Joel Burns tells gay teens “it gets better”;

Stephanie @ Animal Rights & AntiOppression: “You Coming Out or What?”; and

The Bullies Suck T-shirt

In the wake of a spate of suicides, committed by gay teenagers who were each the target of homophobic bullying, the LGBTQ community and its allies celebrated National Coming Out Day on October 11. Together, these events have focused attention on movements to prevent bullying – particularly those aimed at LGBTQ (or perceived LGBTQ) youths – including the It Gets Better Project and The Trevor Project. The former invites members and allies of the LGBTQ community to upload encouraging videos to its website, the message being that “it gets better”; the latter operates a hotline for LGBTQ youths and young adults in crisis, and also provides resources to parents and educators.

As part of this anti- anti-gay backlash, a number of celebrities and public figures have shared their own experiences publicly – including Fort Worth City Councilman Joel Burns, whose heartbreaking speech went viral and was aired in full on various media outlets, including CNN (where I first saw it). I’ve embedded the video above; even though it’s rather long, clocking in at almost 13 minutes, I urge you to watch the whole thing. It will bring you to tears.

And, while you’re already a sobby, snotty mess, head on over to AR&AO, where Stephanie shares her own “coming out” story. These issues – homophobia, transphobia, misogyny, and the like – are relevant to animal rights activism simply because so many activists belong to marginalized groups; nonhumans are not the only animals exploited and mistreated en masse, for no reason other than the simple fact of their birth. All oppression is bad oppression, and all forms of oppression harm individual activists, as well as social movements and the beings for whom we advocate. These are not “special interests,” to be addressed only after the “important” work is done; these are our interests, to be tackled in concert with other “isms.”

To this end, Ari Solomon of A Scent of Scandal, Josh Hooten of The Herbivore Clothing Company and Jennifer Martin of Ink Brigade created a line of t-shirts to show solidarity with the victims of anti-LGBTQ bullying. Called “Bullies Suck,” the tees are available for purchase through Herbivore (just $20, with kids’ sizes, to boot!); all proceeds will be donated to The Trevor Project.

vegansaurus!: Hello, Friends! It’s WTF Wednesday!

KFC has been struggling as of late (apparently they lost 7 percent of revenue in the last year?) and it turns out that their target audience can’t even recognize the Colonel anymore. So instead of thinking “Dude, our problem is that our food is super-gross and also unfit for consumption, so maybe we should get rid of that monstrosity we introduced last year and rethink our horrible horrible menu as well as our choice to be known as chicken murderers,” they decided that their best course of action was to rent ad space on the behinds of college women.

“Keep quiet for the cause”: on sexual abuse in progressive movements

The insistence that women’s liberation is anti-revolutionary, or insignificant, or just so much liberal navel-gazing, allows rape culture to thrive in far too many radical political and ethnic organizations. And brave young women like Dinah get raped and tossed aside.

Vegan Feminist Agitator: Lady Gaga’s Meat Dress Statement, zzzzz….

In the end, this woman who presents herself as an iconoclast and an artist is just like anyone else in line at the drive-thru, consuming animals for her reasons, basking in a set of privileges she is not challenging. A blasé sense of elite entitlement is every bit as ordinary and unoriginal and stupefyingly normal as someone in line trying to decide between a cheeseburger and a Big Mac.

Vegan Feminist Agitator: There is no Y.O.U. in Unity

People may claim that disagreements within the movement creates disharmony and is a waste of our resources: we should be unified, we are so small in number anyway, we don’t need to fragmentize further. I don’t “harmonize” with misogyny, though, just as I don’t with other forms of exploitation. I tend to think of this as a good thing. Those of us who speak out are often told that we hurt the movement. You know what really hurts the movement? When people use shaming, idiotic and mean-spirited tactics and the rest of us remain mute, bullied into silence, taking it on faith that there’s some amorphous benefit in maintaining the illusion of unity. What helps the movement? A diversity of views and voices and talents and people. Creative, truly progressive, smart advocacy.

Charlotte’s Website: The Egg Recall: Exposing the Problems with Reform

This is the reality of a capitalist economy: control of wealth and resources is concentrated in the few hands of an elite owning class. Choices then, for the majority of people, are indeed limited. If you don’t like what’s on the menu, you may be free, in theory, to choose none of it. But if the next closest restaurant is across town, and you can’t afford both subway fare and the price of the meal, what will you do? There are only so many times you can walk away before you starve. If there is no other way to meet your basic needs for enough food, good-tasting food, and varied food, you will eat what you can get.

Philosophía and Animal Liberation: Exploiting Femaleness and Violating Consent: Intersectional Abuse Across Species

Female animals are exploited both because they are not human and because of their femaleness.

Female humans are no strangers to this sort of exploitation. Women’s bodies have been being sold and exploited for centuries and there are always new ways that it is occurring. Even today, things like human trafficking, forced prostitution, and arranged marriages follow this suit. One of the more problematic industries that has been exposed in recent years is the “outsourcing of pregnancies” to India (Associated Press). [...]

The concern for consent is absent in most of humans’ dealings with other animals. The dairy industry is one of many examples of how both the nonhuman nature of the cow and the femaleness of the cow are exploited and how other animals’ differing communication styles- lacking our verbal language- are used as an excuse to ignore their (lack of) consent.

Courtney Desiree Morris @ make/shift: Why Misogynists Make Great Informants: How Gender Violence on the Left Enables State Violence in Radical Movements and

Stephanie @ Animal Rights & AntiOppression: Power Dynamics, Abuse, and Violence, Inside Relationships and Inside Our Movements

The entire make/shift piece is worth a read, but here’s a taste:

To save our movements, we need to come to terms with the connections between gender violence, male privilege, and the strategies that informants (and people who just act like them) use to destabilize radical movements. Time and again heterosexual men in radical movements have been allowed to assert their privilege and subordinate others. Despite all that we say to the contrary, the fact is that radical social movements and organizations in the United States have refused to seriously address gender violence as a threat to the survival of our struggles. We’ve treated misogyny, homophobia, and heterosexism as lesser evils—secondary issues—that will eventually take care of themselves or fade into the background once the ‘real’ issues—racism, the police, class inequality, U.S. wars of aggression—are resolved. There are serious consequences for choosing ignorance. Misogyny and homophobia are central to the reproduction of violence in radical activist communities. Scratch a misogynist and you’ll find a homophobe. Scratch a little deeper and you might find the makings of a future informant (or someone who just destabilizes movements like informants do).

Using this as a jumping-off point, Stephanie offers her own thoughts on sexual harassment, abuse, misogyny and bullying in social movements. The comment section very quickly veers toward events that took place at AR2010, with some disturbing examples of…well, just go read it. There are 69 comments at last count, so consider this set leisurely weekend read, yes?

Food Empowerment Project: F.E.P.’s Food Availability Study, “Shining a Light on the Valley of Heart’s Delight: Taking a Look at Access to Healthy Foods in Santa Clara County’s Communities of Color and Low-Income Communities”;

lauren @ Appetite for Justice: Further Insights on Our Report; and

Marji @ Animal Rights & AntiOppression: Food is Power

The Food Empowerment Project recently published the results of a year(+)-long study in which volunteers canvassed grocery stores in Santa Clara County, CA, in order to assess the available of healthy foods – defined here as “fresh, canned, and frozen fruits and vegetables as well as alternatives to meat and dairy” – in both low- and high-income areas. The 20-page report is available as a free .pdf download (click through the first link), with addition discussion and commentary on the FEP’s blog, Appetite for Justice (link #2). Marji also does a nice job of summarizing the findings for AR&AO readers (link #3). If you’d like to help fund the FEP’s invaluable work, please do!

Feminism & Psychology: Volume 20, Issue 3 (August 2010): Feminism, Psychology and Nonhuman Animals

The academic journal Feminism & Psychology recently devoted an entire issue to the topic of nonhuman animals. Featuring pieces by pattrice jones, Carol J. Adams, Donna Hathaway and Lynda Birke, the ten articles examine a wide range of subjects, such as gender differences as they relate to vegetarianism, anti-/speciesism in ecofeminist psychology, and what the gendering of nonhuman animals says about human society. While none of the articles are currently available for free, you can either purchase short-term access for $25 – or sweet-talk a college-attending friend or family member into downloading a copy for you. Unless you have access through a university your own self. In which case, shouldn’t you be studying or grading papers or something?

