Animal Apathy: Why Don’t a lot of People Care?

Can Enneagram Personality Types Explain Varying Perceptions of Animal Cruelty?

My friend’s four year old son recently asked: “Mom, why are some people fake?”

From a child’s honest viewpoint, he was referring to people who he felt did not show up as their true selves. Like little booboo, I also don’t get how so many people can know about factory farming and simply keep consuming animal products. But perhaps the answer lies in that there are many ‘true selves’, some more change oriented and forward thinking than others.

We are born caring for animals. Being kind and gentle to them, being infatuated with them. And then we learn that the food on our plates IS animals, and we are taught to build walls around our hearts and minds so that we can accept killing animals as okay. The way that we decide to reconcile this incongruity determines not only how we live the rest of our lives, but WHO we become.

So what makes some people care enough to change their behaviour towards animals, while others let their initial programming continue to run? 

Joanne Chang from Nice Shoes recently suggested watching Peaceable Kingdom.

In one scene, a farmer who had grown up on a farm was reunited with a cow he once knew. The cow recognized him, ran up to him and bumped him right in the heart. The man was choking up as he told the story, because he said that this bump re-opened his heart chakra, which had been shut off as a child after seeing his pig friends being slaughtered one day, coming home to find their carcasses hanging upside down. After that moment, he no longer considered the farm his home. The man eventually became vegan, and began adopting animals to give them shelter.

As a contrasting example, recently, little booboo’s mom and I had an encounter with three dumb bitches perfectly acceptable ladies in the lobby of my building. I pointed out that all three of them were wearing real fur, and gave them a quick run down of how animals are routinely anally and vaginally electrocuted and skinned alive, and one of the girls simply giggled and said: “I like fur, teehee!’

How is it that these girls, once faced with their roles in animal cruelty, can go into zombie mode? My friend pointed out that maybe they’d never thought about it before, and even if they had, perhaps they weren’t smart enough to grasp the correlation between their fashion choices and the animal suffering those choices were causing.

So is it intelligence that makes some people connect the suffering of other sentient beings with their own? Do those who choose to turn a blind eye to factory farming lack the emotional and mental intelligence to make the higher moral choice? Or are they bound by certain innate traits of their personalities?

Many people are not educated about what goes on behind closed doors when it comes to factory farming, because the industry does not want us to know. This is why laws are passed like the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act and the Ag Gag bills—to keep consumers from knowing the dirty truth behind what they consider ‘food’ because otherwise they may not consider it food anymore.

For the purpose of this blog post, I want to examine those who ARE educated on a basic level about factory farming. Who have sat down and read literature or watched films about factory farming, who have worked in an animal industry, who have been to a lecture, or know an animal rights’ activist, or those who have been schooled on Facebook when they post some stupid bacon joke.

*Disclaimer: for the record, ‘humane meat‘ does not exist.

Let’s look at the nine Enneagram Personality Types:

1. The Reformer

The Reformer is all about rules. They are the party-poopers. The perfectionists. The ones who ensure that systems are maintained. Think teachers, police officers, the people who rat you out at work.

These people have grown up in a set system, which they may feel is their role to maintain. To ‘go against’ the system would be chaotic for them, and their number one enemy is chaos. Therefore, a Reformer might feel it’s more important to stay with the systems that have ‘worked’ for a long time, rather than to experiment with new lifestyles of which the results are uncertain.

Reformers could be highly valuable to the animal rights’ movement because they are the ones who can carry out real change. They would be the ones to pass animal rights laws, to enforce laws to protect animals are being harmed, and to go cold tofurky vegan. Catch 22 – they’d do it in a heartbeat if it were already law.

2. The Helper

The Helper is motivated by the heart. Personal relationships are very important to them. They feel the most satisfied when making others happy, and are motivated by appreciation, but they are prone to over-giving which can make them carry resentment.

The Helper may not be interested in shifting from consuming animal products because they are more comfortable in a role of assistance than leadership. They also may avoid experiencing the pain that animals suffer—not watching important films, such as Earthlings—because they are afraid of the pain it could cause them.

Once The Helper acknowledges their emotional relationship with animals, they can be the ultimate direct contact for animals. These are the type of people to adopt abused animals, run sanctuaries, and definitely the people who show up at the demo.

3. The Achiever

The Achiever is busy, hard working, and goal oriented. They are hard on themselves, and need a lot of attention. The Achiever lives for glory, fame, and accolades.
Being so ‘gotta stay on top of my day, gotta stay on top of my life’, the Achiever may be too busy to look at the suffering their consumer choices are causing. They are on a mission and may not acknowledge their role in oppressive animal systems because they feel they ‘don’t have time’. The Achiever would be the type to insist that they ‘need’ animal products as their fuel, fearing what any lifestyle change would do to their productivity.

The Achiever could be a great spokesperson for animal rights, since they love to be in the spotlight. The Achiever could execute cutting edge animal rights campaigns, become leaders in the new rise of vegan cuisine, and they could definitely destroy a fur store. Destruction can be productive.

4. The Individualist

The Individualist likes to go their own way. The most romantic number of the enneagram, the Individualist has big ideas and big dreams and their biggest hurdle against recognizing their role in animal suffering is their selfishness. Caught up in their fantasy worlds, the Individualist might not take their head out of the clouds to notice what’s going on behind the closed doors of factory farms. The Individualist will understand the discord between these utopic fantasy worlds they dream of and the current realities of animal slavery, but this harsh dichotomy may be so extreme for them that they ignore it in self-preservation.

The Individualist should be a pretty easy convert for veganism since they like to be different. However, they won’t be swayed by other people pressuring them. The Individualist can be an excellent source of inspiration for others to go vegan because they will do it confidently and with style, reassuring people that it’s okay to be different.

Sensitive to emotional pain, these types will feel a weight off their shoulders once they are no longer a cog in the animal Auschwitz machine.

5. The Investigator

The Investigator. This egghead bookworm is a total poindexter. They are constantly untangling problems in their minds, which they love to chew on. The Investigator can often withdraw into their own minds solving the world’s problems.

As an observer, The Invetigator may be well aware of the systematic animal abuse in today’s modern world, but they may view it from a detached perspective, and not make a heart to heart connection with the Ghosts in the Machine. Stuck in observing and analyzing these twisted realities, the Investigator may not take initiative to ACT to alter this overwhelming information.

The Investigator is probably the first one to find out just how horrible conditions for animals are in farms and labs these days, and would be a great communicator to break these statistics down for the masses. They are the ones who document animal suffering, who research what is actually happening and hopefully, the ones who determine alternative measures that can be taken.

6. The Loyalist

A simple type. This type is conservative and feels at peace with what they know. They are supportive, consistent, and serious. But they are also skeptical, especially to anything that threatens the relationships they have come to value the most.

Since the Loyalist is stuck in the old ways, they could be among the hardest to make aware of the pain their consumer choices inflict on animals. Highly nostalgic, they tend to think of the past as ‘the good old days’, rather than good times with serious underlying mistakes that need to be rectified immediately.

When you stop consuming animal products, many people call you a freak, or ‘religious’, or an ‘extremist’. This could be very difficult for the Loyalist, since fitting in is of utmost importance to them.

Loyalists make excellent animal guardians. Once thinking empathetically with animals, they could be dependable allies to animals, animal activists (aka no narcing here), and would be very thorough in changing their lifestyles over to nonviolence, once that decision is made.

7. The Enthusiast

Positive, upbeat, optimistic. High energy. The Enthusiast is Red Bull.

The Enthusiast might be afraid of ‘missing out’ on the animal products that the majority of the world currently consumes, as many popular foods, events, trends are still based on animal exploitation. The Enthusiast can be scattered, which could affect their clarity in thinking for themselves about the results of their choices on animals. And the Enthusiast would be very resistant to hearing about the deeply sad situations animals live in today because they are committed to being high-energy-happy-fun-time pretty much all the time.

The enthusiast could be a highly valued animal rights’ activist because they are  able to see a better future, to inspire others to join them to create a new world, and best of all, the Enthusiast has infectious joy to spread, making veganism fun, as it naturally is.

8. The Challenger

Contrary. Stubborn. Strong. It is part of the Challengers’ natural inclination to challenge the status quo. The Challenger is a fighter, which is great, but they can’t easily be swayed to make changes to their lifestyles because they do things on their own time.

The Challenger may fight data about animal industries out of their urge to battle, without allowing valid findings to soak in. They could vehemently block out very basic information, such as the China Study, not even taking the time to research it themselves, as they jump to defense instead of going within. 

The Challenger is going to RULE the demo. They are the ones on the megaphone, calling out the cops, the animal abusers, or both. The Challenger is a renegade, so they could be excellent leaders in demanding animal freedom. The Challenger could be highly protective to animals. They are the Mama bears.

9. The Peacemaker

The Peacemaker needs harmony and concensus. They enjoy feeling calm and reject conflict, feeling that it will ‘sort itself out’. The Peacemaker can be very accpeting. Too accepting perhaps.

When it comes to the reality of animal agriculture, Peacemakers might stick their heads in the sand instead of speaking out. Or they may want to envision the state of animal existence as ‘peaceful’ already so it’s easier for them to handle.

But, the Peacemaker is patient and persistent. More than any other type, a plant-based lifestyle should make perfect sense to the Peacemaker’s pacifistic  preferences. They are gentle, and therefore great at things like outreach, one of one connection, and of course, relating to animals (who seem to have copious amounts of inner peace even in the most dire situations).

“(People) occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.”

Winston Churchill

Many people are a mix of these personality types listed. Also, this is just one viewpoint of personality classification. There is of course Myers Briggs as well. The main thing the Ennegram personality indicator tells us is what motivates us in contrast to others.

To determine which personality type you are, take the quiz: http://www.eclecticenergies.com/enneagram/test.php (although this test is not very good in my opinion, better to self-diagnose after reading the descriptions).

What number of the Ennegram do you identify with? How does this affect your relationship to animals?

Snowflake Furs Vancouver – Dunzo

It’s Official: Snowflake Furs is NOT Welcome in Vancouver

Emergency! Someone spoke out for animal rights too loudly to ignore.

How many times have we chanted: Snowflake Furs, Shut them DOWN!

Well, dreams do come true.

After several years of hard-hitting protests and anonymous acts of animal freedom, Snowflake Furs appears to be down for the count.

About a year ago, Snowflake was evicted from the Fairmont Hotel and tried to move down the street. Local activists paid them a few visits. One in which a random guy volunteered to have blood (strawberry sauce) poured all over him in a real fur coat (donated by means of pressure) to show Snowflake’s hand in the sick and blood-spattered fur industry.

In Snowflake’s stark empty windows now are pictures of the damage that led to the store’s closure – chemicals injected into the store to ruin ‘merchandise’ (abused animal carcasses).

The evil Snowflake sisters have never swayed from their position that they are the victims in this situation. Victims of senseless vandalism.

But is it property damage if what they are selling is not only not their property but not products at all?

