Have Gone Vegan

thanks: giving, taking, or living?

To avoid the risk of repeating myself, I've compiled a list of the Thanksgiving posts I've written over the years from oldest to newest, so that you can choose which, if any, you'd like to reread. And the fact that I've posted about this holiday more than any other indicates how off-putting I find the notion of giving thanks by taking away life.

Other holidays too are incongruous for celebrating birth (Christmas) and resurrection (Easter) by killing living creatures, but the hypocrisy of Thanksgiving strikes me as being even more unjust (can't we express gratitude in a less violent way?), perhaps also because more people likely partake of this holiday than the others.

I really wish a movement would take place to reevaluate how Thanksgiving would best be celebrated. And just as 14 U.S. states, the district of Columbia, and more than 130 cities now celebrate Indigenous People's Day instead of Columbus Day, I wish more Canadians would become aware of the colonial history of Monday's holiday. 

===============================

So, here are eight posts (4 October Canadian ones and 4 November American ones) from the past:

2008 - turkey talk

2010 - turkeys belong in fields not on plates

2011 - the fowl/foulness of thanksgiving

2012 - thanksliving

2015 - some food for thought for thanksgiving

2016 - how to get through thanksgiving without killing anyone ;)

2017 - have you met cornelius the wonder turkey yet?

2020 - thanksgiving/taking, it's gotta change however you pronounce it

where has the last year (or two!) gone?

It's been a whole year and a day since I last posted (which means I've now been officially vegan for fourteen years!), and while I meant to get back into blogging more regularly, that obviously didn't materialize. Not that I don't have a bucketful of posts in my drafts folder (34, to be exact, going all the way back to 2011 for heaven's sake), but I just realized too that I only posted TWICE last year. So, what happened?

In part, looking after my mom has taken up a lot of my time and energy. Back in 2018, I posted about her dementia diagnosis and my taking a one-year leave of absence from work to become her caregiver. Well, I never did return to work after that leave of absence, and Mom's condition deteriorated quickly enough that in 2021 she finally went into long-term care. (Was supposed to go in March of 2020 but a pandemic rudely intervened.) And if I naively thought that all my tasks and worries would be over now that she was getting 24-hour care, ha! Nope, that's when an extra workload begins, but that's another story as is life in long-term care during COVID-19. 

Mom will have been at her current facility for 1½ years come September when she turns 95. When she first arrived she was still mobile and using a walker. Now she's completely immobile, stuck in a Broda chair, and her legs are contracted like a pretzel. She was still verbal and lucid enough, but now there are many times when her words are complete gibberish. She's often agitated, distressed, calls out for her mother (in Dutch, moeder, MOEDER!), and doesn't always recognize me, even though I'm in daily.

I can tell you as well that by having to witness her suffering and that of some of the other residents, I have become an even more staunch supporter of MAiD (Medical Assistance in Dying - made legal in Canada in 2016) than I was before. Mom wouldn't be eligible for MAiD anyway as she can no longer give consent, and the faith-based institution she is in is dead set against it (the term "dead set" striking me as somewhat funny in this particular context), but I tell ya, I would want MAiD for myself even if it killed me. (Okay, gallows humour appears to be getting the better of me, snort.)

Seriously though, watching a parent go through this end-of-life hell is probably one of the toughest things one can do. And it makes you question why we're willing to grant pets (that most of our species considers to be inferior) a dignified and merciful ending to their suffering, while making it so difficult for people. It doesn't make sense.

So, that's a big part of why I've been absent. Another major reason is my bewilderment at how completely cockeyed our world has become, and the despair at the lack of power individual folk have in not being able to stop that trajectory. If we thought that Donald being elected back in 2016 was absurd enough, societal regression seems to have ramped up even more. I can't believe the times we live in, and it feels like it keeps getting worse. 