Marji @ Animal Rights & AntiOppression: Cow Shot At State Fair Was Not A Nutcase

Every year at county and state fairs, farmers drag heavily pregnant mothers, stick them in small cages in full view of the public and wait for them to give birth.

Yesterday in California, at the site of the state fair, a pregnant Holstein cow became frightened and bolted. The fair was not open to the public at the time.

Instead of backing off and letting the obviously stressed animal calm down, police decided to hop in a large SUV and drive after her. When that brilliant technique failed, it was decided the cow should be killed.

Ultimately, both mother and fetus died; “experts” – including a veterinary – swiftly commenced a shameless round of victim-blaming that was both ableist and misogynist in nature. For trying to escape her captors, a pregnant cow was labeled “crazy”; “a nutcase.” Meanwhile, the enslavement of billions of sentient nonhumans for human want and convenience – resulting in untold environmental degradation and no small threat to human safety and health – continues unchallenged. Who’s “crazy” again?

Vegans Against PETA: Thanks PETA, now I just spit all over everything.

PETA, on Janet Jackson’s decision to model for “luxury fur” company BlackGlama:

“It’s amazing what celebrities will do when their careers are on a downslide, but we didn’t think that Janet was this desperate. Surely, she knows enough about suffering and unjustified death to recognize that both occur in the production of a fur coat. We are asking her to think again and to donate these stolen skins to be used as bedding for animals orphaned by other human-caused disasters, such as loss of habitat,” PETA spokeswoman Amanda Schinke said in a statement.

Click on through to deconstruct this press release with The Venerable Vegan Empress.

Suicide Food: Sexy Hot Dog Tattoo

In which some shitbag actually shells out money to have the image of a sexy, busty, makeup-wearing, climaxing hot dog/lady hybrid tattooed onto his person. The upside? Vegan feminists the world over will know to steer clear of this loser. It’s like a Scarlet Letter, but in reverse.

————————

Tagged: animals animal rights animal welfare patriarchy intersections parallel oppressions animals and women sexism misogyny gender feminism race racism violence stereotyping exploitation sex intersectionality kyriarchy megatheocorporatocracy pop culture speciesism flickr photos news in the news quick links link roundup link dump Intersectionality ‘Round the Interwebs

“lol batman – get that dood-elle!” – Running through the streets of Gotham, a cheesy, live-action, retro ’60s Batman and Robin try desperately to apprehend a certain sexist blogger before he can unleash any further douchebaggery upon the women of Blogville. “HOLY FUCKING PATRONIZING SEXISM,” goes the refrain of this lol batman.
TV still via the internets; quote via Stephanie; and photoshopping via moi.
——————————

Though I haven’t been posting much ’round these parts lately

[and have all but abandoned ship over at AR&AO, for which I apologize to Stephanie & Co. profusely, and pledge to do better once things calm down here at Casa del Garbato-Brady, otherwise known as the Garden of Vegan, a title which I swear I will one day have posted at our driveway's front gate, threats of TP and eggs be damned]

rest assured that I’ve been busy, busy, busy, namely: working on several projects – including developing a website for my fledgling business

[Remember my - by which I mean Shane's - pizza press idea of last October? We are totally doing it! Slowly but surely, anyway. Our website isn't quite ready yet, so if you'd like to follow our progress, like us on Facebook, mkay?];

revamping another

[POP! goes The Vegan., whose database of vegan reviews should really be on the front page, with the blog in an ancillary position, seeing as the database is the main f'in attraction. What I was thinking by reversing their positions, I know not.];

and launching yet another brand-spankin’ new website

[Schlong4Seals! OMG, just reflecting on all the man-sausages and dick jokes waiting in the wings is enough to bring a smile to my normally frowny face. (I almost always look annoyed, even when I'm not; it's must be the humorless feminist in me, I guess.) I was a little incensed when the Fraternal Order of Facebook killed my SCHLONGS4SEALS group, but in retrospect, I think they did me a solid. A solid I shall return by plastering FB with links to all my super-awesome crotch shots and "seven ways to save the seals using only your cock" posts! Oh, I cannot wait. *Channeling the spirit of Will Ferrell*]

- the height of insanity, since clearly I already have more blogs than I can keep track of. Silly, silly rabbit.

Oh, and the zazzle store! A few designs for which I still need to create. Yeah, let’s save that for later, shall we?

Anyhow, on to issue #23 of “Intersectionality ‘Round the Interwebs.” On accounta me being in a mad hurry tonight, I’ve forgone most of my normal commentary in lieu of excerpts. That’s okay, though; I’ve got a great batch of links to share with y’all, so best to let the individual bloggers speak for themselves.

Browse, share, enjoy – and then blame and smash. Go!

“lol-psycat – narcissus” – Apropos of the dood-elle mentioned above, “narcissistic cat is his own screensavr.” (For those who can’t view the image, a black cat lounges atop a computer monitor, which currently displays a photo of…a black cat!) Not super-relevant to the rest of the post, but I felt like I needed a break between my semi-coherent ramblings above and the über-awesome link roundup below. Anal, who me?
——————————

INCITE! Blog: Why Misogynists Make Great Informants: How Gender Violence on the Left Enables State Violence in Radical Movements

To save our movements, we need to come to terms with the connections between gender violence, male privilege, and the strategies that informants (and people who just act like them) use to destabilize radical movements. Time and again heterosexual men in radical movements have been allowed to assert their privilege and subordinate others. Despite all that we say to the contrary, the fact is that radical social movements and organizations in the United States have refused to seriously address gender violence as a threat to the survival of our struggles. We’ve treated misogyny, homophobia, and heterosexism as lesser evils—secondary issues—that will eventually take care of themselves or fade into the background once the “real” issues—racism, the police, class inequality, U.S. wars of aggression—are resolved.

(Hat tip, Jenna at L.O.V.E.)

Vegan Feminist Agitator: Exploitation + Objectification = Conklin Farms. (In other words, business as usual.)

The process through which we make peace with the inherent injustice of how we treat non-humans occurs because of objectification, the largely unconscious fragmentation system through which sentient beings are turned into objects. It is easier for the mind to integrate the misuse of objects than the abuse of living beings. Through this process, individuation collapses: all cows, all hens become a single entity to be turned into product. Those who are in power have their interests interpreted as a natural right rather a personal desire. When our interests require the subjugation of another, objectification makes the acquiring of what we want that much easier.

Digging Through the Dirt: Promotion of Veal on Columbus Day Adds to Insult

Because we think of ourselves as exceptional, we view “the other” as inferior. Descendents of native peoples and of African slaves are still regarded as inferior in this country, in general. And animals are treated as such, too. They exist for our purposes; they have no value except that which we bestow upon them, usually in the form of dollars. It’s all about what we can get from them — their flesh, their milk, their eggs — just as it was for Columbus. What could he get from the native peoples?

Stephanie @ Animal Rights & AntiOppression: Skinny Bitch, PETA, and Our Fear of Dissent

It’s not just about hurt feelings [in response to "I'm willing to deal with a little hurt feelings if that means the movement gains the patronage of an entire new demographic"]. It’s about perpetuating sexist, hurtful notions that have real consequences for real women. It’s about real women’s struggles, some of them quite serious. . . . The animal rights movement doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and for as long as we pretend that it does, there will be entire new demographics we *can’t* reach because they see us as so hurtful, oblivious, and single-track. The animal rights movement I want to be a part of embraces all battles for social justice, opposes all oppression, and doesn’t feel that it’s OK to cut down and dismiss one group to help another.

and also:

HOLY FUCKING PATRONIZING SEXISM.

(That quote needs to be immortalized on a tee, methinks.)

Lisa @ Sociological Images: Buns for Puns: CodePink Protests BP

On a “nearly naked” protest of BP by the feminist group Code Pink:

The PETA strategy is like a virus, spreading grossly from one social movement to another. Angry Green Girl, for example, Animals Awake, and the Alliance for Animal Rights have essentially copied PETA’s tactics.