The final nail in Snowflake Vancouver’s coffin was committed by the ALF. The update on Bite Back reads:

“Five weeks ago we took action against Snowflake Furs and Speiser Furs in Vancouver Canada. We used 10 large syringes with 16 gauge needles to shoot a foul substance into the stores through small spaces in the doors. Syringes have the ability to shoot more than 25 feet into the building onto their merchandise causing serious economic damage.
The Pacific Center Snowflake Furs location is now closed indefinitely. The store is gutted and lifeless, how appropriate.
We will stop when the violence and murder stops and it is only a matter of time before actions like these start occurring at the other Snowflake locations in Whistler and Banff.
To anyone who does not understand why fur stores are being targeted in this way please search ‘fur cruelty’ or ‘skinned alive for fur’ on your computer and spend some time witnessing the horrific fur trade.”

Although random passerbys might think this ‘vandalism’ needs to be ‘cracked down on’ (yes, I’m talking to you random passerby), what really needs to be cracked down on is the use of animals for clothing when other more environmentally-friendly, more comfortable, more hi-tech, humane materials exist.

Fur is as much a part of Canada’s heritage (as Snowflake tries to claim) as genocide. Let’s leave the past in the past.

If Snowflake is indeed renovating trying to recover from this catastrophe, their insurance will be sky high, and they’ll no doubt be greeted by a slew of animal rights’ activists if they try to show their face in this town again.

Fur bearing animals, we’ve got your backs.

Thank you, ALF.

#nonviolence #crueltyfreefashion

This progress shows that all types of activism can work together nonviolently to get results for animals. This is democracy at work. If one does not have dollars to vote with, one must take the dollars out of the hands of the oppressors.

*For further reading: The Calgary Sun has most cleverly determined that this act of liberation was done by -gasp- anti-fur activists. Read HERE.

Mindful Murder

Is Meat Murder?

If so, can that Murder be Mindful?

Meat is Murder. It’s a loaded statement that immediately divides people. Vegans see it as obvious: of course meat is murder, how the f do you think that burger got on your plate? Meateaters see it as overly dramatic – an overstatement by those who are out of touch with their carnivorous identities.

Humans don’t generally identify with the murderer label. So they will try to overcompensate by doing things like devoting entire websites to bacon. And vegans will drive the point home by doing things like posting blood spattered Meat is Murder  stickers all over public property (which is funny, because that makes them look like the morbid ones).

Recently, I was discussing the new restaurant Meat & Bread with a dance friend. As I flippantly chuckled about how I wanted to spraypaint their windows, she immediately mentioned that some chefs are extremely mindful of where they obtain their meat (because she eats meat and wants to make a case for ‘mindful’ meat consumption.).

This comes to no surprise because most meateaters, when faced with a conscience-jostling vegan, will grab for some reason to justify their lifestyle. I know the drill.

So anyway, just as casually as she described head chefs, out of the kindness of their hearts, visiting factory farms ‘in the flesh’ to pick out the best rotting corpses, I casually mentioned that the whole idea was utter bullshit (no offense to bulls…)—that there was no such thing as mindful killing, because I don’t really give a crap why someone has decided to kill me, or even so much how they do it, if I’m still going to die unwillingly. I explained that the chefs were only acting mindfully for their own benefit (achieving a certain desired taste and of course $$).

And for those who like to think they buy ‘ethical meat’, no matter what slight alterations in conditions the label promises: you weren’t there. You don’t know how the animal was treated. You only know that it’s dead.

Guilty Verdict?

Being polite and maybe not knowing what to say, dance friend then asked me if I hate meateaters. I think I said something along the lines of: I appreciate what people bring into my life. Most of the world eats meat. Would I like it if the world went vegan? Sure. But here we are…

I feel I said this in defense of her assuming that these statements were coming from a place of hatred in me, when really, they were just revealing a hateful act that maybe she still plays a part in.

What I could have said (and might still say) is that people’s choices are not who they are. Sure, patterns of choices can be indicative of character, but context is a large determinant of a person’s choices. Something I’ve realized recently: sometimes it can take us years to realize that we’ve made a mistake. Take for instance when I left my little sweetheart puppy dog, Turbeau, to go traveling when I was 23.

I left indefinitely because I wasn’t happy living in Calgary. At that time, I thought of him as our family dog, ie. not my responsibility. Cut to 8 years later, seeing animals as equals now, I see that he and I shared the closest relationship out of anyone in the family. And that he needed me as he was getting old. It was a difficult time for me during his last years, as I was dealing with staring-at-a-closed-door in my love life, but had I acknowledged the importance of my relationship with my dearest darling, I might not miss him so much today. He was, as I’ve mentioned, my inspiration to go vegan and become an animal rights activist because he showed me how human animals can be.

Anyway, no, I don’t “hate meateaters”. I don’t see people who eat meat only as meateaters, so then I definitely don’t see them primarily as murderers. People are complex. And society is built to hide the truth about what they’re eating. It takes a strong person to pull back the curtain, and then explore other options. I see it as my role to show the other options. Simply.

Murder Victims

Which brings me to an expansion of this topic. I sometimes watch real crime shows. 48 Hours Mystery. Cold Case Files (soo scary). I watch them to solve the mystery, to test myself as a human lie detector, and to test myself to see what I can handle knowing. And I sometimes feel quite deeply for the victims and families.

Becoming vegan, I now watch this suffering a little differently. I still feel for them just as much, but I also acknowledge that they are (unconsciously, for the most part) instigators of murder themselves. Going back to those stubborn stats, 99% of the population eats animal products. This makes most crime victims and their families the reason that animals die horrific deaths in factory farms each year. Does this make them any less deserving of our sympathy? No. But when they are crying for themselves, I wonder if they ever give thought to anyone they have killed.

Someone without the vegan mindset might read this and think it’s despicable for me to even go there, but when we feel sorry for ourselves, it’s a great time to take stock of any harm we have caused.

Real life example: my first job was as a counselor at a YMCA camp (I always thought it was weird that we sung to “the Lord”…) Anyway, my section directors came down really hard on me mid-summer for not being camp-y enough. Just probably being a princess in general, apparently I have an attribute or two of that ; ) To be more specific, I had this hairy troll of a co-counselor who saw herself as my ‘senior’ and she tried to throw me under the bus for counseling with a more laissez-faire style than her ogre-y ways. I was intimidated by my first-time bosses to either be more fake and people-pleasing, or get fired. I chose a), cause I didn’t know myself that well then. I recently remembered how shiteous those people were to blame me without even asking my side of things. And then I remembered how weeks after, another co-counselor and I played a similar power trip on our CIT (counselor in training) for telling the campers that they were ‘on crack’. We nailed her for being inappropriate and crossing the line. I mean, really? She was just a sweet kid. So I was power tripped on, and then repeated the behavior (the cycle of abuse that leads to the sick hierarchy of our society). This is me taking responsibility for harm I have caused as I revisit a victim experience.

Do the families of murder victims also take responsibility? It’s something I think about now when watching these shows.

And on that note, it’s usually the mastermind behind the crime who does the most time, not necessarily the one who actually did the killing. What does that say of those who pay for meat?

I See you Brother

One of the first things I think of is Neytiri on Avatar killing an animal and sort of blessing it by saying: “I see you, brother.” This makes me rather nauseous, and I guess this is the same idea behind ‘halal’ meat where they slowly make the animal bleed to death. Ugh.

If I was being held captive by a murderer who needed to get his psycho fix and he said right before slicing my head off: “I see you, sista”. I would say: NO, you DON’T. Let me live and then I will show the world who I am. Not you, I don’t give a flying fuck about showing you who I am. Don’t ‘see’ me, take a look at yourself, you psycho fuck! (Whoa, really went there…)

So would an animal feel the same way? An animal who is taken away from its mother at birth to become veal to perpetuate the dairy industry?

I would say yes.

So what of the foodie chefs who refuse to buy from the most dire factory farms because they have ‘high standards’, such as that infamous Robert Belcher from Fuel (now Re-Fuel since we took them down a notch)? Or what about these new hipster butchers who feel that they deserve to eat the animal if they do the dirty work of butchering it themselves? Butchering apparently now some kind of sick art.

I mean, I have more respect for a person who hunts their own meat than someone who buys it. But in the end, killing is killing. Unless it’s done in self defense, then it just wasn’t necessary.

Hot shot chefs need to acknowledge that any extra thought they put into where they obtain their rotting animal flesh is essentially for their own gain, NOT the animals’.

Being mindful of something is a nice notion, but unless an action towards the nonviolent alternative is actually chosen, then that mindfulness goes to waste. Just an abandoned whim.

Sorry if I’ve spoken a little bluntly here, to all the yogis and new agers who have worked so hard at mindfulness. But if you’re well-practised at mindfulness, this is actually a huge head start for you to use it to examine gentler alternatives. Mindfulness IS gentleness.

Daily mindfulness is not just noticing pain, it’s observing it, accepting it, questioning it, and then acting to move beyond it. Without the action, you could mindfully do just about any horrific act.

I’m not going to get into whether an animal’s life is worth enough to be considered murder. I think we’re all familiar with varying punishments for murderers, depending on who they are and who they killed. Some people’s lives are deemed more important than others in our current society. Immigrant prostitute? Less. Rich white politician. More. Do we really want to play that game?

How about re-defining “I see you, brother” to mean that we see ourselves as animals – one and the same. Then no one has to die.

Violence – Are you Getting Enough?

How Much Violence Do We Need to Stay Healthy?

Society looks down on those who openly love violence, labeling them as bullies, thugs, or even serial killers, but let’s be honest with ourselves: 9 out of 10 of us believe that we need a daily dose of violence just to stay alive.

Whether it’s killing a cow, a chicken, a goat, a pig, or a human, violence is crucial to our everyday functioning, or at least we’re pretty sure it is. I mean, to eat those beings, they must be killed. So violence must not be all that bad, if it feeds us. It’s the juice that keeps us alive. Well, most of us.

Usually we try to side-step the violence that kills the beings we eat and focus on the nutrition provided from their dead carcasses (because it’s the lifeless final product and not the process that truly provides nourishment). But what if the nutritious value is not in the bodies of these tortured beings but in the killing?

Perhaps we are feeding off the violence and not the aftermath of the violence—the process of killing one being to fuel another.

Let’s come out of the closet and admit that violence is not such a bad thing. Raping, mutilating, confining, and slaughtering animals is something we should be proud of. Let’s get in touch with the essence of our violent diets and start being more violent ourselves.

No more keeping the violence behind closed doors in factory farms and hiring new immigrants to do our dirty work—why let them have all the fun? Let’s get our own hands bloody! Since we’re convinced that nourishment can only come from killing, then having more violence will make us all healthier.

Wait. What’s that you say? You regret that eating animal products means that animals have to suffer? You don’t want to hurt animals? Hmm… conundrum.

But… something has to suffer for you to be nourished. Someone.

Doesn’t it?

Can we live off NO violence? Eat a nutritious diet without killing any creatures who experience affectionate,  nurturing relationships with their young?

This idea is so extreme. So hardcore. So jarring.

So… violent.

Disclaimer: Obviously this post needs a disclaimer.

Don’t hurt people. Or animals.

Veganarchy.

