wisconsin like to spend their weekends:

That’s right, torturing pigs. Fucking awesome, isn’t it, the way her eyes bulge out of her sockets and her tongue lolls out of her mouth as you squeeze every last bit of air out of her porcine lungs, isn’t it? What can be cooler than inflicting some unnecessary hurt on a “lower” life form, eh? Bet it makes y’all feel like quite the menz. Tomorrow you can haul her off to the slaughterhouse and come back with a freezer full of pork chops. You know, a MANLY MEAT!!!!! “Real food for real guys,” indeed.

(more…)

Here, finally!, is my review of Strategic Action for Animals: A Handbook on Strategic Movement Building, Organizing, and Activism for Animal Liberation (Melanie Joy, 2008). At 2,000+ words, it’s perhaps my longest book review yet. Towards the middle, I kind of wander off the book review path, discussing issues of “mainstreaming”, violent vs. non-violent tactics and intersecting oppressions. Some of these are central to Strategic Action for Animals, while others are just touched upon. They all struck a chord with me, though, maybe because they’ve been floating around the internets lately. But bear with me, it’s all related.

By the by, I posted a condensed review on Amazon, so if you’d like the short of it, go here (or here, if you prefer LT).

Otherwise, onward.

(more…)

Hunting is not “fun” or “enjoyable“, nor is it a “sport”;

If hunting was just about honing your shooting skills - challenging yourself, your aim, steadiness and sight - and hitting a target (stationary or not), then you could shoot at non-sentient targets - pieces of paper, bottles, clay discs.

If hunting was just about the joy of tracking, finding and surprising an animal in its natural habitat, you could shoot your targets with a camera.

But it’s not, so you don’t.

Hunting is about asserting your power over the less powerful, about dominating “others”, about getting your rocks off through sadism, in a legally and culturally sanctioned way.

It’s about taking your lack of power out on creatures less powerful than yourself. What better way to relax at the end of a long workweek than to gun down unsuspecting woodland creatures, all the while pushing thoughts of the abuses inflicted on you by the evil megatheocorporatocracy to the back of your mind.

Hunting isn’t about “having a good time”; it’s about exerting control when you might otherwise have none (or less so) at the expense of others. It’s about lashing out at those with less voice than your own, much like so many forms of human-on-human violence that we abhor today.

But Hillary, you’re right when you say that hunting is “part of culture…part of a way of life.”

Spousal abuse, child abuse, hate crimes against racial, ethnic, and sexual/gender minorities; all used to be “part of [our] culture…part of [the American] way of life”, yet time has proven(or perhaps more accurately, is proving) them barbaric, inhumane, unacceptable.

Like these, hunting will one day be seen as the patriarchal pathology it is.

That is all.

(Crossposted on.)

———————

Tagged: hunting hillary clinton 2008 elections guns parallel oppressions the patriarchy animals animal rights animal welfare

My favorite patriarchy blamer has come out as a vegetarian! At least methinks so:

A couple of years ago I got called on the carpet by a vegetarian blamer who was deeply grossed out by blogular photographs of my meaty lunches. At the time I demurred, not having fully worked out the connection between women’s oppression and the global megameatyocracy. But today I lounge before you in my lime green recliner and declare that there is no legitimate argument on behalf of consuming corporate meat. Convenience is not a legitimate argument. Price is not a legitimate argument. The delicious flavor of applewood smoked bacon is not a legitimate argument. Tradition is not a legitimate argument. Culture is not a legitimate argument.

Culture, as a matter of fact, is never a legitimate argument for anything. Fuck culture.

I am prompted to state the obvious by the reports of ground beef recalls and animal cruelty circulating around the media today. An undocumented immigrant meat industry worker has been arraigned for “illegal movement of a non-ambulatory animal,” which is a sanitized way of saying that he savaged sick cows with electric prods and forced them to their feet with fork lifts, among other things.

Despite the protestations of the corporate spokesperson, this slaughterhouse sadism cannot and must not be considered an anomaly. 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. As is the rationalization, parroted, unsurprisingly, by the meat worker: “I was only following orders.”

Thus we can but conclude that hamburgers and radical feminism are mutually exclusive.

(Emphasis mine.)

Bonus pleasant surprise of the day: a majoroty of the Blamers are responding positively to Twisty’s proclamation, with many singing the praises of veg*nism themselves. Even most of the omnivores are expressing some degree concern for animal welfare, as evidenced by their support for organic/free range/hand raised meat and dairy products. Hey, it’s a start. And it’s much better than the widespread scorn we misanthropic animal lovers/people haters encounter on other *cough* feminist blogs *cough*cough*.

Now if ya’ll will excuse me, I have to go wipe a tear. This may be the happiest day of my life (on the interwebs, that is).

(Crossposted from.)

———————–

Tagged: animals animal rights animal welfare feminism blogs blogging ibtp i blame the patriarchy vegan veganism vegetarian vegetarianism meat factory farming the internets quotables

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: DawnWatch - news [at] dawnwatch.com
Date: May 29, 2007 3:09 PM
Subject: DawnWatch: Huge Chicago Tribune spread on animal advocacy, and Newsday on faux meats 5/27/- 5/29/07

Over Memorial Day Weekend, the Chicago Tribune ran a wonderful story on the cover of its magazine section, Sunday May 27, headed, “Ruffling feathers; Once Viewed as Crazies, Animal Rights Activists Say Their Message is Starting to Get Through.”

Proving the point, New York Newsday, one of the countries most widely distributed papers, has a great story on fake meats, on Tuesday, May 29.

The Chicago Tribune magazine cover story, by Mick Dumke, is huge — over 4,000 words long — with loads of great photos.

It opens telling us that PETA protests KFC, using leaflets informing people “the chain’s suppliers abuse chickens–routinely breaking their legs, cutting off their beaks and scalding them alive before they’re slaughtered for food.” We learn that protesters get some snide comments, but mostly support. We read of a protester handing out leaflets to three kids who came running to her:

“Pollock happily set them up–they’re the future of the animal rights movement, she says–and the mother, stuffing the leaflet in her purse, thanked her.”

(more…)