It’s striking that this particular one is overtly feminist. It’s also striking that both Suburban Guerrilla and Feministe failed to remark about the ludicrousness of using (nearly) naked women to protest something entirely unrelated to nudity. The only reason it makes sense to use women’s naked bodies in a protest is because women’s naked bodies (in Western culture) are things to be used.

There’s so much more to say re: Code Pink vs. PETA’s use of female nudity, but since I’m running short on time, I’ll just pause to point out one key (IMHO) difference between the two groups: CP is a largely grassroots, non-hierarchical organization that’s comprised of – and welcoming to – women of all shapes on sizes. In contrast, PETA is more corporatist, what with its hierarchical, top-down, march-in-lockstep structure, and primarily seems interested in displaying the bodies of female celebrities and would-be models. Given these differences, which group do you think more likely to value and respect the opinions, feedback, and wishes of its volunteers – and to engage in naked/semi-naked protests only when all participants are comfortable in so doing?

That said, I still agree with Lisa’s implication that omni feminists are quick to criticize the use of female nudity in defense of nonhuman animals as inherently objectifying to women – but are, collectively, a tad more forgiving when the females getting naked are doing so for human rights causes. Speciesist much?

Carmen Dell’ Aversano @ The Scavenger: Queering the human-animal bond

Historically, queer’s primary aim has been to draw attention to incoherencies in the allegedly stable relations between chromosomal sex, gender and sexual desire, and to question the dominant model of heterosexuality, demonstrating the impossibility of any “natural” sexuality, and calling into question even such apparently unproblematic terms as “man” and “woman”.

Theoretically, though, it is vital to note that queer is about sex only incidentally: the real topic of its polymorphously transgressive reflections is identity; the fundamental – and most productive – idea in queer is that identity is not an essence but a performance, exacted through a pervasive matrix of assumptions and expectations, and that subjects themselves only come into being as products of performances. [...]

In the case of animal queer, the dominant normative model to be questioned is of course the assumption of a “natural divide between species”. Just as heteronormativity grotesquely maintains that any member of the “opposite sex” is more appropriate, suitable and attractive as a sexual partner than any member of one’s own, humanormativity maintains that all members of one species (homo sapiens) have more in common with one another than any of them can have with any member of any other species.

Animal Place: Dairy Farmers Waste Milk

On July 4th, participating dairy farmers plan on wasting a day’s worth of milk to make a point. They aren’t getting paid enough to maintain their dairy farms. So their solution for losing money is to squander a day’s worth of milk.

This isn’t anything new. Last year, European dairy farmers did the same thing. They dumped a whopping 6.6 million gallons of milk on their fields. Probably not the best way to feed your plants. Belgian dairy farmers alone dumped more than 750,000 gallons of milk.

Of course it is unfair to not be paid an appropriate price for the work you do.

But who is doing the work?

Amy Benfer @ Broadsheet: The rise of the digital wet nurse

Yes, breast milk is awesome stuff. But isn’t asking another woman to lactate for your child kind of … weird?

No “weirder” than imprisoning a female, subjecting her to repeated cycles of forced pregnancy and birth, and then kidnapping her baby (to either similarly imprison her or slaughter him) and stealing the milk meant for that disappeared child. Oh, and then killing that same female once she’s deemed “spent.”

Besides, modern breast milk banks are volunteer operations – mothers are not paid for their milk, thus negating the incentive for impoverished or marginalized women to sell milk that would otherwise go to their own children. The author eventually reaches this conclusion, making the points raised at the beginning of the piece non-issues. And yet, the suffering of dairy cows doesn’t merit a mention.

To find out more about breast milk banks, check out the “Breast is Best” section in the blogroll. (And if you have any suggested resources, please share! It’s a pretty skimpy section at the moment.)

Holly Kretschmar @ Salon: On tonight’s menu: Placenta

Before getting pregnant, the idea of eating my placenta had never occurred to me. My hippie aunt had buried hers under a tree. That sounded nice. But a month before my son was born, my doula (a birth assistant I hired to coach me during labor) asked, “Do you know what you want to do with your placenta? I have a great recipe.”

Again, while most people will cringe at the above excerpt, eating one’s own placenta is objectively no weirder than consuming the flesh of an anemic baby. In fact, the latter makes the former look downright sane. Shiny. Brimming with puppies and rainbows and unicorns. Totally fucking awesome.

At least, that’s how I see it.

Riddhi Shah @ Salon: Men eat meat, women eat chocolate: How food gets gendered; How food gets assigned a gender and

Vegan Burnout: Food plus gender? Sign me up!

Salon has an interesting piece today: “Men eat meat, women eat chocolate: How food gets gendered.” I encourage you to read it, then bring your love back here and talk about it with me. We already know what the headline points out: Certain foods are considered masculine (mmmmm, animal carcass), while others are feminine (gimme that candy bar, I’m PMSing). Of course, the heavy hand of marketing is everywhere we look, but what really captured my interest was this little factoid: In other countries, food is rarely gendered this way.

Skepchick: The Skeptic Next Door: Carrie Poppy

We have discussed briefly that it seems logical that a rational person would become a vegetarian or a vegan could you talk a bit about that and explain why?

There are a couple of reasons. For one, secularists are used to bucking the trend and ‘thinking outside the box.’ We’re disillusioned with tradition and cultural norm. We know that horrible things have been justified in the name of religion, power, status quo. We’re good at questioning things. So it makes sense that a critical thinker questions whether we should mistreat animals over something as unimportant as liking the taste of their flesh or having an affinity for milkshakes.

The second thing is, we’re good at researching and we like to learn. A lot of people think cows just go on producing milk all the time (even though every other species just does that when they’re pregnant or just gave birth), or that animals are usually slaughtered humanely, or that chickens wander around in tall grasses and lay eggs once a week. But secularists often know the truth about factory farming– that animals are crammed into tiny cages, their kids are torn away at birth, they have their throats slit and bleed to death. We know animals are treated in horrible ways to get those products because we’ve read, we’ve been educated. And once you know, you have to ask yourself if you support it. A lot of people refuse to pay for animal cruelty once they know.

And finally, we’re done with religion telling us we’re special. We realize we’re not the center of the universe, that no God put this earth here for us. We need to realize the same is true of the animals. I think the Judeo-Christian world view really still has a grip on a lot of us when it comes to animal rights. The Bible teaches us that animals are ours to treat as we want because they are lesser than us. But science has shown us that animals are as capable of feeling pain as I am. As secularists, we should be moving past treating animals as commodities, and seeing them as fellow sentient organisms that weren’t created for us. We’re not the center of the universe, but we’re not the center of the web of life either– we’re just the species with the most power. That means we also have the greatest capacity for mercy.

ecorazzi: Leona Lewis’ Meat Free Tour Causing Cranky Staff To Bear Their Teeth

Brace yourselves, peoples. I’m about to give some rare props to ecorazzi for outing some sexist bullshit (!):

When Paul McCartney declared his Up and Coming concert tour a meat-free zone by furnishing 480 daily 100% veggie based meals to his staff and crew, everyone seemed to applaud his efforts with a huge high-five. Now that fellow Brit rocker Leona Lewis has followed suit with her Labyrinth tour by banning all animal products (and even sporting a $262,500 self-funded, ethically produced wardrobe that meets “the highest animal welfare standards”), crew members are working themselves into a tizzy, complaining that she’s a demanding bee-yotch. Heyyy…wait just a second. What gives? Is there a double-standard at play?

I would say that hell hath frozen over, but the heat index in my neck of the woods topped off at 108F today, so…not so much.

————————

Tagged: animals animal rights animal welfare patriarchy intersections parallel oppressions animals and women sexism misogyny gender feminism race racism violence stereotyping exploitation sex intersectionality kyriarchy megatheocorporatocracy pop culture speciesism flickr photos news in the news quick links link roundup link dump Intersectionality ‘Round the Interwebs

Raising her sword to Grayskull, LOL She-Ra demands, “I Can Haz Equal Rights?” & as long as we’re taking requests, the lady would like a NOMy vegan meal, too. (She’s a Shegan, yo!)
CC image via Brett L. on Flickr.
——————————

The Boston Globe: Men leave their own mark on veganism and

vegansaurus!: He-gan woman-haters club!