Human and Animal Enslavement

Why Animal Rights Can’t Progress

Unless We Look at the Bigger Picture

Just after I write a guide on being less controversial, I drop this bomb. Some people devote their lives to animal rights. And it’s an area that needs a TON of work. So how could it be a waste to devote attention to it?

In order to create a non-violent world, we need people working on all types of changes, on all levels, from all angles. But sometimes, we become so entrenched in a particular area of focus, that we forget to look at it in the larger context. Some of my smartest animal rights colleagues reject looking at the bigger picture, perhaps because it’s overwhelming.

So what do animal rights activists want?

We want animals to have the right to freedom because we believe that animals want that right for themselves. This includes freeing animals from their roles in food, clothing, testing, and harmful entertainment. In effect, animal activists want animals to stop being thought of as products. But how is this possible when humans are used as products?

Let’s begin by watching this short film on human enslavement:

So who are the farmers?

The farmers of human oppression are not only those in high positions of government, those with accumulated wealth, those with the closest ties to the financial world, or even the small number of families who control 1% of the world’s wealth, but anyone who can find justifiable reasons to use violence. The ones actually making profits from human enslavement would be the owners of the farms – the instigators, but Hitler did not create a holocaust on his own.

Dominating others is the single most profitable industry on Earth. This is why the most powerful countries are at permanent war with the rest of the world—to ensure that they are feared by other nations and their own nation just enough to preserve that dominion. These same nations ensure that other ’3rd world’ nations are kept down to make their own livestock feel as though they don’t have it so bad.

How do they breed us?

Mandatory schooling. Do you remember learning about how our financial systems really work in school? Or about current human oppression in your own country? Let’s not be overly dramatic, there are many positive skills and memories one can experience in school, but it is also an institution that is focused on creating obedient employees.

Also included in this obligatory indoctrination is competition. We are judged with letters and numbers and compared to our peers so that we are less likely to join forces with them. This also has the bonus effect of creating a majority of a population who believes so strongly in their system that they will violently oppose those who point it out to them because they define themselves according to their countries/churches/hockey teams.

We are simultaneously programmed by mainstream media, which has become consolidated into the hands of fewer and fewer. Those mainstream media channels project the rights of their owners, under the guise of entertainment and information sharing.

What about all our freedoms?

Just as corporations today are learning that micromanagement doesn’t necessarily equate with more productivity, and thus providing more free time for employees to work towards assignments of their choice, so has the human enslavement model developed, allotting more freedom to humans, but only as far as it makes us more create more profit. Just like allowing cows room to graze to produce better ‘beef’.

The problem is that once humans get a taste of more freedom, we begin to feel entitled to it, leaving us to question why we need to be ruled and why we give up such a large portion of our earnings to a government who represents us only indirectly, and usually not at all. Many vegans are disgusted to know that their tax dollars go towards subsidies for animal agriculture, for example.

We are provided by our farmers with enough freedom to survive, as long as we are productive (for example, you can only be employed if your skills are needed and you comply with your employer’s policies).

Our freedom ends when we want to freely move about our planet or spend the majority of our time as we want. We are trained to think that it is not humble to even consider these possibilities. That we should appreciate what we have, which is more than others have in developing nations. And if we, as livestock, try to push against the system, we meet violence—whether economic or physical—to silence us from dissent.

How do they keep us on the farm?

Heavily manned borders. Laws that dictate who is legal and who is not. You do know you can’t escape, right? And to make livestock feel at home on their farm, sometimes special events are held, such as 9-11, in which horrifying events unite people in attacking other countries and trick them into appreciating the security that their farmers can protect them with.

Not to mention that we are born into debt… and chained to our 9-5 jobs.

As the film states: We will never escape a cage that we refuse to see.

What happens when we try to get rid of the farm?

An excellent example of how humans are prevented from actually changing the farm is evident in the film Into the Fire, which depicts what happened when the G20 Summit visited Toronto in summer of 2011. A (fucking) billion dollars of taxpayers money was spent on fencing people away from the event and costuming police with full riot gear. Police reacted with random violence, ID checks, and strange new temporary laws to deter people’s rights to protest.

Police are quick to point out in oppressing your freedom that it’s ‘for your own safety’ just as veal calves are kept ‘safe’ in dark boxes before they are led to slaughter.

Humans as a means to an end: profit

Sure, human livestock doesn’t (directly) face slaughter, like factory farmed animals. However, with the routine poisoning of the masses through toxic foods and chemicals, constant wars, and weather warfare, are we really kept as safe as we believe? If we are kept alive it is because we are of more value alive, for awhile.

Has anyone seen the Care.org commercial for women as “the world’s greatest untapped resource?”

The commercial is meant to get you to donate to helping women, but hold the phone… Does Care.org think women haven’t been working for the last 4000 years? Ok, the ad is trying to tell us that sexism lives on in some parts of the world more than others. But accidentally gives away that the larger system would optimally like to exploit women to their fullest capacity.  If a woman chooses to exert her power, it shouldn’t be as a resource for someone else’s gain.

So how did we get duped into all this?

Death Denial

The film above discusses how our fear of death makes us controllable. We are afraid to be physically hurt or deprived because we fear it will end our existence. While animals also experience this fear, humans have more cerebral capacity to contemplate death on a linear level, making us prone to fear beyond an instinctual level by our awareness of death’s effects on our future.

It is from this deep fear that we are also driven to dominate others. The film Flight from Death: Quest for Immortality discusses how people harm others to feel as though they are at least more immortal than those who they knock down.

Experiments were performed in which subjects who were given subconscious reminders of death were found more likely to cause harm to others, and less likely to destroy systems  that they felt represented them eg. an American flag and crucifix. The studies found that we aim to appease our own death anxiety by alienating those who are dissimilar to us (think Holocaust), and that humans feel a type of immortality in belonging to a greater culture, so that even if we can’t live on, we can live on as a whole eg. as Christians, Canucks fans, Nazis, etc.

{*What the documetary failed to discuss is that this knowledge of how death denial works  is a prime motivator for a group of people seeking financial domination to instill a fear of death in the masses to make them more prone to want to attack an outside source (Iraq and Afghanistan).}

This same death denial can be transferred to the animal-based diet eaten by the majority of the world’s population. We feed off of the death of other ‘lesser’ beings. We believe that our lives can only flourish through their death. We feel that energy is obtained through dominating and conquering those species that are weaker. And we put the majority of this process of domination behind closed doors so that we can shove it to our subconscious, just like our thoughts about death.

The Bigger Picture

The oppression of animals in our society is a symptom of human oppression.

Gary L. Francione writes on The Abolionist Approach that we can change human rights by changing animal rights, which means first and foremost changing ourselves to not wear or eat animal products, and secondarily taking direct action to liberate animals. I agree with Francione – animal rights is a great place to start in order to wake up to large the larger systems of oppression we live in. But it is only a place to start.

This does not mean that we forgo veganism for other causes – veganism is the building block of all non-violent progress. But it does mean that if we wish to campaign for animal rights, we need to pay just as much attention to the bigger picture of our oppressive world systems.

By learning to treat animals non-violently we are feeding something in our souls. However, if we are not aware of the nuances of oppression in our daily lives in a greater scope, then our animal rights victories will not be as far-reaching as we want them to be.

I’m not asking anyone to stop doing what they’re doing, simply to keep an open mind. It takes a lot of courage to look into factory farming and see what really goes on, but the horror doesn’t stop there.

Just as we can’t rally for no war while our bodies are graveyards, we also can’t practice veganism without properly critiquing the systems we live in. Don’t be afraid of anarchism. Check it out and learn what it means to you.

Being the person who protests the effects while ignoring the cause is like being the person who says they are against animal abuse but eats animals.

Only when we strive for the end of all oppressive systems will animals and humans truly be free.

The Law of Compassion

Another Weak Attempt from Esther Hicks

at Justifying Animal Suffering

In watching an animal themed ‘Abraham’ video on You Tube the other day by Esther Hicks, I was once again disappointed to hear Esther Hicks referring to animals as ‘beasts’ and trying to strip them of their likeness to humans.

She told a story of a hen whom she named Henny Penny and explained how she was so sweet and loving, then a wonderful mother to her chicks, and then when the chicks grew up, she pecked each one on the head and made them make their own way.

Esther Hick’s point was to show that animals are really not like humans, suggesting that a human mother would never do this to her child, and therefore when we see animals as having human qualities, we are simply imposing our own humanity onto them.

I object to this faulty logic in two main points.

1) Humans ARE like Animals

I can tell you that when I turned 18, it went from being ‘our’ family home to ‘my parents’ home, followed by a barrage of ‘what are you going to do with your life’, ‘move out’, ‘get a job or pay us rent’, etc. This post is not to judge my parents, although there are harsh and gentle ways of helping your kids through this transition. I could also point out that a few of my friends whose parents over-supported their kids through this transitional period ended up with kids who had drug and alcohol problems, depression, or self-esteem problems.

My point is: on some level, it’s normal for parents to ‘peck their young on the head’ to push them out the door. The more successful the parents are in doing this right, the better the relationship with their kids will be afterwards, but in some way, all parents (whether chicken or human) must go there.

2) Animals ARE like Humans

“When they are separated from their families, friends, or human companions, cows grieve over the loss. Researchers report that cows become visibly distressed after even a brief separation from a loved one. Cows are especially dedicated to their young and the bond formed between a mother and her calf remains long after the baby has grown to adulthood. Separation causes them tremendous stress and agitation. If mother and calf are separated by a fence, the mother will wait for her calf, even through harsh conditions like intense heat or cold weather, hunger and thirst. Cows have even been known to break fences and walk miles to be reunited with calves that were sold at auction. One can imagine the trauma a dairy cow must feel when her calf is taken from her shortly after birth. It’s well known to farmers but rarely discussed that mother cows continue to frantically call and search for their babies for days after the calves have been sold off to veal farms.

Not surprisingly, studies have found that cows recognize and respond to kind treatment from humans. Edmund Pajor of Purdue University said that cows will actually produce significantly more milk when they are spoken to gently than they do when shouted at and handled roughly. According to Purdue’s findings, it doesn’t take much for the cows to feel badly – they reacted poorly to even a simple slap on the rump meant to keep them moving. Cows don’t forget being hurt and seem to hold grudges not only against other cows, but also against people who have hurt them or their family members.”

Global Action Network

Esther Hicks contiually tries to make the point that even if every human were to go veg, animals would still eat animals (forgetting that many animals don’t eat other animals). But why does this matter? She says that animals do not have the ability to reason like humans, implying that there is no point in humans bothering to use reason in the way we interact with animals. But Esther always lectures to not worry about what others are doing, that the only thing that matters is if YOU feel good. So who cares what the animals do? It’s about what we do, as a collective human race, and as individuals.

Straight up: Esther Hicks’ handicap in addressing any and all compassionate people who come to her with questions about animals is in my opinion based on her inability to consider giving up meat and other animal products. She reasons that animals don’t feel pain in the way that humans do, and purports that that this knowledge is coming to her from Abraham.