Last year I started a draft post of what was pissing me off, and some of the items included the number of vegans embracing anti-vaccine conspiracy theories and retweeting fools like Theo Fleury, the passing of the horrendous Texas 6-week abortion ban, folk who still insist that global warming and climate change is a hoax despite the increasing in-your-face fires, floods, hurricanes and other "natural" disasters witnessed worldwide, the infantile and ridiculous obsession in the US with the right to keep and bear arms, and the seemingly unlimited American tolerance for gun violence no matter how many people and children get killed. 

So far in this year Ottawa was held hostage by the "FreeDumb Convoy" in February, we're currently in the seventh wave of COVID in Ontario and the umpteenth outbreak at my mom's LTC facility, the right to abortion healthcare in the US was stripped after 50 years by Supreme Court justices deciding that individual states have the right to enforce forced birth upon their citizens, the aftermath of the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas illustrated how many Americans STILL worship guns above all else, 3600 people were killed by extreme heat waves in Europe in July, and of course the Russian invasion of Ukraine that has already displaced 14 million people and ended the lives of at least 20K. It's mind-numbing.

Animals haven't fared well either. Flooding in the province of British Columbia back in December killed more than 640,000 pigs, cows and chickens, but climate change denial lives on. In that same province, 2 animal rights activists were recently found guilty of Break and Enter and Mischief, while in a gross miscarriage of justice the farm owners faced no consequences whatsoever for their legal and illegal abuse of animals. After Ontario passed their "Ag Gag" law in 2020, federal "Ag-Gag" Bill C-205 passed its second reading before Parliament dissolved as a federal election was called. Now, an almost identical bill reintroduced by the same member, John Barlow, will again be up for debate. 

Even species more favoured by humans, like cats and dogs, are sadly being surrendered in record numbers to animal shelters. Blame it on inflation or lifted COVID restrictions enabling people to work at their workplace instead of at home, but many supposed guardians of these animals are abandoning their caregiving promise.  

I ended up abandoning my what-pisses-me-off post because it was getting too long, and too damn depressing. It's hard to know how to make a difference, and what words to use to reach those who don't seem to care or want to know about how humans are succeeding in destroying our environment, animals, and each other. As one reader of this blog once commented, it's so tiring saying the same thing over and over. Exactly.

And there are times when I think that if our human species is that hell-bent on destroying themselves and everything around them, well, so be it. When I was lamenting the choices in our last provincial election, someone said to me that we get the government we deserve. If that's true, then in the same vein humans collectively get the environment we deserve as well. But future generations will be stuck with solving all the needless problems they didn't create and don't deserve, and animals certainly don't deserve the extinction of themselves and their habitats.

So where does that leave us? What can we do? I don't have the answers of course, and I find it maddening to keep having to watch our species not only messing things up, but implementing laws and policies that were more typical 70 years ago. I mean, we might as well be living in 1952 given the extreme right-wing conservative push-back in too many places. The prime minister of Hungary (considered a hero by far too many conservatives) has openly lamented Europe becoming a "mixed race" society, and doesn't even seem to recognize the inherent racism of his views.

And while we watched reproductive rights being stripped in so many other countries, who would have thought that nine individuals (but especially three) could screw over millions of people in the US? I had a letter to the editor published, by the way, warning that Canadians shouldn't be complacent about our abortion rights as too many groups and politicians here are stoked by the unjust overturning of Roe v. Wade. 

As I said, all this nonsense going on perplexes and bewilders me to no end. But it does make it clear that we as vegans have to fight on all fronts and on behalf of ALL animals (including human ones) if we're going to help this planet become less topsy-turvy than it is.

That's it for now from me. Hopefully it won't be another year before I reappear again!

still vegan after all these years

I sometimes wonder if I should change the title of this blog already. Have Gone Vegan makes it sound as if I've just transitioned, whereas this is my 13th! year since giving up consuming sentient beings. So, thirteen years have flown by and I'm still alive, which according to this ex-vegan is quite miraculous as they "Do not consider any version of a vegan diet to be acceptable, safe, healthy or remotely appropriate for human beings.... I think veganism is dangerous and nutritionally defective. Failure is the only possible outcome of that defecient [sic] diet." Well! 