Men + vegans = hegans. (Get it!?) Specifically, hegans are “men in their 40s and 50s embracing a restrictive lifestyle to look better, rectify a gluttonous past, or cheat death.” (Or, alternately, hegans are the latest faux-trend created by the newspaper industry in order to 1) hawk their wares and/or 2) avoid reporting on actual news. Be your own decider person.)

Though I prefer the term “hegan” to its predecessor, “femivore” (which, as a word, makes zero sense), it’s still kind of bullshit: in describing this ‘new breed’ of manly vegan men, Pierce is setting up a false dichotomy that portrays ‘regular’ vegan dudes (and women, too) as effeminate, weak and sentimental (‘pussies, queers and commies,’ as hegans might say). Also: paint with a broad brush much? Veganism is a diverse movement, and any attempt to pigeonhole such a large segment of the population is misguided at best. (See above, re: creating news where there is none.)

That said, I have a counter-proposal: shegan. More complex an equation than “women + vegans = shegans,” shegans as I envision them are feminist vegans of all sexes and genders (and/or feminist-allied vegan men, if you prefer) who reject sexism and misogyny as vehemently as they do speciesism. Dog knows we could use a little more sheganism, particularly since this is quickly shaping up to be the summer of the hegan douchebag.

Vegan Feminist Agitator: The PETA Effect

A lovely essay from Marla in which she manages to deconstruct the bulk of PETA’s campaigns in one fell swoop. To wit:

The PETA Effect has come into existence because they have cynically decided to not only accept the terms dictated by the worst aspects of the mainstream world, but to be a part of it. Instead of questioning misogyny, they wallow in it. Instead of thoughtful, insightful analysis, they have women citing statistics while stripping on camera. Instead of rejecting the notion that we all need to be young, slim, and, more often than not, surgically enhanced to be attractive, they embrace it fully, and they also tell us that objectification for the “cause” is a worthy endeavor. They tell a nation already deeply battered by this message that if you are not young, slim and conventionally attractive, you are worthless and disgusting. What does this have to do with compassion to animals? How does this improve a battery chicken’s life? How does this make the skeptical public more receptive to questioning their values? It doesn’t.

Seriously, go read the whole piece. I can wait.

Eastern Shore Sanctuary Blog: No Exploitation is Good Exploitation

Miriam (I think!) at Eastern Shore writes of rescuing 40 hens from a CSA. Run by a relatively “progressive” family, these small/family farm hens were kept in neglectful and abusive conditions, which (unfortunately) pale in comparison to those found in large-scale operations. The moral of the story?:

So, when your intentions are good, your actions will be in accordance and you will provide good care; when they are not, you will not; and either way, in the end, it won’t matter to you because in the beginning, you decided these animals were yours to do with as you wish. Perhaps a twinge of guilt here, a passing regret there — this is all you will have to handle if you treat them poorly.

That’s why no exploitation is good exploitation. Just like dictatorships are all oppressive whether or not they are benevolent. Some paradigms cannot ever be trusted.

This holds true for human as well as nonhuman animals; exploiting the members of one marginalized group on behalf of another does not a victory make.

Stephanie @ Animal Rights & AntiOppression: Classism from Vegans Doesn’t Help Animals, Nonhuman or Human

In what turned out to be a shockingly (to me) controversial post (the second of two), Stephanie examines class privilege in the vegan movement vis-à-vis the expectation that new vegans replace all non-vegan items (leather shoes, wool coats and the like…cars with leather or suede interiors weren’t even touched, I don’t think!) with vegan versions immediately upon becoming vegan – or at least before one can start self-identifying as a vegan. Sticky ethical considerations re: rampant consumerism aside, not all vegans have the money to replace these sometimes-expensive, hopefully-durable items right away – heck, many people cannot afford to replace them even as they wear out naturally! – no matter how pure one’s intentions.

I’m with Mary: “Shaming someone who is already in the process of changing what she can is . . . shameful.”

Stephanie @ Animal Rights & AntiOppression: A Vegan But Not an Activist? Sure. An Animal Lover But Not a Vegan? Nope.

Look. Everyone eats. After the initial learning curve, eating vegan doesn’t take any more time, effort or expense than eating non-vegan. So your reproductive rights activism, your focus on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, or your volunteer work with Big Brother/Big Sister? None of these are valid justifications for your choice to consume nonhuman animals.

You can be a vegan but not an animal rights activist; you cannot, however, claim to love animals whilst eating them. (As always, standard disclaimers re: access to food and disabilities that impact one’s dietary needs apply.)

Janani Balasubramanian @ Racialicious: Sustainable Food and Privilege: Why is Green Always White (and Male and Upper-Class) and

Anna Clark @ Broadsheet: The foodie indictment of feminism; Michael Pollan blames the movement for our fast-food culture. What about untold men who’ve never tied on an apron?

In which Michael Pollan blames the women’s movement for the “death of the family meal” – as opposed to, say, men who failed to do their fair share of housework once their wives, mothers and daughters pursued higher education and entered the work force. Luckily, there’s no shortage of feminist writers willing to take this privileged white male to task for his sexist, retro romanticization of “the good old days,” when healthy, homecooked meals magically appeared on the plates of middle- and upper-class white men, as if from the ass of an invisible pink unicorn. “Bitch, make me a sandwich,” indeed.

Katrina Fox @ The Scavenger: Why animal rights are (still) a feminist issue

This piece made the rounds on Twitter and Facebook upon its publication, and with good reason: by laying out the case that animal rights is most certainly a feminist issue (!), Australian feminist Katrina Fox challenges her sisters’ collective silence on issues of animal exploitation. She had me at the intro: “An egalitarian society will never come about while sections of it are oppressed, whether on the basis of their sex/gender, race, ability, sexual orientation – or species, writes Katrina Fox.”

Again, it’s awesome to see these connections made in a more “mainstream,” social justice venue.

Breeze Harper @ The Scavenger: Veganism’s connection to anti-racist social justice work and

Carol Adams @ The Scavenger: The sexual politics of meat

Subsequent to her vegan-feminist primer, Fox featured lengthy articles penned by Breeze Harper and Carol Adams, both of whom summarized their most recent releases (the newly published anthology Sistah Vegan and the 20th anniversary edition of The Sexual Politics of Meat, respectively) “for the masses,” as it were.

From the introductions to each:

People of color’s health and consumption practices are frequently contradictory to our social justice beliefs in the Black community as well as other communities engaged in antiracist and antipoverty social justice work, writes Breeze Harper.

A process of objectification, fragmentation and consumption connects women and animals in a patriarchal culture, where misogyny and speciesism are rife, writes Carol J Adams.

Read, share, comment.

The Vegan Ideal: The Sexual Politics of Carol J. Adams and

Mirha-Soleil Ross: Carol Adams & Feminists for Animal Rights: a hodgepodge of bad theory, exclusion, prejudice and transphobia *practiced through an eco-feminist lens*

Over at The Vegan Ideal, Ida uses Adams’ guest-post at The Scavenger to address some of the more problematic aspects of Adams’ work, such as her attitudes about sex work, sex workers and the transgendered community. Included at the bottom of the post are several links to additional reading materials (all of which I recommend, some of which I may have already linked to); if you click through them all, eventually you’ll arrive at the second piece by Mirha-Soleil Ross, a transgendered sex worker and activist who describes an unpleasant run-in she had with Adams in 2000. It’s lengthy, but well worth a read. Bookmark it and forgo tomorrow’s daily lunch hour lolcats fix in the name of anti-oppressive solidarity, mkay?

The Biotic Woman: In Praise of Sistah Vegan

In her next-to-last post for Bitch (yes, I have been hoarding these links that long!), Brittany offers a short review of Breeze Harper’s Sistah Vegan. Also of note: Brittany interviews the author/editor/activist in the latest issue of make/shift. If anyone has a spare copy, I have none. (Hint, hint, wink, wink.)

The Biotic Woman: Parting Ways, Moving On

The Biotic Woman’s farewell, complete with a blogroll and a recommended reading list informed by moi.

Suicide Food: Manny’s Has Great Legs;

Suicide Food: Healthy Chicken Skin;

Suicide Food: Turkey Hooker and

Suicide Food: Poll-ette Hostess

Ben at Suicide Food serves up four more examples of sexualized “food” animals for your blaming pleasure. Shegan sister snark, activate! (By the power of potato head?)