I would challenge Esther Hicks to examine – then why does it make you FEEL  uncomfortable to watch animals being slaughtered? Isn’t it all about how you FEEL? Why do you, Esther, eat other people’s chickens and not your own? (as she admitted in another lecture). And how can you, Esther, justify that animal agriculture is creating widespread famine and environmental destruction? Would these not be dips in the emotional guidance scale that inspire us to set forth rockets of desire that in turn create a better reality? Why do you never remind people of the law of attraction when it comes to animals, Esther? You try to make people feel helpless on this topic. Just accept it, you instruct. But all the rest, you can change on a vibrational level. All except this.

Sorry, Esther. You’re busted.

Animal Rights Psychos

Why Animal Rights Activists are “Crazier than the Rest”

I chose Brigitte because she came up first under crazy animal rights activist. And she’s rad.

Someone recently remarked to me something I’ve heard before, along the lines of: “why are animal rights activists so (effin) crazy? You know your crazy is giving the movement a bad name”.

Allow me to explain.

An 8 Point Guide to Understanding Crazy Animal Rights Activists

1) The voice of the voiceless

What would one say who was made to endure a lifetime of confinement in filthy, crowded living conditions, unable to even turn around, separated from their peers and offspring, parts of their body hacked off with no painkillers, humiliated by being hung upside down, or shaved, or castrated, pumped full of drugs just to keep them alive, sick and dying from lack of care, abused by numb, begrudging workers, treated as products from birth until death, raped, anally and vaginally electrocuted, and then killed sloppily and unceremoniously?

What would these voices say?

They would be upset. They would be angry. They would be sad. They would feel disrespected. Betrayed. Lonely. And hysterical. How is it that we are made to face such atrocities? They would ask.

This voice would demand answers and change.

This is what the collective animal rights voice calls for.

2) Until humanity ceases to nourish itself from violence, violence will prevail

Some people find it ‘crazy’ that animal rights activists place animals ‘over’ people. But animal rights activists see the widespread, systematic animal abuse in our world as the root of all other problems.

The Tolstoy quote goes: “As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.”

Animal rights activists do not place animals above people, they see them as equal (but different) to people in that they, too, have a right to live.

3) What is violence?

99.99% of animal rights activists are pacifists. We are so upset to see violence towards animals because we are disturbed by violence in general. Violence meaning physical and emotional harm and abuse to others. Violence does not mean: yelling and breaking stuff. Violence means gore. Expressing anger and sadness is not violence.

While animal rights activists may pay you a home visit to protest you testing a make up line on baby monkeys, we are not going to show up and torture you or murder you – that is exactly what we’re protesting against. And for those who think home demos are acts of intimidation, compare in contrast the animals in labs who do not have homes, who are kept in cages their entire lives in isolation, only to be taken out to have painful experiments performed on them. They don’t get to go home.

4) No measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society…

Animals rights activists usually adopt a vegan diet since it doesn’t make much sense to fight for some sentient beings and torture others. There is some discrepancy as to what veganism is among activists, which is okay, as most of us are on the same page about most things. But from a vegan standpoint, ARAs find themselves among a very small portion of the population, making us, for lack of better terms… freaks. We are used to being the odd ones out.

If we cared about what people thought of our unwillingness to consume products derived from suffering animals, we would throw in the towel. But clearly, we like it over here, and we are willing to give up being normal for inner well-being. So standing on street corners and being vocal are really just a few more steps in a direction we’re already confident in.

5) They’re not ‘beliefs’, they’re understandings

Nothing annoys me more than when people start talking about ‘my beliefs’. If you watch the footage, if you read the statistics, if you go to the factories and smell the putrid, rotting smell of death, you will know that factory farming is not a concept one needs to believe in for it to be true.

Animal rights is not something certain people engage in to be different; it is not something that defines us (just like some people like the colour blue, or fencing, or Buddhism, or clogs) – it is about paying attention to a mass component of the state of the world.

“It takes all kinds”, is a cop out used to explain that well, some people like to be vegetarian and others just like meat—we’re all different. No. While it takes all kinds, we don’t need to all be different in this sense. Just like we don’t need for there to be some murderers, some child molesters, some serial killers, and some normal people to provide a lovely rainbow of variety within society. We can all eat a plant-based diet and celebrate our millions of other differences. Meat is not part of anyone’s identity. Although some rednecks have no other personality traits, so they make websites and TLC shows about bacon fetishes and the extreme barbecuing of flesh.

6) You think we’re crazy? 

While animal rights activists stand outside with signs or megaphones, do crazy shit, or write controversial pieces, those who consume animal products willingly are actually signing the slip for horrific animal abuse to occur.

What’s more crazy? Standing on the street naked, or ripping the skin off an animal while it’s still alive? (Common practice in the fur industry)

What’s more crazy? Screaming at the top of one’s lungs in public, or hanging a cow upside down and slicing it open so its innards spill out while it’s still conscious?

What’s more crazy? Talking about the horrors of factory farming at Thanksgiving turkey dinner, or sticking your arm up a cow to impregnate it against its will and then putting its baby inside a dark box for the entirety of its life?

If you wear fur, if you eat meat, if you drink dairy – you are the reason why these acts of cruelty are happening. You are paying for these industries to exist. They exist only because of you.

7) The truth is persistent

When you feel good, you want to share it with others. Although there is a lot of misery expressed by animal rights activists, it is not our personal misery – it is misery that we are strong enough to know about and not take on ourselves.

The only reason that we are strong enough to persevere in looking at these images and teaching others about what goes on behind closed doors is because we are doing it from a place of confidence and strength. We feel good in our path. We feel good in our diets. We are not being vocal about animal suffering to ‘recruit you to our side’ like missionaries; we could care less about your inner beliefs. We just want you to know what’s actually going on. Someone else told us, and we, at our own pace, changed. We are so glad they told us.

Thank goodness a plant-based diet is a karmic superfuel or we wouldn’t have the energy to keep doing this.

8) A bad name

Okay, part of the purpose of the animal rights movement is to educate and bring people together to form new, conscious communities. Excellent. The other part of the movement is to simply: stop the killing. By any means necessary (except violence).

So while it’s great to see a plethora of tactics being used, from PETA’s porn site to vegan potlucks and bake sales and leafletting at high schools, the other part of the movement is just as necessary. Making it known that animal abuse is politically incorrect. Setting free confined animals. Hitting these business where it hurts: the profits. These means of direct action have nothing to do with winning the support of the general public.

It’s a choice of getting in where you fit in. Joe Backwoods might not have the best people skills, but he may have a crowbar and some spraypaint to do some serious liberation for the ALF.

Vegan Blasphemy

Thou Shalt Not Procreate

There is an unspoken (and sometimes spoken) rule that goes with the vegan thing. And you know how I feel about rules. One lifestyle choice that many vegans seem to follow that doesn’t have anything directly to do with animals is the choice not to procreate.

Many of my vegan friends have waived their human right to have children in a belief that the world is already taxed by human overpopulation. I completely see where they’re coming from, I support their decisions, but for myself I do not believe that having no children will solve the problem of human population.

To me, moving away from the monetary system to equally distribute knowledge and wealth, allowing more advanced technology to monitor our resources, and of course, a planetary movement towards a vegan diet will be the larger solutions in solving this little problem of humans as Earth’s cancer.

I’m completely open in telling other vegans that I want to have a biological child (we’ll start with one…) And I have been judged for it with comments such as:

“Well I’m not vain enough that I need another of me running around in the world.”

“You don’t care? You don’t CARE? That’s what meateaters say.”

I have no problem defending my decision, since it wasn’t a decision – it has been a part of me since I can remember.  I have been learning how I’ll raise this child since I was a child. And I’m not going to let anyone’s freak fertility accidents, crazy Bible thumping super families (how many now and counting?), or even my own vegan community deter me from my future family.

Now, my vegan friends have obviously suggested: why not adopt? Adopt someone else’s child? Maybe. Eventually. But what I really want is to go through the whole experience myself. I want the unmatchable bond. It is the bond that we fight for when we advocate for cows – we cherish the mother/child relationship, we grieve when we see the mother being separated from her child. And not only that, but the experience of creating a life out of two people’s love is a beautiful concept that feels too good to be wrong. Is this an ideal? Yes. But a very tangible ideal that many get to experience.

For me, having a biologocial child is part of the FULL life experience. It is not this way for everyone. But the argument that: too many people have already had this FULL life experience and it is ruining the planet does not deter me from living my life and offering the life experience I enjoy to a new human.

If I were made to sacrifice this experience, I would honestly give up in life. I would not have the drive to create this new world we all want to live in. I would not be myself.

I could say that having a child is my way of passing on a new conscious being into world. Sure, whatever. That’s not why I want to do it. My child could end up a meateater, for all I know. (Fingers crossed not…)

Now, who wants to knock me up?

…in 5 years….maybe 10. Did I mention I have other big dreams, too? Well, vegans live longer, so I have lots of time.

Animal Rights Idol

Do Vegans Compete for Sainthood?

I win. You lose.

I have always found the animal rights community to be an extremely caring group of people where everyone is treated as equals. Sure, there are conflicts surrounding tactics, but even the activists who personally dislike one another can still work together for the movement. Just as we believe that animals can and should be treated equally to humans (though in some cases, as required, differently), the animal rights community has been a place where all hierarchies are put aside as we work to manifest a non-violent world.

Until the other day. I’m new to this whole Facebook thing, so I’m not sure about proper etiquette for ‘friend’ing people (although I have a personal policy to never unfriend anyone (unless they are trying to kill me, or sue me, or equivalent). And so carefully treading, I added Colleen Patrick Goudreau with a message passing on my previously mentioned compliment about her plenary speech. My basis for adding Colleen was that she has almost 5000 friends, and was also friends with a few of my friends. Clearly a popular lady sure to have some interesting discussions on her wall.

I received an almost immediate reply from a woman managing her account who called herself Colleen’s “Fan Manager”, saying something along the lines of: thanks for the compliment but what makes you think Colleen has time to receive it? This is a PERSONAL account. If you want to praise her, go to the fan page. She also mentioned that Colleen has been trying to cut down on her friends (!?) and turn them into fans, so any further friends were out of the question. Seriously? I was having images of the Queen of Narnia turning her subjects into statues.

The first thing that came to mind was: hmm, a compliment does not a fan make. I’m nobody’s fan; it’s not my style. So I replied that I prefer to communicate with people as equals.

Now. I have nothing against Colleen – quite the opposite. I could never bring myself to hate any animal rights activist. But this experience caused me to question: is animal rights a popularity contest? Is it ever okay to use our success in the movement as a way to promote ourselves for personal gain? Before I continue, I’d like to state (again) that this is not a personal rant against Colleen. That would be ridiculous; I mean how awesome is it that she reaches so many people? It is a post meant to explore our motivations (and possible distractions) as individuals within the animal rights movement.

So – is an animal rights activist higher status because she’s published and on TV? Or do the animal rights activists in masks setting free caged animals have just as much of an impact on the movement? I believe that it is extremely important to maintain a level of equality within the movement or we risk becoming ourselves exactly what we are trying save the animals from being: products. 

If we are writing books, and speaking publicly, and creating brands for ourselves with any intention in mind other than helping the animals, then aren’t we just emulating the icky media-saturated world that already exists where people follow blindly the lead of those who pretend to know and be more?