They also cite the Faunalytics' Study of Current and Former Vegetarians and Vegans saying that 84% of folk will abandon vegetarianism/veganism, but then throw in a time frame of within the first five years that I don't see listed in the study. And as a former researcher myself, I seriously question aspects of the study even though I support the organization and am a monthly donor. For example, grouping vegetarians and vegans together is like saying that apples and oranges are the same kind of fruit. No, they share similarities, but shouldn't be conflated.

As an illustration here's a statistic from their full report: Interestingly, while 86% of lapsed vegetarians abandon their diet, a smaller proportion (70%) of lapsed vegans do so, suggesting that while people are far less likely to adopt a vegan diet, vegans are also less apt to start opting for meat. I think 16% is a fairly big difference, and that's just one example.  Also, if you look at the actual numbers of the study sample (N= 11,399), you'll see that of the total number of 1,166 former vegans and vegetarians, 129 were vegan. Yep, you read that right. Percentage wise they indicate that of the 10.2% (1,166) vegans and vegetarians grouped together, 1.1% (129) were vegan and 9.1% (1,037) were vegetarian.

But stats can be deceiving (as one who used to manipulate them for a living I know), because another way you could look at this is to see that of the 1,166 former veg folk, 11% were vegan and thus 89% were vegetarian. In other words, this could be viewed as more of a study of former vegetarians than vegans.  If you then add in that the study definition of vegan/vegetarian was based on dietary inclusion only, and given that most vegans don't even consider veganism to be a diet, motivation would appear to be a key factor in how many vegans lapse as opposed to vegetarians. Hmmm... 

At any rate, IF veg folk DO abandon their "diet" within the first five years as claimed by the ex-vegan turned enthusiastic fisherwoman and licensed hunter quoted up above, then I should have ditched my principles 2.6 times already. But even in my dreams I consistently identify as vegan, so that's not likely to happen.

And while I don't get how former vegans (some might argue they were more plant-based than vegan) can turn their backs on animals, I do certainly understand turning down the dial on activism as being vegan is hard. Not in terms of food, in my opinion, but the emotional toil of witnessing animal suffering and death, the indifference and denial of others if not downright hostility, and the incremental pace at which change often seems to occur. Being a vegan and seeing real progress is a long-term prospect, and not for the faint-of-heart. 

So I would argue that being vegan is sometimes all you can do given other life circumstances. Full-on or even part-time activism is great if you have the time, energy and inclination, but please don't feel you're not doing enough, because just by not consuming other sentient beings you're already saving lives and making a difference.

And if you do feel you can contribute a bit more, consider what I think of as being more passive forms of activism: wear t-shirts with slogans, put stickers on your car* and around the community, have individual conversations face-to-face when appropriate (my best interactions with folk have been in grocery stores, for example, instead of anything posted online), chalk animal-rights messages, and other smaller actions that feel doable. Anything is better than nothing as they say, so don't feel it doesn't count if you're not up to doing bigger things like protests. Just being vegan and setting an example is activism in its own way, and all of our actions DO add up. :)

* like this! Was tickled pink/red? when I saw this vehicle in my rural small town. Had a lovely chat as well with the owner who wasn't sure what my reaction would be as I asked if this was their car, until I gave them a big smile and a huge thumbs-up when they said yes.

thanksgiving/taking, it's gotta change however you pronounce it

I've written about Thanksgiving (October in Canada, November in the US) more than once on this blog, but the posts have mostly boiled down to this: giving versus taking. Specifically, why can't people GIVE thanks without taking?

Expressing gratitude is a lovely thing, and having a national holiday where folk can celebrate the good things in their lives is fine too, but can't this be done in a way where other lives aren't taken? Why is it necessary to kill in order to say, thank you? 