Sociological Images: “Nibbles”: Sexualizing Easter Candy

To sells its “Nibbles” candy, Cadbury’s conjured up a super-sexy Easter rabbit. Need I even mention the rabbit’s gender?

————————

Tagged: animals animal rights animal welfare patriarchy intersections parallel oppressions animals and women sexism misogyny gender feminism race racism violence stereotyping exploitation sex intersectionality kyriarchy megatheocorporatocracy pop culture speciesism flickr photos news in the news quick links link roundup link dump Intersectionality ‘Round the Interwebs hegan shegan she-ra meat is for pussies pussy language suicide food sexy meat michael pollan peta breeze harper sistah vegan carol adams the pornography of meat sex work transphobia glbtq

Don’t fear, Ms. Kaylee is here! lol dog sez, “wonder beyatch – be hear 2 smash ur kyriarchy, mkay?” She brought her Wonder Woman undies, but she’ll need to borrow a hammer. You got a problem with that, human?
——————————

Last November, I penned a brief letter to the editors of VegNews, in which I questioned Rory Freedman’s casual use of the term “fur hag” – “hag” being a sexist, ageist and lookist slur. (VegNews subscribers can read the exact quote in context in Freedman’s column, “Prison or Bust,” which appeared in the December 2009 issue.) Fast-forward several months; my letter was published, albeit with several edits, in the March+April 2010 issue.

Not surprisingly – given the popularity of the term, as well as PETA’s “fur hag” campaigns – some readers disagreed with my comments, including Annie Hartnett of change.org‘s newly-rebranded Animals blog. (Many thanks to Marji of Animal Place for bringing the post to my attention!) In Are Animal Lovers Sexist?, Hartnett argues that, ahem, attacking women for their femaleness is not sexist because most fur-wearers are women.

While I have previously deconstructed the term “fur hag” – as well as the campaigns’ associated imagery – what follows is a line-by-line response to Hartnett’s piece. Rather than rehash points that I’ve made elsewhere, however, I’ll use this as an opportunity to build upon my previous argument. If you haven’t already, please go read last January’s On “fur hags” and “fucking bitches.” before continuing on; doubly so if you’re surfing on over here from change.org. (Also related, and referenced in passing below: ARA PSAs: Women, Men and Fur and ARA PSAs: Attack of the Killer Cosmetics.) (1)

Before we begin, though, I’d like to reprint my letter, as Hartnett did not/would not do so, even upon request.

Here is the original letter, in its entirety:

As a vegan feminist, I’m increasingly disturbed by the number of animal advocates who are willing to engage in sexism (and other “isms”) in the course of their advocacy – “for the animals,” of course (as if women are not sentient beings as well). Take, for example, Rory Freedman’s use of the term “fur hag” to describe those who wear fur (“Prison or Bust,” December 2009 issue). “Hag” – a gendered slur that is synonymous with “witch” – literally means “an ugly old woman.” While fur-wearers may indeed be ugly on the inside, a person’s gender, age and physical appearance say nothing of her character. If Ms. Freedman – or any other animal advocate – feels the need to resort to insults, please keep them “ism”-free. “Jerk,” “loser,” “asshat”: all convey a point – without further marginalizing already-marginalized groups of animals, human or non.

Kelly Garbato
Kearney, MO 64060

kelly.garbato [at] gmail.com

www.easyvegan.info

By the way, I wrote a lengthy piece on the term “fur hag” last year, wherein I expound upon the sexist, ageist and sizeist nature of the phrase in much greater detail than is possible in 250 words or less. Additionally, I employ PETA’s associated “fur hag” campaign imagery to further illustrate my point. You can read the post in its entirety at bit.ly/vl8sB

Seriously, tho’, enough with the misogyny!

And here is the letter as it appears in VegNews:

IsmIre

As a vegan feminist, I’m increasingly disturbed by the number of animal advocates who are willing to engage in sexism (and other “isms”) in the course of their advocacy. For example, Rory Freedman’s use of the term “fur hag” to describe those who wear fur (“Prison or Bust,” December 2009 issue). “Hag” is a gendered slur; it literally means “an ugly old woman.” While fur-wearers may indeed be ugly on the inside, a person’s gender, age and physical appearance say nothing of her character. If any animal advocate feels the need to resort to insults, please keep them “ism”-free. “Jerk,” “loser,” and “asshat” all convey a point, without further marginalizing already-marginalized groups of animals, human or non.

Kelly Garbato
Kearney, MO

As you can see, there’s some light editing going on, some of which is rather puzzling (e.g., making a complete sentence incomplete). I’m including both versions not because I so enjoy the sound of my own fingers typing, but rather to give y’all an idea of the points I wanted to convey (the original letter), as well as the exact points to which Hartnett is responding (the edited letter). Naturally, distilling this post into 250 words or less was a bit of a challenge, but I think I pulled it off. (The great thing about having one’s own blog? You get to set the word limits. Muahahaha!)

The quintessential “hag”: the evil witch-queen from Disney’s Snow White. The witch is short, stocky, and haggard; she is plagued by what – for a cartoon character – is an excess of wrinkles; she has a long, crooked nose, topped off with a grape-size mole; her eyes are surrounded by deep, dark bags; her fingernails are overly long and (presumably) yellow; her teeth are crooked and twisted; and she has gray – if not pallidly yellow – hair. She is the embodiment of ugly – and, by association, evil. (2) Eva Longoria, Mary Kate and Ashley Ollsen, Kate Moss – none of these “fur hag” celebrities physically resemble a “hag” in the least.
——————————

Now on to Hartnett’s response. Please go read her post in full, as I’ll only quote the relevant sections below.

I’m a vegan feminist too, but I disagree.

Sure, there are a few fur-loving Kanye Wests and Johnny Weirs out there, but the fur industry is mainly fueled by women. According to the Fur Information Council of America, the sales of fur to men accounts for five percent of total fur sales. If women are buying 95 percent of fur, then it is a gendered issue.

This particular paragraph, I think, cuts to the core of our disagreement. I never said (or even implied) that fur consumption is not gendered. Fur – especially items made primarily of fur, such as stoles and coats – is much more popular and socially acceptable among women than men. (Indeed, remember when David Puddy donned a “womanly” fur coat on Seinfeld, thus making himself a “man furred” object of ridicule?) Fur is considered a fashionable sign of wealth when worn by women, whereas men who wear “flamboyant” fur pieces risk either calling their sexuality into question (hello, homophobia!) or are associated with certain unsavory characters, e.g., “pimps” (a stereotype that’s both racist and classist in nature; and, to the extent that “pimps” are romanticized, misogynist as well).

Given the above, I think it’s both valid and worthwhile to examine the gendered nature of fur – as well as other animal exploitation items of vanity, such as silk, feathered hats and cosmetics tested on animals, for starters – with a critical eye. More so than men (although the gap is slowly narrowing), women’s self-worth rests in their physical appearance – in their perceived beauty, or lack thereof. Girls are socialized from an early age to believe that there’s no higher compliment than to be called “beautiful.” Advertisers chip away at our self-esteem, only to sell us expensive products that are harmful to our bodies and the environment: “anti-aging” wrinkle cream, Botox, fad diets, “breast augmentation” surgery – labia jobs, even. To this end, women consume fashion and beauty items, including fur and cosmetics tested on animals, in disproportionate numbers.

Rather than feed into this cycle by further disparaging women with misogynist insults – by mocking women for being “old,” “fat,” “ugly,” “unfuckable” (or – dog forbid – too fuckable, i.e., a “slut”), etc., etc., etc., why not break it by actively challenging these “isms”?

Yes, fur is most certainly a gendered issue; however, this gender disparity does not grant animal advocates license to use gendered slurs against those who wear fur. Insult the fur wearer’s character and morals – not her sex, age, physical appearance, or other irrelevant, largely genetic personal attributes.

I mean, really. Who cares if Anna Wintour is “ugly” or Donatella Versace, “fat”? (And I’m not saying they are, one way or the other.) The face and body type a person’s born with say nothing of her inner character. Being “ugly” on the outside does not make one ugly on the inside.