This is exactly why I do not only advocate for change in animal rights, but for the end of all oppressive systems (ie. Veganarchy).

I’ve had the chance to meet Will Potter and Nathan Runkle, other busy, successful “famous” activists. They didn’t emit the same “untouchable” vibe, and that affirmed for me my lifelong place in this movement. Joanne Chang, Glenn Gaetz, and Brian Vincent are some of Vancouver’s most known animal rights activists and are all media figures… and yet they are totally accessible. approachable. “touchable” (hey now, not in that way). But my experience with Colleen’s “fan manager”? (Again, really?) sort of reminded me of elementary school. “Oh, sorry, I already told Steph, Lexy, and Megan they could eat lunch with me… there’s not really enough room for any more people, ie. you.” (Hey – we all have to learn that we’re not followers somehow).

Many vegans hold themselves above “mainstream” people as being more intelligent and more evolved (don’t lie). And this holier than thou attitude can also translate amongst our own community. Let’s not measure our successes. Let’s not develop complexes about who we think we are. Let’s remember that in order to treat the animals as equals, we must always treat each other as equals, too.

In a movement where the process often depends on some who lead and others who follow, let’s not label those who follow as fans, or even as followers. Our ideas would mean nothing if others did not gather to listen to them.

Animal Rights National Conference 2011

I Love Direct Action

I’ve been wanting to attend AR2011 for 2 years, so I cashed in my AirMiles and went for the weekend (United Airlines is a suckfest with planes from the 70s still with the ashtrays that will probably kill you and your family in a horrible plane crash if you fly with them, just saying). I was immediately greeted by friendly (albeit drunk) vegans in the lobby, and there was that familiar sensation from Let Live that everyone had a secret we all shared: we are all vegan(ish) and we are all on a path we feel inwardly very proud of but can’t always express in the animal-consuming world.

Shirts read: “Ask Me Why I’m Vegan”, Or, “Don’t Ask Me Why I’m Vegan, Ask Yourself Why You Aren’t.” Or “Compassion is Not Terrorism”

The plenary began on Saturday morning with a strong speech by Colleen Patrick-Goudreau of Compassionate Cooks. She expressed an importance of not using the terms ‘fake meat’ or even ‘meat alternatives’ for things like Tofurkey and seitan, etc. because vegans don’t see them as alternatives – we see them as the only ideal way to eat – plant based. She referred to items like dairy and eggs as ‘animal secretions’ (I will so be using that). And she closed with a statement that we can use the traits of animals to win the animals their rights back. This induced emotion (even in me). The animals are brave in their struggle and we can use their bravery as our inspiration.

Also featured as a speaker was vegan Simpsons creator (!) Sam Simon, who was effortlessly funny and talked about how Real Housewife, Kyle Richards, was recently  made aware of the elephant abuse that occurs in Ringling Bros. circuses via Twitter. (Sidenote: 600 activists showed up to protest the circus in downtown L.A. on July 20th and there was an activist presence all week, right up until they ran the elephants back into their trains/trailers – whatever insufficient transportation device.)

For those who know me, I’m not the best passive listener, so I only did the conference one day. I went to a great talk on speaking our message by Josephine Bellacomo, a super fantastic speaker and activist. I want to be prepared to speak to media (and other interested parties) so this was very useful and Josephine was inspiring in her clear, sincere speaking manner. And I also went to a great discussion lead by Stephan Kaufman (who I see now is from the Christian Vegetarian Association… interesting cause I was bashing anti-abortion) on the grey areas of animal rights ethics: Can we ever justify cheating, stealing, subordinating other social justice goals?

This was a pertinent talk because we had all types of activists joining in from marines to teens, some preferred direct action, others preferred outreach. We talked about the new Pig Farm Investigation video from Mercy for Animals and discussed whether it is ever okay for an activist to kill and abuse animals (even if for the sake of capturing the realities of the industry on film). Very interesting because I often say: healing can never come from violence. But how would this video have come to be without an infiltrator? I can honestly say that I’m still mulling this one over.

We also talked about using women as sex symbols to get attention for animal rights issues (Peta, we’re talking about you). It seems almost silly to confuse the issues – animal abuse and sexual arousal, but on the other hand, veganism is the sexiest thing out there. Being healthy, compassionate, and self-respecting truly radiates beauty and sex appeal, and maybe some want to show this off while backing important issues. Not all sexual displays are degrading.

We also discussed whether animal rights can clash with other social issues, putting animals before people. But most activists in the room agreed on this: treating animals with kindness leads to treating humans with more kindness, whether it be the slaughterhouse workers (ending cycles of violence and oppression), the consumers (reducing food-borne illnesses and dietary diseases caused by animal products), or those facing issues of poverty and hunger (veganism can provide more food for more people).

Saturday evening ended with four successful home demos against L.A. based vivisectors. Edythe London, a UCLA primate abuser, stood outside and watched 66 activists express sorrow and outrage at her practices while DRINKING A CORONA AND LAUGHING WITH FRIENDS AND FAMILY. Her neighbours did not take the matter as lightly. I didn’t take pictures as I didn’t want to have any trouble at the border (one of my friends is currently flagged as an eco-terrorist for having activist literature with her while crossing the border).

Edythe London: Vivisector, UCLA Relieves Guilt By: Drinking & Nervous Laughter

Conferences are great to remind us that we are not alone in this growing movement, which is the epitome of all non-violent movements. So many amazing hearts and minds were there building an indestructible energy – Will Potter, Nathan Runkle, Vancouver’s Brian Vincent, to name just a few. (A complete stranger from Band of Mercy lent me his Prius to hit the Ringling demo – what a guy.) All types of people (and animals) are now connected at a closer level and have new ideas for how to give the animals of this planet the freedom and joy they deserve.

But I just found this quote: As Dylan Powell from the Vegan Police is fond of saying “Talk – Action = Nothing”

As we convene, we must remember to act on what we’ve learned. As my new sticker says: “I <3 Direct Action”.

What we feel compelled to do, we must follow through

Git. Er. Done.

What About the Little Babies?

Can We Compare Animal Rights to Abortion?

“But what about the little babies…?”

…a woman asked my friend during our seal hunt protest during the Olympics last year.

“What babies, lady?” my friend Chuck replied. “I’m not even getting laid.”

It was the perfect reply. Chuck was admitting she wasn’t pregnant, wasn’t a parent, and hadn’t been directly affected by abortion, so why should she stand in the street to fight about it?

Animal rights affect us all in terms of health, the environment, and perpetuating cycles of violence – abortion seems to be more of a case-by-case personal matter.

However, what interests me about the comparison is the potentially violent aspect of abortion after a  friend told me that she’d seen footage of babies ‘clawing their way back up into the womb’ during a suction-abortion. I watched a video of this procedure and naturally felt that it was not an ideal situation for any mother or fetus to undergo, but I could not separate the child from the mother to see it simply as violence to a fetus or a new life since their bodies were essentially connected. To me, it seemed just as much as process of self-violence as violence inflicted to another life. I did not feel as though I was witnessing murder or slaughter as I do when watching videos of factory farming.

More importantly, I felt that any violence inherent in abortion occurred way before the surgical procedure and lay instead in our society’s flawed methods of controlling birth. This “violence”, too, upon examination is not violence at all but simply lack of knowledge. To the best of my knowledge, we don’t know how to ensure 100% safe sex yet. And therefore our sexual freedom will inevitably have causalities.

The Bébés

I’ve been completely taken by surprise the few times anyone has asked me if why I’m not defending “the little babies” alongside my animal rights work. Usually they are implying that we should be fighting for the rights of humans (born or unborn) above those of animals, in fact the more common comment is: “what about the starving people in _____?”, where my reply is usually one of “I value and respect all life and choose to fight for those without a voice.” But that’s where the tricky part comes in – technically fetuses do not have a voice.

Now – I come from a generation where it was more taboo to be against abortion than pro-choice. The culture in which I grew up did not speak openly of abortion, but I was raised to understand that it was a woman’s right to handle accidental/unhealthy/dangerous  pregnancies to the best of her ability and that this was an essential human right that kept women equal to men and that defined the evolution of our humanity.

In animal rights, my colleagues and I recognize animal suffering based on our experiences with animals and the evidence we observe of their pain, and we fight for the end of animal oppression.

In terms of abortion: anti-abortionists fight for abortion to be illegal, which essentially means punishable by law (since a woman can technically inflict harm of her own body and whatever it contains in discretion anywhere she chooses as long as she doesn’t get caught).

I’m almost exasperated at having to list the differences between these causes because to me they are entirely unrelated. One deals with the matter we ingest and use in daily life (sentient beings who are bred to be killed) – the other deals with the beginning of human lives, which naturally occur in immeasurable numbers daily. To try to control it, especially with laws, is overwhelming.

Goodbye Slutty Pioneer Girls

In many countries, abortion is illegal. It was illegal in early Canadian history.

Breath of Life

When a new life is extracted from the female body – it becomes a person.

I call this bottom line: the breath of life. Until then, it shares a body with its mother who has the right to decide for it, not because it’s right but because it is inseparable from her.

Those crazy Catholics argue that it happens at conception, but then they also believe that Mary was a virgin and a bunch of other wack shit.

It’s a grey area, acknowledged.

A fetus may feel an instinct to survive in early development, but so do plants.

Fundamentalist Vegans

And then there’s this rather fundamentalist article from the Robert Cohen of the ALF which comes across as sexist (the mother is the murderer of a fetus – not mentioning any man involved who may have played a part – wrap it up, homeboys). It’s ironic that when vegans are so militantly against violence, they loop back around to… violence (implementing by force).

Coincidence

Why is it that the only people I know who are anti-abortion are Christian? I have perused websites likening current day abortions to a holocaust. The creator of these sites? Mark Crutcher – hardcore Christian.

Taking the power of creating human life out of female hands and back into the male-dominated church allows for women to spend a lot more time chaste or pregnant and therefore economically dependent on men, and men to continue to make the lion’s share of the decisions while overpopulated families (*cough* 19 Kids & Counting) brainwash their litters with Bible stories. How convenient.

The Male Voice

I used to live in Kelowna where they had anti-abortion billboards and picketers at the hospital every day. It always confused me to see men there in the middle of the day, not working. Men do not give birth, so how could they hold such strong opinions on the topic? Was it their place?

I think that’s exactly why so many fundamentalist Christian men speak out against abortion: because it is an act that is out of their control. They are not fighting for complete compassion (if so, they would fight for other human and animal rights, as well as compassion for mothers), they are fighting to conserve the way it was in the past when men did have control over women’s bodies.

What Would Illegal Abortion Look Like?

Since only women could be punished for attempting to commit abortion on their own if it were illegal (and any accomplices, but mainly women), then we would see a huge spike in incarcerated women. This could essentially have detrimental effects on the woman’s other children and/or future children that the woman is actually prepared to have.

In animal rights, we do not focus on what punishments should be for animal abusers, we focus on asking people to stop using animal products.