The hypocrisy of this is even more blatant at Christmas when people worldwide celebrate the birth of Christ (whether they believe or not) by partaking in death.

So I ask again, why does being thankful for good fortune have to involve the taking of life? I would argue it doesn't, and would urge you to rethink why and how you celebrate, if it does.

In these times of anxiety and turmoil it can be difficult to be truly appreciative, but we have to try. With Covid-19, good health is something no longer taken for granted, so if you and those you love are healthy, then that already is something to be thankful for. Still working and making an income? Also something to be extra thankful for. Not separated from your family? Again, no longer taken for granted.

I take it back about it being difficult to be appreciative right now. Perhaps this year like no other people are even more acutely and consciously grateful for the things in their lives still going right, and are more aware than ever of how it can be going so incredibly wrong for so many others.

Happy Thanksliving everyone (to our southern neighbours, we are hopeful that this year you can be thankful for a new President), and please consider the many ways in which you can celebrate life by respecting the lives of all living beings. Thank you (especially from Corno the turkey below, best friend of Esther the Wonder Pig.)

what will it take for people to go vegan?

Well, that's the million-dollar question isn't it? And if the answer was an easy one, an awful lot more people would have gone vegan by now.

We also would have avoided the bickering between camps advocating different approaches. Abolitionists, incrementalists, welfarists/new welfarists, reductionists and utilitarians, whatever term you want to use; you can find a group that most closely matches your own philosophy or perspective. Mine, by the way, is one I termed pragmatic abolitionist about five years ago.

One of the many frustrating things for long-term vegans is the amount of time we've spent trying to achieve our goal, but with seemingly little to show for it. As one reader shared when I first starting writing again this year, I am bone-weary of trying to find new ways to say the same thing. It is frankly exhausting. Yes, yes it is. 

Vegans and animal rights activists have been saying the same things over and over and working for a long time in trying to bring about change. Here are a few of the tactics we've tried:

• education
• protests and demonstrations
• undercover investigations
• direct action
• leading by example
• changing laws and legislation
• animal sanctuaries
• introducing new vegan products
• incremental steps like Meatless Mondays 
• appeal to logic and rationality
• appeal to emotion
• media (books, blogs, documentaries, vegan characters in movies and TV, etc.)

Which ones have worked better than others? Hard to say. 

I view education as a cornerstone and vital part of reaching people, but remember reading that Vegan Outreach had distributed something like over a million pamphlets (don't remember the exact number) one year and thinking, but if you multiply that by the number of years you've been doing exactly that, shouldn't there be more vegans by now? How much more information do people need? Apparently, lots. So I don't want to denigrate that particular organization (indeed, I was a financial supporter for a long time) or any other as I realize that educational materials still have their place, but it's only one avenue of outreach.

Leading by example is crucial, I think, as the ripple effect of that can't be underestimated. Set a good example, and that may influence more people than any loud in-your-face exhortations to go vegan.

Two people, who I believe have probably contributed to more people changing their dietary habits than they may ever know, are Steve and Derek of HEEFS. They exemplify kindness in a way I never could, and if ever a couple found their right mission in life it would be them. Opening an animal sanctuary is a purpose they probably couldn't even have dreamt of in their prior lives, but seems like the magical fit that has changed multiple lives for the better.

And animal sanctuaries are a great way for people's minds and hearts to open unreservedly. Because if folk only think in terms of products on their plates without even connecting them to the animals they're derived from, than sanctuaries place those animals directly where they belong: in the center. In the center as individuals with personalities, a desire to live, and a wish to form bonds with others. I would think it'd be very difficult to interact with a cow or a pig or a chicken and then have their cousins for dinner a few hours later. At least, one would hope.

Vegan products? If I think of the range and accessibility in just the past 12 years, well, to say it's exploded is not much of an exaggeration. There was a time when your options for anything vegan was limited to either specialized health stores or huge grocery chains. Now even the most generic stores like Food Basics and No Frills carry a lot of plant-based items as well. That would have been unthinkable 12 years ago. 