PETA’s “Worst Dressed” campaign always attacks fur-wearing women, and men rarely make the list. In 2001, PETA told Sharon Stone: “Put your fur coat away. We saw enough of that tired old beaver in Basic Instinct.” Ouch. PETA has also attacked Star Jones’ weight, called Kate Moss a “supertramp,” and Eva Longoria a “streetwalker.”

More than anything else, this section of Hartnett’s reply boggles the mind. Defending one sexist slur by pointing to PETA’s use of several more? How does that work, exactly?

Referring to Sharon Stone’s “tired old beaver”?: Sexist and ageist.

Along with similar terms such as “pussy,” “cunt,” “tail,” “piece of [ass],” “snatch,” “beef sleeve,” “bearded clam,” “camel [toe],” “fish [taco],” and the like, “beaver” is one of many slang terms – often used in a pejorative or objectifying manner – for women’s genitalia. A number of these terms involve nonhuman animals – many of them either edible (fish, clams, deer, assorted pieces of “meat”) or domesticated/tame-able (cats) – thus linking the oppression of women with that of nonhuman animals. (3)

As if signaling Sharon Stone’s vag out for ridicule isn’t bad enough, PETA further denigrates Stone – and her sex organs – as “tired” and “old.” In addition to the ageist implications that old(er) people are “less than,” this insult adds another layer of misogyny to that already unpeeled. Stone isn’t just old and tired; her “beaver” is old and tired, too. Get it?! Old women are ugly and unfuckable! What man would want to poke a wrinkly, well-worn, loose cunt like Stone’s, anyway? Yuck!

As with “ugly” “old” fur “hags,” the age and tightness of Stone’s vag has nothing to do with her decision to wear fur.

Attacking Star Jones’ weight?: Primarily sizeist, but also sexist, classist and racist. (It’s all connected, yo!)

PETA’s billboard, reworked by moi. It reads: “Save the ‘Whales’: Boycott PETA!” The “fat” lady – i.e., the “whale” – appears as a loud and proud VEGAN. Now there’s a billboard I’d happily fund.
——————————

This is an area which received a great deal of coverage over the summer, when PETA put up, took down, and not-really-apologized for that odious “Save the Whales” billboard. I never did get around to writing about it, so instead I’ll direct you to this massive link roundup I compiled of vegan-feminist responses.

The bottom line, for the umpteenth time, is that a person’s body size is not relevant to the discussion. Some underweight people are cruel, mink-wearing, puppy-kicking, baby-juicing fuckers, while some overweight people are the kindest, most compassionate and giving vegans you could ever hope to meet. And vice versa. What’s weight got to do with it? Nothing. To suggest otherwise is to encourage prejudice and stereotyping based on a person’s body size (i.e., sizeism).

How is weight (and thus weight-based discrimination) tied to gender, class and race, you ask?

Gender: What constitutes an acceptable weight varies based on the subject’s sex. Women are allowed less leeway when it comes to weight and body size (and physical appearance overall); whereas a man might be able to “get away” with carrying around an extra 20 pounds, this same amount of weight on a female frame (even one similarly sized) is more likely to be met by ridicule. See, for example, the flap over American Idol Jordin Sparks.

Class and race (and geography, too): While partially genetic/biological, one’s weight is also influenced by environmental factors, such as diet, exercise and lifestyle. While it’s easy for middle-class, suburban white folks such as myself to assume that everyone has several well-stocked grocery stores nearby, not to mention safe neighborhoods in which to play and, if so desired, extra funds with which to purchase gym equipment or a gym membership, these are privileges – privileges closely tied to one’s race, class and geographic location. Impoverished people, people of color, and those living in inner-cities don’t have the same access to healthy/fresh/organic/unprocessed/plant-based foods as do (possibly) you or (definitely) I. Ditto: preventative and emergency health care, knowledge about nutrition, and areas in which to exercise without risking one’s own personal safety.

As I argued on Stephanie’s “Save the Whales” post, rather than shaming overweight people into losing weight, PETA would be better served by increasing access to healthy, plant-based foods, not to mention joining the fight against poverty and working to make schools and neighborhoods safe for children and adults alike.

But I digress.

Race (and ethnicity): In addition to the above, race (and ethnicity) is tied to weight in another way as well: namely, what constitutes a healthy and/or attractive weight (and the two are not mutually exclusive in popular imagination and discourse, though they should be) varies between cultures and across time periods. PETA’s definition of “fat” may not jibe with Star Jones’ – nor may its perception of “fat” as a negative. By pushing Western beauty standards as the ideal, PETA (et al.) is engaging in colonialism.

By the by, the page to which Hartnett links only mentions Jones in passing – and only in relation to Lara Flynn Boyle, one of 2004′s “Worst Dressed” celebs. Because it offers an interesting case study in the “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” Catch-22 that is femininity, let’s discuss, shall we?

7. Lara Flynn Boyle – Unlike the entire forest of foxes it takes to cover up previous worst-dressed winner Star Jones, it likely takes just a fox-and-a-half to cover this incredible shrinking actor, so PETA ranks her last for having caused the fewest animals to be drowned and strangled for her coats.

Whereas PETA deems Star Jones “too fat,” Lara Flynn Boyle is “too thin.” Now, I’m not saying that Flynn Boyle isn’t extremely thin – so much so that rumors abound about a possible eating disorder. But this is a classic example of how women can never win; Jones loses because she doesn’t adequately conform to Western beauty standards governing how a woman should look, i.e., thinner than is healthy – while Flynn Boyle also loses because she conforms to these standards a little too closely.

I’d argue that it’s much the same with other areas of fashion and beauty (including the aforementioned fur and cosmetics): women are taught to pay close attention to their physical appearance – but pay too much attention and you’re a superficial, vain little powderpuff. (Wherein just how much is “enough” is forever fluctuating and subject to interpretation.) Funny, that.

Calling Kate Moss a “supertramp”?: Sexist, anti-sex, anti-sex worker, and/or classist.

This is Supertramp; Kate Moss, not so much. (For those who can’t view the image – it’s a group shot of Supertramp, the rock band of the late ’70s/early ’80s. LOL my wordplay funtime!)
——————————

So much to deconstruct.

As related to this discussion, a tramp is:

a sexually promiscuous woman

Kate Moss has a lot of sex! She enjoys fucking! Let’s bury the slut up to her neck and stone her to death, shall we?

But seriously. Again, why should the amount of sex a woman engages in – or the vigor with which she does so – be introduced into a discussion about the ethics of wearing fur? Rhetorical question; as with gender, weight, physical attractiveness, etc., it shouldn’t. It’s irrelevant. And for an organization that’s quick to call feminists (including vegan feminists) who oppose its nude campaigns “anti-sex” “prudes,” this sentiment is…awfully sex-negative, no? Sex is a normal, healthy part of life; why all the hate for women who have and enjoy it?

And, um, hello gender disparity! Riddle me this: how many men does a woman have to sleep with before she’s “trampy”? How many women does a man have to sleep with before he’s a “tramp”?

Or, to further muddy the waters: how many women does a woman have to sleep with before she’s “trampy”? How many men does a man have to sleep with before he’s a “tramp”?

Yeah.

But this definition is only partial; the entire entry reads:

a sexually promiscuous woman; prostitute.

As with PETA’s nude ads, “good” (vegan) feminists can and do disagree whether sex work – including but not limited to prostitution – is necessarily misogynist, or can ever be empowering/liberating/feminist/insert your super-awesome adjective here. But there’s a world of difference between being anti-sex work and anti-sex worker. Calling a woman a “prostitute” as a means of (slut-)shaming her is decidedly anti-sex worker. Not cool.

Women enter prostitution for a whole host of reasons. Some see it as a valid and favorable career choice; they enjoy having sex in exchange for money. (One might argue that this sums up the institution of marriage in a nutshell.) Again, why should a woman’s enjoyment of sex count against her? (4) In addition to personal preferences, some women enter the sex industry because they have no other options or marketable skills; as education is tied to privilege (race, class, etc.) anti-sex worker bias is, in a way, racist and classist. Still others become involved in prostitution because of past sexual abuse and/or current drug use. Ableist much? Via human trafficking, some girls and women (and boys and men) are literally “sex slaves” – victims of repeated sexual and physical violence. I hardly think they deserve to bear the brunt of PETA’s ire; do you? (If so, there’s a term for that: victim-blaming.) Finally, sex workers are predominantly women; in fact, you could argue that sex work is one culmination – a logical conclusion – of the social roles that woman are socialized into. Madonna, meet whore. Fittingly, anti-sex worker rhetoric and sentiment is usually aimed at women; it’s sexist. (Wheh!)