Instead of making abortion “illegal”, shouldn’t anti-abortion activists devote at least 75% of their time to… babysitting unwanted children?? And creating the support for these potential lives to exist and prosper? It seems like those who “fight for life” should be waiting there when the baby pops out to raise the child.

After a life is born it needs 80-100 years of resources to sustain it. Better get on that shit.

Bottom Line

The bottom line is that society/the government/collective thinking/majority agreement will NEVER be able to get inside the female body. The female’s body is hers to do with it what she pleases – violent or not, unless we choose to live in a very surveilled society – a police state is what it would take.

Even if we are anti-abortion, we are only really supporting dirtier, more dangerous abortions compared to safer, cleaner ones.

Logic Aside

All rational thought aside, does it disturb me to see pictures of tiny little hands and feet? Personally, it doesn’t. I can not give a good reason for this and can only explain that I see it as what could have been a life – not yet a life.

It doesn’t sit well with me to hear of mothers with drug problems who have multiple abortions, but it also doesn’t sit well with me to hear of drug-addicted mothers who give birth to babies with fetal alcohol syndrome and other life-long debilitating disabilities.

In an anti-violent society, we would optimally aim to treat all sentient-beings, partial or full, with gentle compassion. So then, one would naturally contemplate whether there is a gentle and compassionate way to abort a child. Those who support euthanasia like myself may not see a painless abortion as violence. But that’s a whole other topic.

Is Something Wrong with Me?

Even if the babies were not aborted there are still so many factors needed for them to survive. A baby needs a mother to survive, two parents – even better. It costs about $30, 000.00 to adopt a child. Many cannot afford this.

I also question: why is the child being aborted? Did the parent do it out of compassion? (ie. preventing the child from suffering from a syndrome or disfigurement or other?)

Pro-Life… What kind of “Life” Are We Fighting For?

When people say that they are pro-life, I would question what type of life they are fighting for. If a “pro-lifer” fights for the rights of a female fetus and this little girl is raped by a family member – should she have to go to jail if she aborts the child she conceived?

When people say they are pro-life, they mean that they support the rights of an unborn fetus over the rights of woman with an unwanted pregnancy, usually compensating for any unfairness in this by offering consolation that the woman can always choose adoption. But pregnancy is a huge life-changing experience and when one claims to be pro-life, they are in effect arguing that women’s bodies are vessels that they do not have the right to control. There are two problems with this stance. 1) Men can control their bodies, so to ensure equality between sexes, we must offer women this equal right. And 2) The life that pro-lifers are pro could eventually be that of a woman, and this woman who has been ‘saved’ would surely want full freedom and not just the guise of freedom smothered by societal pressures.

Mixed message: we fight for your life so we can take it away.

20 Questions to Ask About Abortion

1. If abortion is made illegal – what should the punishment be?
2. If mothers who aborted their fetuses were put in jail, who would take care of their other children?
3. Is it not just as cruel to deny children a mother as it is to deny an unborn fetus a mother?
4. If women were punished by law for having abortions, should it also be law that the men who made them pregnant are punished accordingly?
5. Is a fetus a life, or the possibility of a life, since it could miscarry at any time, especially without a willing mother?
6. When one human and another potential human are sharing the same body, do they have equal rights?
7. Since there is no 100% sure form of birth control available, should women be forced by law to give birth if they become pregnant? Does this make their rights equal to a man’s?
8. Should a man who fails to pay child support be condemned in the same way as a woman who gets an abortion? (Since he is essentially endangering the life of his child.)
9. What about incest? If the child is forced to be born genetically disabled, who should by law have to care for the child?
10. Is severe child abuse/neglect as equally wrong as having an abortion? Crushing your child emotionally or physically? If so, can this abuse be measured? And should it be punished in the same way as those who would be punished for attempting abortion?
11. Should unfit mothers (mentally disabled or ill) be allowed to be mothers when they are not fit to take care of themselves? Who should pay to raise unwanted children?
12. Should men have an equal right to women in determining the proper treatment of women’s bodies?
13. How does it affect society when the state has final control over women’s bodies?
14. Should it be illegal to practice unprotected sex unless you have the financial and physical means to have a baby?
15. How are miscarriages and abortion different? Does the fetus suffer in both cases?
16. At what point does consciousness begin? Can we suffer if we are not conscious?
17. How is suffering measured?
18. Is birthing a living being with the purpose of killing it the same as preventing an accidental potential life from continuing to grow?
19. Can you end a life before it has begun? When does life begin?
20. If making abortion illegal compromises women’s rights, then what type of humanity are we protecting?

Free Speech VS Hate Speech

What to do with

Anti-Semites & Gay Bashers?

Freedom of speech?

I read a few pieces in the news lately about freedom of speech that were seemingly opposite yet equally irked me and made me question where the line is between free speech and hate speech.

The first was about Christian Dior’s John Galliano going on an anti-Semitic rant:

“…I love Hitler, and people like you would be dead today. Your mothers, your forefathers, would be … gassed and … dead,” he supposedly told a couple during a drunken outburst in a Paris cafe.

Jewish Dior model, Natalie Portman, not impressed by Galliano's allegedly hateful rant

*Let me say first that I have no idea what happened with Galliano. Footage is said to show him describing his love for Hitler, but I haven’t seen it.

Let’s say it happened, for the sake of discussion. I’m always as shocked as the rest of the world to hear anti-Semitic or racist comments from people, just in that they seem as antiquated as the idea of ‘war’. But does someone deserve to go to jail for making hateful slurs? Fired, sure. But jail? Why are we so afraid of obviously untrue words? If it were continuous verbal assault and harassment, this would be a different story. But shouldn’t jails exist (if at all) to protect society from violent people? I see Galliano’s comments not as dangerous (because only the unintelligent would follow him) but as silly and worthless.

No one I know (including myself) is free of having said hateful things. I would rather people get away with saying despicable things than being jailed for opening their mouths a little too far. I believe humans naturally punish each other for things like this and an outside establishment doesn’t need to intervene.

As uncool as it is to be racist, anti-Semitic, an animal abuser – whatever – it is your right to think these thoughts. Sometimes a person needs to go there (best quietly) in order to embrace the opposite. No one can control what goes on inside our minds. I would much rather the changes came from within.

*For the record, Jewish men are hot.

"You Are Going to Hell," fundamentalists stressed, clearly already there.

The other example in question was a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to allow fundamentalist Christian protesters to protest military funerals. The anti-gay protesters have this odd notion that American soldiers are dying because the country is finally embracing gay rights. Rrright.

“They carried signs that stated, God Hates You, You Are Going To Hell, and Thank God for Dead Soldiers.”

Don’t even get me started on faulty logic and false premises, but to me this ‘free speech’ seems a little more like harassment. NOW, I do support demonstrations against businesses, corporations, corporate leaders, and government bodies… but the loved ones of a dead soldier who most likely have nothing to do with the state of gay rights? Not only are these fundamentalists not going to achieve anything by their presence because it’s guided at – nothing/no one in particular, but they may be verbally assaulting individuals who agree with them.

So on one hand, too much lock down for drunken tirades and not enough lock down for constant, illogical verbal harassment at personal gatherings.

I’m not saying I have the ultimate answers. You could say: “hey, aren’t you supposed to be an anarchist and reject law altogether?” But any ethical matters are up for debate, whether they be societal or governmental territory.

The court supported these rallies with the notion that “The Westboro Baptist Church should be able to communicate its views on matters of public concern”. But are these matters of public concern? It seems to be a matter of importance to the Westboro Baptist Church, but everyone else seems to have better ways to spend a Saturday.

Perhaps the most interesting side-note I read in relation to the pro-gay-bashing ruling was the court’s decision a year ago to “strike down a federal ban on videos that show graphic violence against animals.” See this I like, because these pictures are real – they exist because society chooses for them to exist (whether they want to look at the results of their choices or not.) Maybe if we looked more closely at the pictures, even once or twice, we might make different decisions so that pictures like that would not exist anymore.

I think people outside of animal rights often look at animal rights demonstrations as harassment, but the difference here is that the harassment is actually beginning with the businesses/corps/governments – the protesters are simply revealing the harassment. Mirroring it, if you will, by expressing the pain being inflicted on the animals.

So unless the gay-rights protesters are going to have a giant gay orgy at military funerals from now on, I doubt they’re going to get anywhere.

(Didn’t that happen on South Park once…?)

Winners Working to Take Dog Fur Off the Floor

Winners Slow on the Uptake to Remove Fur… but on the Way to a WIN

In response to customers continuing to find dog fur in Winners stores, Winners is working to remove ALL fur marked Asiatic racoon in locations all across Canada. This is huge progress for both Winners and fur-bearing animals.

You can help Winners become dog fur free by checking labels at your local Winners. If you see a garment marked Asiatic racoon, bring it to the counter and remind them of the memo being circulated – that all dog fur is to be removed from the floor.

Rabbit Fur Earmuffs Sold at Winners

When businesses like Winners make a pact to actually remove fur from their floor immediately, and not only promise to no longer purchase it in the future, it shows that they are serious about keeping their word. We hope that Winners will continue to work hard to comb through their merchandise for remaining dog fur items.

To encourage Winners to remove the fur of other animals from their store, anyone is welcome to join as concerned activists come together on Sunday the 13th of February to demonstrate outside of Winners’ Granville Street location in Downtown Vancouver. Please contact the VADL for further information at:

vancouveranimaldefenseleague@live.ca

and/or join the Facebook Group @

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=7792476869

It’s important to encourage Winners to go fur-free because since they sell such a variety of merchandise, there is no need for them to sell fur. Also, because Winners is basically the garbage dump of fur fashion (selling what can be sold nowhere else) so they have no accountability in selling fur that is derived from any type of set standards. They are a blind third party.

Winners Lies About Selling Dog Fur

Winners Continues to Sell Dog Fur After Promising Customers that they Don’t Sell Dog or Cat Fur

Raccoon dog fur photographed at Winners

The VADL (Vancouver Animal Defense League) has had two victories this winter: Aritzia has officially stopped selling fur, and so has the Robson location of Bang-On (other Bang-On locations will hopefully soon follow suit). The VADL and many other concerned B.C. citizens are now in dialogue with Winners to encourage the corp. to go fur-free.

Winners sells fur from many different species of animals like rabbits, raccoon dogs, mink and foxes, raised on fur farms in several different countries including Canada, Greece, Finland and China.

When contacting Winners in the past regarding their sale of fur they have stated “as long as it is in style, we will continue to sell out sell it.”

When a concerned customer contacted them in regards to a raccoon dog trimmed jacket they were sold, the customer was specifically told by Winners staff that it is FAKE FUR.

Here is Winners’ official response:

Thank you for your email.  We appreciate the time you have taken to contact
us and have taken your comments very seriously.  Your voice does count, and
we will continue to evaluate the sale of fur in our stores.

As a retailer, our goal is to provide our customers with the widest
selection of merchandise, while providing the best quality and value.
Therefore, as a retailer with a diverse clientele, we make every attempt to
understand and satisfy the needs and concerns of all of our customers.