But what I love about the ubiquitousness of vegan products is that it normalizes veganism. People may still not always react kindly to the word or idea, but they sure know what it means now. And while it's thought that some of the sales can be attributed to meat-eaters instead of vegans, so what? Isn't that what we actually want? Vegans are already part of the choir so to speak, and in my opinion, who eats vegan items is less important than that fewer animals are consumed.

I'm not going to go through every item on the list as I'm sure it's evident that each approach has its potential merits and downfalls. And because we don't know what will eventually turn a person vegan, having a multitude of ways, entry points, and even reasons will likely help turn more people vegan than just one approach.

Because the one answer that we do know for sure about what'll take for people to go vegan is that we just don't know.

We don't know what will be the societal tipping point. What environmental, economic, or health factor (or something that we haven't even thought of) will be the one thing that changes everything. Possibly in the future we'll be able to look back and say, there, that day, or that event, or that incident is what really got the ball rolling. In the meantime though, I think we just have to go with the approach that makes the most sense to us personally, and that gets us to stick with the mission. I'm also all for groups (like Faunalytics, for example) that can quantify for us what approaches do seem to bring about the best results.

In short, be wary of anyone who feels they have the answers, or worse, THE answer, when it comes to ending animal exploitation.

Note: still haven't read How To Create A Vegan World: A Pragmatic Approach by Tobias Leenaert. Wouldn't be surprised though if our perspectives greatly align, but will post before dipping into his book and come back to expand (if need be) after reading. 

whose lives matter continued: part A

This is a follow-up to whose lives matter? as I thought a few links that I included in reply to a comment would be helpful in a post as well. (Note: I rambled on too long, so those links will be included in part B.)

But first I want to say a few things. I've been vegan for a long time now (twelve years), and I'm sure I'm not the vegan I was when I first started this journey, just as I'm no longer exactly the same person in general. And while I believe my core values haven't changed, I wouldn't be surprised that if I looked at my posts beginning from 2008, I could find a few things that would make me cringe today. And that's because nothing is static. You change as you grow, and your viewpoints and philosophies refine themselves as you incorporate new information. That's a good thing, both personally and for whatever cause grabs your heartstrings the most.

So I would say the biggest change is likely the realization that the problem which requires veganism as a fix isn't simple, therefore the solutions won't be either. Platitudes, easy sound bites, and single-pronged solutions aren't the answer; otherwise the world would have become vegan a long time ago already. I'm more comfortable now with realizing that the solutions by necessity will be multi-pronged, have a variety of elements that some would describe as welfarist/new welfarist, abolitionist, intersectional, etc.

It could also be that change will come about quicker because of market forces, consumer innovations, environmental or economic necessity, and I'm okay with that. If more animals end up staying alive because of something like cultured lab-meat, for example, than a massive change in people's moral perspective, well, I'm okay with that too. 

Another thing I've come to realize more fully is that vegans, because they're human, are complicated. Being vegan doesn't automatically make you a better or nicer or more compassionate person. There are likely as many assholes among vegans as there are in the general population, but that shouldn't surprise anyone. Infighting shouldn't come as a huge shock either. No matter how noble a social justice movement may be, it's still comprised of imperfect humans with internalized prejudices.

Most vegans are driven by a sense of compassion, sure (well, one would hope), but that doesn't mean that racism, sexism, ableism, classism, homophobia, transphobia, and on and on and on, hasn't affected the movement. Just as the world grappled at large with the notion that rampant abuse of power leading to sexual harassment and assault is more of a norm than an exception, stories of sexism within the animal rights movement were front and centre at the same time.

Right now the world is also more fully waking up to the reality that racism plays a role in every institution and layer of society (systemic racism), and while some vegans may continue to not want to deal with that, may continue to insist that our movement should only focus on nonhumans, a veganism without intersectionality at its core is like a feminism that doesn't want to include all women in its fight for equality.