But wait! There’s still one more “ist” definition to dismantle!

a person who travels on foot from place to place, esp. a vagabond living on occasional jobs or gifts of money or food.

In other words, a homeless person – a “bum.” As with sex workers, there are many reasons a person may find herself homeless: choice, yes, but also unemployment (due not just to personal irresponsibility, but a faltering economy, so crippled by the actions of a privileged few; most of them white, most of them men – a majority of whom were rewarded, rather than punished, for their immoral-if-not-outright-criminal acts), mental illness (I will see your schizophrenia and raise you PTSD triggered by war time combat!), and drug use/addiction. As with sex workers, none of these conditions make a person deserving of our ridicule.

Calling Eva Longoria a “streetwalker”?: Sexist, anti-sex, and anti-sex worker. See: Kate Moss.

The letter in VegNews suggested animal advocates switch to insults like “jerk,” “loser,” and “asshat.” The trouble is, those words don’t pack much of a punch.

Okay, let’s not be disingenuous here. Seeing as I was penning a letter to a rather PG, family-friendly magazine – and seeing further that I wanted VegNews to actually publish my commentary – I couldn’t exactly let loose with the obscenities. In addition to jerk, loser, and asshat, we have: asshole, wankstain, shitface, fuckwad, dick nose, douchenozzle (5)…shall I go on?

Nor need one stick with standards. Create your own unique combinations! Make up your own silly nonsense words and imbue them with meaning! Learn the curse words of fictional languages! Transform the names of detestable items and people into insults!

Some of the shiniest slang comes from the world of science fiction. (Shiny! Get it!?) Frak off. Gorram. Nugget. And that’s not even counting Klingon!

Bernie Madoff appears on the cover of New York magazine, Photoshopped to resemble The Joker. The headline trumpets: “Bernie Madoff, Monster.” Indeed.
——————————

Likewise, Dan Savage singlehandedly transformed “Santorum” – as in Rick Santorum, the former Republican Senator from Pennsylvania – into a noun signifying “the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex,” in honor of the politician’s homophobic comments. Why not treat men like Donald Tyson, Kenneth Lay, Bernie Madoff, Frank Perdue, John Ensign, Joseph Ratzinger, et al. with the same degree of respect? At the very least, these men deserve to have their names used as insults; sex workers and homeless people, not so much.

Dog gave you a brain; use it. You’re only limited by your own imagination (and, hopefully, your anti-oppressive ethics). “Queer,” “fatty” and “slut” – this is the stuff of schoolyard bullies. Lazy. Unimaginative. Easy. You’re better than this…aren’t you?

After all this, if you still find that oppressive insults such as “fur hag” and “streetwalker” “pack [more] of a punch” than, say, “Santorum” or “hymen hugger,” (6) perhaps you ought to stop and ask yourself why? Why is being a woman – or being “fat,” or “ugly,” or gay, etc. – the meanest, most vicious thing you can call someone? What does this say about our society, and how it values those who are “other”? Is this really a value system you want to perpetuate?

Additionally, the effectiveness of a given strategy says nothing of its moral righteousness. One of the most powerful words in the American English lexicon is one so abhorrent and taboo that I can’t even bring myself to type it in this here space (particularly as someone lacking in melanin). So, Annie: If you really, seriously want to insult a fur-wearer – and if degree of offense is positively correlated with one’s license to offend – then I expect to see the n-word grace the pages of Animals with increasing frequency.

No? I didn’t think so. (And thank dog for small favors.)

I’m less comfortable with using gendered insults when talking about eating animals, as opposed to wearing them. The popular vegan diet book, Skinny Bitch, has also taken a lot of flak for the book’s misogynist language (Including over at the Sustainable Food blog). And earlier today was the first I’ve heard of John Joseph’s book Meat Is For Pussies.

Well, at least I don’t have to explain why pushing thinness as an ideal and tossing around slang for women’s sexual organs in an insulting manner is misogynist. Phew!

Or…do I? Really, one shouldn’t be “comfortable with using gendered insults” at all. Again, pointing out the ways in which animal exploitation conform to gender roles and gendered stereotypes is perfectly acceptable, if not a welcome change of pace for the animal advocacy movement. But this is far, far removed from insulting women merely for being women, which is exactly what gendered slurs do. Meat or fur, it matters not: sexism is sexism, ageism is ageism, lookism is lookism – and none have a place in the animal advocacy movement.

So what do you think? Are animal advocates too vicious towards women? Or is it okay to get catty for the sake of animals?

“Catty,” really? Sigh.

@ Annie Hartnett: Consider this your feminist intervention. finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com – For the love of dog. Go there, please. Lurk, listen, learn. And try your best to ignore the speciesism – at least until you’ve mastered the feminism and can craft a coherent, anti-oppressive retort to the otherwise badass bitches over there.

Catra, She-Ra’s would-be nemesis and my imaginary girlfriend.
Kelly ♥’s Catra, furever.
——————————

Me-ow.

—————-

(1) How many “gender + fur” posts must a girl bank before she’s crowned the Official “Fur Hag” Hag ™? Because that would be, like, totally awesome. WANT!

(2) Personally, I much prefer Neil Gaiman’s retelling of the Snow White tale, in which Snow White’s stepmother is not wicked, but innocent and compassionate; so much so that she cannot bring herself to slay her young stepdaughter after the King’s death, a folly which eventually costs the Queen her throne. (Spoiler: All is stolen by a vampiric Snow White and her necrophiliac Prince Charming!) Seriously, read it: the story appears in John Joseph Adams’ vampire anthology, By Blood We Live. Best part of the book.

(3) Yes, the English language is replete with slang terms for men’s genitalia as well (e.g., “cock”); but these do not come close to rivaling female-specific terms in number, nor are they as consistently employed in a negative manner (e.g., when a man is called a “dick” or “cock,” it’s usually with an undercurrent of respect – he may be a jerk, but he’s a jerk who knows how to get what he wants).

(4) Also: nice to see you again, Catch-22! If women are not eager enough to have sex – or do not express adequate pleasure in bed – they are “cold” and “frigid.” If they are too willing to have sex – or express too much pleasure in bed – they are “tramps,” “sluts,” “whores,” etc. What constitutes “enough” and “too much” sexual activity and pleasure, and how do these norms differ according to the subject’s gender and sexual orientation?

(5) “Douchebag” and variants thereof are arguably not misogynist. Ditto: “bitch” and “cunt” (and “hag” in #1 above) when used by women in a positive, complimentary manner.

(6) See!? I thought of this one just now, all by my lonesome! A great slur for a virginity-worshiping misogynist, I tell you what!

—————-

Tagged: animals animal rights animal welfare peta rory freedman skinny bitch vegnews fur fur hag hag language sexism sexist feminist feminism misogyny race racism racist intersections intersectionality animals and women parallel oppressions class classism homophobia sex worker anti-sex transphobia transphobic slut shaming fat shaming flickr photos slang gender stereotypes gendered stereotypes gendered slurs ethnicity beauty kate moss sharon stone eva longoria ollsen twins ableism sizeism disability homelessness food diet privilege lol kaylee kyriarchy change.org kaylee my furkids

A neon red-and-white sign declares: “My Bloody Valentine sells out.”
CC image via Penningtron on Flickr.
——————————

Vegansaurus!: What creepy chefs do to get laid

Guest blogger Kristen looks at a Valentine’s Day article which highlights the foods that non-vegan chefs cook for their lovers. Surprise, surprise: many are animal-based, thus transforming the descriptions into an appalling spectacle of sex and death. The original article at Grub Street, for example, is decorated with a disgusting photo of scallops in an orange-and-green sauce/oil slick. Yuck.

Suicide Food: Happy Valentine’s Day: a digression

Just when you thought the butcher’s counter couldn’t get any more grotesque, behold: heart-shaped slabs of “meat”! I shit you not.