Please be assured WMI does not condone the unethical treatment of any
animal. Our buyers only purchase fur products from reputable manufacturers
in the industry.  We have very tight systems in place to ensure that we do
not purchase or sell any merchandise containing dog or cat fur. Whenever
possible, our buyers purchase domestically produced goods, where it is
illegal to use dog or cat fur and any new purchases require manufacturers’
documentation that no dog or cat fur is involved.

Our Buyers travel to China periodically throughout the year and tour many
of the factories, however we have Agents who live there that we pay to
protect our interests and to ensure our vendors are abiding by our
agreements.  Be assured we have all of our Vendors sign an agreement that
indicates no fur from endangered species, dog, cat, racoon dog, asiatic
racoon, etc…  will be a part of any product offered to, shipped to or
sold to our Organization by them or their affiliates.

We hope this information answers your concerns.  If you have any other
inquiries, please feel free to contact our toll free Customer Service line
at:  1800-646-9466 in order to speak to one of our representatives.

Winners has now stated that they do not sell ASIATIC RACCOON.  The problem is that we were in Winners on December 23rd, 2010 and found a whole rack of winter jackets with raccoon dog trim labeled as ASIATIC RACCOON.

Raccoon dog label photographed at Winners

Please email Winners staff that they need to come clean about selling fur:

mike_faulkner@winners.ca, leslie_berg@winners.ca, shannon.johnson@winners.ca, liz.mcdonald@winners.ca, bob.cataldo@winners.ca, sherry.zaremba@winners.ca, Teresa.kakish@winners.ca, mike.kinnon@winners.ca, andrew.todd@winners.ca, judy.schroffel@winners.ca, katie.dryburgh@winners.ca, cheryl.zamalynski@winners.ca, andrea.little@winners.ca, kevin.hale@winners.ca, brenda.mackirdy@winners.ca, brenda.berg@winners.ca, graem.rolfe@winners.ca, kim.stark@winners.ca, connie.johnson@winners.ca, marsha.loft@winners.ca, pat.steed@winners.ca, gary.burney@winners.ca, lauren.henry@winners.ca, brandy.ross@winners.ca, tulin.aulgin@winners.ca, ray.nero@winners.ca, shahin.fooladbary@winners.ca, sharalyn.landon@winners.ca, maura.cowie@winners.ca, gary.howell@winners.ca, cam.badwal@winners.ca, rene.pichett@winners.ca, rob.sewell@winners.ca, helen.abdullah@winners.ca, darlene.abukar@winners.ca, kevin.roberge@winners.ca, debra.sikorski@winners.ca, don.phinney@winners.ca, jason.baird@winners.ca, doug.kleininger@winners.ca, , pat.stead@winners.ca, patty.harris@winners.ca, lori.markel@winners.ca, shannon.pagen@winners.ca, barb.hayes@winners.ca, joel.lohr@winners.ca, joanne.lafrenier@winners.ca, edma.grasfler@winners.ca, lori.kennedy@winners.ca, karen.ramo@winners.ca, kasia.orlow@winners.ca, cservice_department@winners.ca, michael.case@winners.ca

As for Winners touring Chinese factories and fur farms?

The VADL contacted the manufacturer Soia and Kyo whose fur trimmed jackets are for sale in Winners right now.  They told us that Winners has not ever inspected any of their factories, let alone a fur farm, as they are an independent manufacturer.  So Winners has NO IDEA where they source their fur from, or how the animals are treated.

Inglourious Basterds?

Is Brad Pitt a Baby Killer?

Does Angelina empathize with factory farmed animals?

Okay, we all heard from Handler the other day that Angelina Jolie doesn’t have any female friends because she’s a c-u-n-t. Then I found this quote:

“I joke that a big, juicy steak is my beauty secret,” Jolie, 35, recently told reporters. “But seriously, I love red meat.

“I was a vegan for a long time, and it nearly killed me. I found I was not getting enough nutrition.” Meanwhile, partner Brad Pitt is allegedly unhappy with Angelina’s meat addiction, and prefers their children eat a vegetarian diet.

Hmm… I’ve always respected Jolie as a strong woman. Never believe the crap I read about her. Maybe she is a c-u-n-t?

I have to say, a vegan diet is my beauty secret. Less chemicals, lighter lifestyle and essentially – purity of the heart.

I also think this is funny because Jolie previously reported that she was super skinny (which she still is, btw, on a diet of pure blood and guts) because she was grieving her mother. I don’t think Jolie needs to blame her eating isuses on veganism. I’ve been vegan for years and I’ve got curves. Have a vegan milkshake, girlfriend.

Jolie does digress however, admitting that maybe red meat isn’t her beauty secret… but she just likes it. That same taste for blood that most average people hang on to – what they’re used to.

But this post was initially about Brad. According to snippet on People…

“After a champagne toast, the couple’s meal began with soft-boiled eggs infused with truffles, followed by an artichoke soup with a glass of white wine. For main dishes, “she took a lobster dish, and he ordered a cote de veau, with mashed potatoes seasoned with truffles.” Their wine accompaniment was a Bordeaux: a Paulliac from Chateau Lynch Bages.”

Cote de Veau is veal, and well – you know People ~ they get it wrong – they get sued.

So what’s the real story with Brad and Angelina. Do these baby lovers hate babies?

And do any of their humanitarian deeds mean anything if they don’t give a fuck about the unfathomable suffering taking place this very second on factory farms all over the world?

Charity going out doesn’t mean much when it’s based on a sick, tangled abusive energy source.

Let’s send out a mass tweet to Brangelina’s PR.

Dost thou protest too much?

What is the Alternative to Protesting..?

I’ve been noticing that in my dreams I’m often on some mission that deters me from having fun. Usually, there’s a main event, but I can’t go because I have a cause to attend to – whether it’s an insignificant loose end to tie up, or a world to stop from ending, And of course, some of you may be aware of the affinity this blog has for protesting as a method to save the world. But, when you fight against something you give it power. Like quicksand. He who angers you conquers you.

So if protesting is not the most energy efficient way to change things, then what is the alternative..?

No really, I have no idea, I’m asking you. It’s taken a while, but I present you with

dawnofanewera’s 1st poll:

Kill for Me

Hired Violence

So easily are we appalled by violence in our society hearing about people who murder people, or even who abuse animals. The sight of blood and gore, the empathy of knowing the pain the victim must have suffered – we resent the discomfort that witnessing violence makes us feel.

But to me, what’s worse than a person committing an act of savagery to a person or an animal is someone who hires someone else to do it for them. Letting someone else do your dirty work because you can’t handle it is, in my mind, leading our world towards collapse (or in less apocalyptic terms, because above a worldly collapse I believe in eternity and rebirth and stuff – passing the buck has for centuries stunted our Earthly growth.)

In murder cases, when the scorned ex-wife hires a thug to kill her husband, she, too, is charged with murder. Just as despicable.

And as the Twilight Zone has taught us, pushing the mysterious red button for a million dollars knowing that you won’t know the person who will die because of it ends with you dying, too (you greedy bastard) for pushing the button.

Clean murder doesn’t exist.

Or does it..?

Factory farming doesn’t exist because of the evil corporations. It exists because we choose for it to exist every single day. Every single time we pick up an animal product, we are voting for these torture chambers to stay in existence.

Just because we didn’t manually slit the pig’s throat, just because we didn’t hang the chicken by its talons and dip it into a vat of boiling water, just because we didn’t castrate the bull with no meds – we hired someone else to do it. A human being who is emotionally dead enough inside, who wants to live in a 1st world country badly enough, or who is birth-control challenged enough to have to perform these unpleasant tasks will do it for you, for a price.

To mimmick the drug commercial from the 90s – “No one ever says: ‘I want to be a junkie when I grow up.’”

Brit Brit at McDonald's

No one ever says: “I want to work in a slaughterhouse when I grow up.”

If you dare to be shocked by the way animals are treated on factory farms (which account for 99% of farms) the first thing you’ll probably do is either cut down on animal products or try to find friendlier practices. Unfortunately friendly factory farms are like Santa.

You might be able to subsist on vegetarianism, for years – I did. But if you care to educate yourself about the full process of factory farming then you’ll soon realize that the animals are not suffering (and killing the planet with their animal agricultural waste) because it’s a cruel world – they’re suffering because we’re comfortable with our habits and collectively agree to let factory farming happen. Keeping factory farms and slaughterhouses out of public view makes it easy for us to stay comfortable in our habits. This is what we, as a society, request. Do it fast, do it cheap, and okay do it dirty if you must – but keep that mess out of sight.

Well, hired violence is still violence.

Could most of us – a few short generations past cutting off chicken heads and dissecting full cows – perform the violence that we pay others to do for us every day?

What kind of world are we creating where we appoint others to commit disgusting, horrible atrocities for us as long as we don’t have to witness it..?

I would respect someone more who killed the animals they eat themselves. This, to me, would be more honest.

Beginning, beginning, quitting seconds after I begin sometimes…

All this beginning, beginning, beginning stuff…

I think I may be a commitmentphobe.

What does vegan mean to you?

1. Aritzia has STOPPED selling fur

Read their comments here, the same words that CEO Brian Hill told the Vancouver Animal Defense League today. Thank you, Aritizia. We knew you were better than that. And thank gawd because in my heart of hearts I didn’t want to stop shopping there. (I did however refrain while this process was in the works). Aritizia is making a great decision.

Hello,

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We understand and appreciate these concerns.  Aritzia did not design or produce these items – they were purchased from an external vendor. Aritzia will not be ordering these items again in the future.

Regards,

Aritzia

…and this:

It is with much regret that we have learned that one of our external vendors (someone we buy from) has been using animal products that are not consistent with our beliefs.

We are proactively removing the product from all of our stores and would like to thank you for sharing your concerns with us.

Kind regards,

Corinne, Aritizia

So now, please direct your letter writing skills to the makers of the coat: Mackage – awesome taste in fashion, sick and twisted choice of materials. It’s so SAD, I tell you. To lose great designers to shitty ethics.

info@mackage.com

*The funniest part is imagining the peeps at Aritizia headquarters trying to pronounce the name of the blog post that was written about them. Easier if you sing it, guys.

*Update: Aritzia has removed all the Mackage fur coats from the floor. How amazing is that? Not only have they decided to be fur-free, but they have also taken immediate action.

Thanks, Aritzia. I knew there was a reason that I spent thousands and thousands of dollars at your store.

2. Stop UBC Animal Cruelty Research Pulls off Huge Demo

Why would I waste my breath telling you about it when this hot girl wrote such a great, albeit almost neutral sounding, piece for Granville Online. I’ll take neutral any day when Dr. John Hepburn sabotages an actual pro vs con argument by saying shit like this. For those not willing to click that link (and it’s a good one), he’s accusing animal rights activists of making spooky midnight phone calls to researchers. Basically trying to accuse peaceniks of violence, again. Yawn. What can I say besides: leave a comment! Check out the dramz. Peeps impersonating Brian Vincent, angry Kanye capitals – it’s all there people.