And that realization (the importance of intersectionality) has probably been the biggest shift in my own approach to veganism over the years. Because at heart, the ending of oppression is what veganism is all about. Which is why as vegans, we have to fight for the most marginalized of ALL groups, including both animals and humans. Fighting against speciesism is important, but without paying attention to other interlinked forms of oppression, veganism misses the mark.

As I said, I've said too much, snort, so will continue this discussion and links in part B.

Stay tuned.

'serenity and peace' or an attempt to silence protest? (Bill 156)

Well, you know my view on the matter, but this was one of the write-ups in response to the passing of Bill 156.

The comment at the bottom is mine, but it's a condensed version as I was only allowed 750 characters, including spaces. So, not enough space to say my piece. Below is a longer version. It was originally intended as a letter to the editor (which I would then have to cut down to 320 words), but the article itself wasn't published offline, therefore I decided not to bother submitting. 

Here is the long-winded version:

While I appreciate the reporter trying to provide a balanced view, here are some key points to consider.

Two themes in particular I’ve seen repeatedly put forth by proponents of the ag-gag law concern safety and disease. Farmers, apparently, are highly worried about safety. But safety of what? Their livelihood? Their reputation? That seems probable enough. Animals themselves though? That’s a bit dubious as they’re raised a) for profit, and b) to be killed, so I don’t think animals themselves will be “safe” for too long.

As for personal threats by trespassers, where are the statistics to back up this claim? How many farmers have actually been harmed or killed? And given the recent death (viewed as intentional by some) of activist Regan Russell, I would argue that activists may have more to fear from farmers and truckers than vice versa.

But back to stats. How many incidents of trespassing on Ontario family farms were actually reported to police in the last few years? How many charges were laid? How many convictions resulted? In other words, how have trespassers proven to be a real safety risk? Hmm, I see.

Another aspect often cited is that activist trespassing brings disease. But, as we know from prior zoonotic viruses like bird and swine flu, disease is already a part of farming because of the very practices that activists are trying to make public. The current Covid-19 pandemic itself underscores how infectious disease is a byproduct of farming and marketing animals.

And if things have changed considerably since 1989 as claimed by Mr. Witteveen, then why is it still considered reasonable to transport pigs, for example, without food, water, or rest for 28 hours? How is this humane? Why are certain practices, such as the killing of all male chicks, and the slamming of piglets into concrete walls, still considered both acceptable and standard?

Why are standard farming practices exempt from cruelty laws in the first place? That, in and of itself, makes the so-called tough anti-cruelty legislation of PAWS null and void, especially since the only duty to report in the PAWS Act lies with veterinarians, not employees. This makes Ernie Hardeman’s statement that nothing prevents employees from reporting animal abuse disingenuous at best.

The reality is that most animal farming industries would have died a natural death anyway were it not for being continually propped up by government bailouts. And now with Bill 156 we have a government turning an even blinder eye to industry promoted-and-protected cruelty by allowing animal agriculture to police itself.

No, the idea that this bill is balanced is so off-kilter it’d be funny if it weren’t so damn sad. 

For anyone interested in the true and harrowing dangers of the bill I would suggest looking at the comprehensive brief submitted by Animal Justice:

https://www.animaljustice.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/2020-05-09-Animal-Justice-Submission-to-General-Government-Committee.pdf

MPPs who voted in favour of Ontario's ag-gag Bill 156

As you know, the third reading of Bill 156 passed by 68-22, with 25 MPPs not voting.

It will be rightfully challenged in court, and I encourage you to support Animal Justice in their bid to overturn it. Also, read their brief to the Standing Committee on General Government, which will make this bill and its consequences even more chilling than you thought you already knew. This is scary stuff, people.