The Pursuit of Harpyness: Be A Bitch: To the New York Times Public Editor

In which Roman Polanski’s 13-year-old rape victim is likened to – wait for it – “quarry.” “Quarry” being another word for a hunted “game” animal.

The link above is to a complaint letter (good!) written in response to a piece which ran in The New York Times (bad!); you can read the original piece in its entirety here: Polanski’s Visions of Victimhood by Dennis Lim.

The Discerning Brute: Who Wears The Pants?

Joshua Katcher dissects a trailer for the upcoming documentary “An Emasculating Truth” – brought to you by, ahem, Dockers – which, surprise, is chock full of sexism and speciesism. In particular, the men appearing in the film advocate violence towards animals as an expression of one’s masculinity. Katcher ties this overt encouragement of violence with Levi’s own history of environmental and labor violence towards its employees and their families, many of them poor women of color.

Marji @ Animal Rights & AntiOppression: Olivera Farms, the Price of Eggs

In her discussion of California-based Olivera Farms, Marji provides a cogent study of animal rights and veganism as issues of human rights and food justice; “The price of eggs goes beyond the cost of a dozen at the grocery store.” Ditto: “meat” and dairy. The true price of these – which includes untold animal suffering, environmental degradation, and poor human health and declining quality of life – is kept hidden from us, by our government at the behest of corporate interests. It’s time we wake up and stop subsidizing these cruelties, both at the cash register and in the voting booths. Go vegan. Vote Green.

Elaine @ Vegan Soapbox: Guide To Analyzing PETA’s Nude Activism

Though Elaine and I generally disagree when it comes to PETA’s nude activism, I respect her opinion re: the intersections of feminism and veganism. Unlike PETA’s minion apologists, she’s actually taken the time to dissect, examine and analyze the issues involved, rather than defending PETA solely because the group (purports to) defend nonhuman animals.* Her guide to analyzing (PETA’s) nude campaigns is both useful and thought-provoking, if not entirely feasible on a post-by-post basis.

* Plus, she has a vagina and a BA in Women’s Studies! And I say (repeat) this with not a whit of sarcasm or mockery, as male privilege – much like white privilege – is very real, and not at all a laughing matter. (If you’ve no idea wtf I’m talking about, consider yourself lucky for missing Installment #3,625 of Twitter Wars.)

(Me @) POP! goes The Vegan.: CSI on Spike: Vegetarians who consume “meat.”

I report on an unexpected piece of televised vegetarian-feminist awesomeness, courtesy of a sixth-season rerun of CSI.

Institute for Humane Education (IHE): FEATURED CHANGEMAKER: LAUREN ORNELAS: SEEKING FOOD JUSTICE FOR ALL

In its February newsletter, IHE interviews lauren Ornelas, founder of the Food Empowerment Project. Ornelas discusses the genesis of FEP, as well as some of the group’s current projects:

Being an all-volunteer organization, we’ve been spending a lot of time working on a new website and putting together a series of newsletters that aim to help people go vegan or stay vegan. The newsletters will provide information about industrial animal factories and their impacts on the animals, people and the environment, the importance of recognizing the plight of farm workers, and also other injustices related to food.

We’re also working on addressing the issue of food deserts, starting with Santa Clara County, where volunteers spent hours surveying grocery, liquor and convenience stores to determine the degree of availability of healthy foods in both low and high-income areas. Our goal is to eventually work with the local communities and the city government in order to eliminate what we know to be inequities in lower-income neighborhoods.

Saying Goodbye to Target: Women

Last month, Sarah Haskins announced her departure from Current’s Target: Women series. (No, it’s good news! She’ll soon be penning scripts for Amy Poehler and Natalie Portman!) In light of this development, I think it’s high time I share these two Target: Women videos that I’ve been sitting on for 6+ months.

The topics raised in each segment indirectly touch upon nonhuman animals, the natural world, and how women are linked to each. In the first, Haskins has a little fun with the return of “the cougar” – i.e., older women who “prey” on younger men. Cougars are “wild” (read: free-living), dangerous, “exotic” – and seductive! What does it say about our culture that unconventional women are likened to these beautiful-but-menacing predators?

Sarah Haskins in Target Women: The Cougar (May 28, 2009)
Watch out young men. The Cougar is on the prowl. No, not the mountain lion kind. The lady kind.

In “Your Garden,” Haskins pokes fun at the many (many!) euphemisms for “lady parts,” a large number of which involve nonhuman animals and nature (even nature itself is given a feminine face in the form of “Mother Nature”). Also skewered: advertisements for “feminine hygiene products” that play into this cutesy talk (because dog forbid we call a tampon a tampon or “Aunt Flo,” menstruation!).

Sarah Haskins in Target Women: Your Garden (April 17, 2009)
Afraid of using technical terms to describe your lady parts? Try these fresh, mountain scented natural metaphors.

FYI: all of the previous Target: Women episodes are available for viewing here.

When Bitchy Meets Eco-Feminist

The Biotic Woman: Transphobia and Ecofeminism and

The Biotic Woman: Talking About Transphobia and Ecofeminism With Ida Hammer

In these posts, Brittany addresses the shameful history of transphobia and trans exclusion in feminist circles in general, and vegetarian-ecofeminist communities specifically. The series includes a (too-short, IMHO!) interview with trans activist Ida Hammer of The Vegan Ideal, whose posts on trans issues I’ve linked to on several occasions. There’s a lot to digest here, but I urge you to check it out, links and comments included.

Oppression is oppression, no matter the target; in our struggle for liberation, we can leave no one behind.

The Biotic Woman: You Say Tomato…

In a post that’s only intensified my spring fever, Brittany examines one side of the “veganism is a moral baseline” coin. While eating vegan is the single most important choice you can make at mealtime, food justice issues reach well beyond the cruelties and wastefulness of animal agriculture. Local, seasonal eating vs. global food swapping. Monoculture vs. diversity. Heirloom crops vs. genetically modified/standardized foodstuffs. DIY vs. industrialization. Politics, labor and free trade. So many issues; how to navigate them as both an animal and human rights advocate?

The Biotic Woman: What Big AR Gets Wrong

While PETA merits a brief mention, Brittany’s musings on Big AR instead gravitate towards cookies, vegetarian burgers, compromise and growth – and inevitably arrive at the conclusion that the revolution will not, in point o’ facts, be funded. (Speaking of Starfucks: What do we want? Vegan doughnuts at Dunkin’s! When do we want ‘em? 2011! That said, NOM. I’d have to try it, at least once.)

Academic Miscellany

New Zealand Centre for Human-Animal Studies: November 2009 Newsletter

Via vegansaurus!, I learned of the NZCHAS, which is (in vegansaurus’s words) “doing some pretty groundbreaking shit.” The Center puts out an occasional (but lengthy) newsletter, and though I can’t find a subscription sign-up, you can view a list of past newsletters here.

To give you an idea of what’s featured in a typical NZCHAS newsletter, the November ’09 .pdf includes two book reviews (of A Kingdom for Animals – the History and Politics of the British Animal Rights Movement and Softening the Stony Heart of Eternity: Contributions to a Critical Theory for the Liberation of Animals); information on new associates, including select publications; and academic news and event information.

Lib Now! Conference Schedule, Registration Form, and Flyer are Up!

For what, you ask? The 9th Annual North American Conference for Critical Animal Studies, which will be held April 10, 2010 at SUNY Cortland in NY. Details and links at Lib Now!

Lib Now!: Anarchist Studies Initiative

Also at SUNY Cortland this April is the unveiling of the Anarchist Studies Initiative. If you happen to be in town for the aforementioned Critical Animal Studies conference, arrive a day early and take in double the radical awesomeness.

————-

Tagged: animals animal rights animal welfare patriarchy intersections parallel oppressions animals and women sexism misogyny gender feminism race racism violence stereotyping exploitation sex intersectionality kyriarchy megatheocorporatocracy pop culture speciesism flickr photos news in the news quick links link roundup link dump Intersectionality ‘Round the Interwebs sarah haskins target women cougar garden menstruation video peta nude activism transphobia ida hammer bitch magazine the biotic woman meat valentine’s day heart my bloody valentine food empowerment project hunting masculinity violence