3. Desire Rocket…Law of Attraction site never launches

Waw-wawwwww. For those of you who actually remember, I was starting a law of attraction based website this summer called Desire Rocket, but then a friend of mine showed me this site he was doing stuff for called Genius Rocket – a site for artists to pitch ideas to businesses, cool, completely unrelated, but still – a little too similar sounding. I want this site to be original so I’m working on articles for it and it will be up eventually/shortly… as a law of attraction based personal growth site.

Waw-wawwwww

4. Follow @IslaKay on Twitter

I’m not down with Facebook because I don’t like to be the same person to all the different people in my life, but Twitter is less revealing and less commitment and I’m all over it like Alicia Silverstone on a Vaute Couture coat. Follow me! But not in an I’m-the-leader type way, just if you want me as a virtual friend who tells you random things.

Isla on that new planet they discovered water on

We Don’t All Want to Change the World

A Word to the Revolutionaries:

Contrary to what many think, people who choose a vegan lifestyle don’t do it for the glory. The first thing many animal-product consumers feel when they find out you’re vegan is a sort of guilt, which they may or may not project onto you, and which I felt myself before switching.

But veganish people don’t do it to be better than the masses, it’s a personal ethical decision that helps them feel better about themselves. Essentially, the need to do no harm (or less harm) becomes more important than fitting in.

So how does a vegan person relate to the animal-product consuming world? How do we do not judge when we hear of so many discrepancies between the choices others are making and the people they want to see themselves as?

Example. I was taking the skytrain back from the airport recently and had a bunch of stuff with me which I was attempting to balance on the seat next to me. At first it was fine because the train was empty, but as more people started crowding in, I began to have an ethical dilemma on whether I should give up the seat. The woman next to me snapped at me to move my shit (where? was the question – ever heard of luggage racks VanTransit?) and I thought to myself, okay, let’s *assume* this woman eats and buys like a regular person. Who is she to judge me for a social faux-pas of taking up too much space when she consumes mass amounts more fuel and takes a massive chunk out of the environment that a plant-based person wouldn’t? She’s the one taking more than her share (yeah, yeah – assumption, it works for my point).

I see similar situations like this all the time, eg. a pseudo hippie who bike rides and composts but eats meat every day . A large part of it is that people aren’t aware of the way that their diet affects the animals and the planet, but another part is a shared social lacuna – we aren’t willing to consider giving up animal products because thinking about that produces anxiety and in order to avoid discomfort, we simply avoid facing the issue, writing off alternatives as “preposterous”. Vital Lies, Simple Truths: The Psychology of Self-Deception offers wonderful insight into the process of ignorance as a defense mechanism.

Tips for Aspiring Vegans Relating to Reg’lar Folk’:

1) Don’t Lose the Meaning

For example. When you hear a parent bribing their kid with ice cream, instead of judging them for not knowing or not caring about the horrors of dairy, just think: it’s the process of eating the ice cream they enjoy, the taste, the temperature. It could easily be made of soy, rice, coconut, or a bevy of other ingredients. Getting ice cream is a universal symbol of healing and bliss, and you can relate to that.

2) Check Yourself

There was a time when all of us were ignorant of where our food comes from. I remember talking about some poor animal one day at the dinner table and my mom said: “what do you think you’re eating?” and I truly didn’t know. I didn’t know that hamburgers were made of cows, and I conveniently separated chicken from chickens. I didn’t know how I felt about the new-found knowledge at first. It’s a shock. It takes time to digest the information that this civilized world we live in relies on a lot of killing to keep it afloat. Stay humble, and remember where you came from.

3) Find the Bond

If everyone around you is talking about their favorite animal-derived foods, don’t feel left out. Tell them your favorite foods, or suggest a vegetarian version of one of theirs. If they say ‘ewwwww’ when they consider, say, a replacement meat product not made out of flesh, it’s easy to get thrown off, but the best tactic here is just to show them how not ‘ew’ it is when you bring around your own meals. At my brother’s wedding, the chef made me a stupendous curry-portabello mushroom dish beyond words and I saw the table eyeing my plate.

It’s even okay to think back to when you used to eat animal products (if you did), and connect with others over the understanding that you used to like that dish, too.

4) Be Revolutionary

If being marginal was important to you, you probably wouldn’t have made the decision to go vegan in the first place. Accept your choice, fully. You are eating in a way that’s different from how past generations have eaten.

You are new school. You are cutting edge. Enjoy it.

It’s worth giving up agreeing with those around you to feel at peace with your lifestyle. If your choice is as healthy as you know it is, then others will naturally follow you whether you want to be a leader or not. Create the space for others to make up their own minds. If they ask you for details about your lifestyle, give one or two, but keep the mystery or they’ll think you’re trying to pressure them. Again, this is not to be “above” others, simply to relate to them on your terms.

5) Be Lifestyle-Blind

There are not that many vegans yet. How many of us are in love with reg’lar folk? Most of the people in my life are not vegan or vegetarian or even pescatarian and I admire them daily. Because the essence of who a person is lies beyond their decisions. Just as the world is still learning to be color-blind, vegans must accept responsibility to be lifestyle-blind if they want to experience reality in its most potent, immediate form. There is so much to disagree with, so much to be shocked by, that if our loved ones don’t or won’t see it, then we at least have to see them for who they are and inspire them through our own actions. When we make a judgment against someone, it’s our own loss because we are rejecting the connection.

Allow yourselves a blind-spot for where the world is at in its learning curve. Vital lies may be circulating, but it’s not your duty to police the world to stop them.

Ga-ga-ga’s In-fes-ted Ga-ga’s In-fes-ted

Flash *Veg* News

FAIL

Creative Genius or Vapid Whore?

Lady Slab’a (Meat) was busted on Ellen the other day after wearing a dress made of the innards of abused animals and presented with a veg bikini. “Just my luck,” she said after finding out that Ellen was vegan. But the next statement reveals more about Lady Slaba’s limited mind than ever before. When asked what the purpose was of her fleshy fashion, she gave this weak, not quite proper English statement trying to link her dress to homosexuality:

“If we don’t stand up for what we believe in we’ll have as much rights as the meat on our bones.”

Girl…

Methinks she said the meat on “our” bones instead of animals’ bones because she realized last minute that being treated like a piece of meat is actually not an edgy comparison, but just sad to many people as it evokes the very real images of factory farming.

PETA issued a statement supposing that Gaga’s meat ensemble—dress, boots, purse, hat—was likely hopping with little worms: “Meat is the decomposing flesh of a tormented animal who didn’t want to die, and after a few hours under the TV lights, it would smell like the rotting flesh it is and likely be crawling in maggots—not too attractive, really.”

And PETA could be right. According to the laws of Sweet Lady Science, once a fly lays an egg—say, on a rotting carcass, or a promising piece of flap meat—if the weather is warm, the eggs hatch in the next eight to 20 hours. Given that most gowns, particularly custom ones, take at least that long to design and execute, Team Fernandez would need to either keep the meat in a totally fly-free fridge, or hire an anti-insect squad armed with couture swatters to guard the dress around the clock until Gaga could don it.

“Maggot infestation can happen quickly on raw meat at room temperature and will develop faster with heat, accelerated by being close to skin and under hot lights,” says Dr. Shawki Ibrahim, chief scientific advisor for Grow Green Industries. Plus, “the dress is definitely puts her at an E.coli risk if she had a cut on her skin, but otherwise it’s just the stink factor.”

In an interview with Ryan Seacrest today, Ellen explained how inappropriate it was for daytime television, how uncomfortable it made her feel, and how clueless Slaba was to not consider the cruelty that went into such an outfit.

You can’t stop cruelty with cruelty. Duh.

WIN

Animal Rights Activists Stage Protest at Alumni Event

Article by Fabrizio Stendaro

On Tuesday, STOP UBC Animal Research, an animal rights group, held a protest at the Ce­cil Greene Park House during an alumni event to protest ani­mal experimentation at the uni­versity. Brian Vincent, a spokes­person for the group, said he was happy with how the event turned out.

“I’m very proud of how the volunteers represented the or­ganization,” he said. “They ad­hered to the mission statement of being very peaceful.”

He also said that UBC officials were respectful of their right to free speech.

This protest was the latest ac­tion in a media campaign the group has been undertaking over the past month.

STOP, which is an offshoot of the Animal Defense and Anti-Vivisection Society of BC, ad­vocates for the abolition of all testing and research conduct­ed on animals at UBC. They were inspired by an 2008 ar­ticle published in The Ubys­sey entitled “Cruel Intentions.”

In the article, Dr. Chris Har­vey-Clark, director of UBC’s An­imal Care Centre, claimed the university might be “the sec­ond largest biomedical cam­pus in Canada.” According to Vincent, STOP has upwards of 200 members, including a pri­vate Facebook page.

The group claims that one of their primary objectives is to have greater transparency when it comes to animal research.

“We think that the public has a right to know how their money is being spent,” said Vincent. He said that STOP’s ultimate goal is to hold a debate between scien­tists on both sides of this issue.

However, UBC VP Research John Hepburn said that informa­tion regarding research on an­imals is “the intellectual prop­erty of individual researchers.”

Moreover, Hepburn worried that some of the information that STOP was asking for could be misinterpreted.

Hepburn said that STOP’s objective is unrealistic, which is why the university will not engage in a dialogue with the group.

“It’s important that UBC, as a major research institution, tries to find cures to major dis­eases,” he said.

Hepburn went on to say that testing on animals is a regula­tory requirement for agencies such as the Food and Drug Ad­ministration and Health Cana­da before anything can be test­ed on humans.

“You don’t want to stop re­search on animals because there is no substitute,” said Hepburn.

Recently, Hepburn sent an email to faculty and staff warning them to “remain vigilant…to help mitigate potentially unpleasant and violent situations” due to the increased activity by animal rights groups around UBC’s Van­couver campus.

In response, Anne Birthis­tle, another STOP spokesperson, said that the group’s presence at UBC had been threatened. Hep­burn maintained the email was a response to a YouTube video in which an unidentified person tried to gain access to research facilities on campus, which he said was not to his knowledge associated with STOP.

“[I believe that] STOP is a le­gitimate group that is repre­senting the rights of animals,” said Hepburn. “I am not wor­ried about their campaign. I am concerned with the [groups that] follow.”

FAIL

Aritzia is Carrying Fur Again. Fuckingest biatches

If you don't stand up for me, you'll have as many rights as... me : (

Just when Aritizia was proud to have gone fur free, the formerly awesome clothing store has started selling a coat with a racoon-dog fur trim! I approached the manager of the Pacific Centre location today who stated that they have no choice to buy it because they need to kiss ass with their designers and have no mind of their own, and/or aspirations to be cruelty-free. Such a shame when their carry awesome labels like Community which makes clothing out of organic materials. Le Grr (copyright to my homegirl, Lana, on that term ; )

Update: click here to find out Aritzia’s response!!!

WIN

Dairy Farmers go D-List

When I went to order a vegan pizza online from Domino’s last week, a message came up when I said no cheese that went something like: “Sorry, your pizza will have no cheese, but we still have to make it look that way to keep the dairy farmers of Canada happy.” I was like who the what now? I sent a quick, polite message to customer support and within days had 3 employees reply to apologize and tell me they were removing the comment from the site. Go Domino’s! Will we see more vegan options from you in the future?