In the meantime, here are the names and email addresses* of those who helped pass this monstrous bill. It's on public record, so it's not like their privacy is being invaded. Besides, if they really believe the bill is necessary as farmers have nothing to hide, then their vote shouldn't be hidden either. Feel free to let them know why you're both angry and disappointed.

Deepak Anand- [email protected]
Roman Baber- [email protected]
Aris Babikian- [email protected]
Robert Bailey- [email protected]
Toby Barrett- [email protected]
Peter Bethlenfalvy- [email protected]
Stephen Blais- [email protected]
Will Bouma- [email protected]
Paul Calandra- [email protected]
Stan Cho (Willowdale)- [email protected]
Steve Clark- [email protected]
Lorne Coe- [email protected]
Stephen Crawford- [email protected]
Rudy Cuzzeto- [email protected]
Doug Downey- [email protected]
Jill Dunlop- [email protected]
Christine Elliot- [email protected]
Victor Fedeli- [email protected]
Amy Fee- [email protected]
John Fraser- [email protected]
Merrilee Fullerton- [email protected]
Goldie Ghamari- [email protected]
Parm Gill- [email protected]
Mike Harris- [email protected]
Christine Hogarth- [email protected]
Sylvia Jones- [email protected]
Belinda C. Karahalios- [email protected]
Vincent Ke- [email protected]
Andrea Khanjin- [email protected]
Daryl Kramp- [email protected]
Naatalia Kusendova- [email protected]
Lisa MacLeod- [email protected]
Robin [email protected]
Gila Martow- [email protected]
Jim McDonell- [email protected]
Jane McKenna- [email protected]
Monte McNaughton- [email protected]
Norman Miller (Parry Sound—Muskoka)- [email protected]
Christina Maria Mitas- [email protected]
Caroline Mulroney- [email protected]
Rick Nicholls- [email protected]
Sam Oosterhoff- [email protected]
Billy Pang- [email protected]
Lindsey Park- [email protected]
Michael Parsa- [email protected]
Randy Pettapiece- [email protected]
Rod Phillips- [email protected]
David Piccini- [email protected]
Kaleed Rasheed- [email protected]
Jeremy Roberts- [email protected]
Ross Romano- [email protected]
Sheref Sabawy- [email protected]
Amarjot Sandhu- [email protected]
Laurie Scott- [email protected]
Amanda Simard- [email protected]
Donna Skelly- [email protected]
Todd Smith (Bay of Quinte)- [email protected]
Dave Smith (Peterborough—Kawartha)- [email protected]
Kinga Surma- [email protected]
Nina Tangri- [email protected]
Vijay Thanigasalam- [email protected]
Lisa M.Thompson- [email protected]
Michael A. Tibollo- [email protected]
Effie J. Triantafilopoulos-- [email protected]
Daisy Wai- [email protected]
Bill Walker- [email protected]
John Yakabuski- [email protected]
Jeff Yurek- [email protected]

* compiled by Dog Tales Rescue and Sanctuary

Ontario's ag-gag Bill 156

Like many of you, I'm pissed off. Royally so. A good thing too that I didn't have much hope, given that the bill passed a second reading with a unanimous vote of 100-0 (how incredibly screwed up is that?), but still. I'm angry, disappointed, upset, outraged, and sad. (Note: third reading passed 68-22, so I guess some progress was made.)

Luckily, perhaps, I can no longer log onto my Facebook account (someone complained last year that my profile was not following Community Standards, but that's a post for another day); otherwise I'd have let off some pretty angry steam on that site. I did, however, come out of a 3-year dormancy on my Twitter account yesterday, before remembering why I'd gone dormant in the first place. Because besides being an enormous time suck, you end up either preaching to the choir, or leaving angry/snarky responses to people/organizations (e.g., Ontario Pork Producers who are very concerned about the mental health of farmers unfairly victimized by abusive extremist activists) whose views are so firmly entrenched that you might as well be trying to convince a hardcore staunch Trump supporter to vote for Joe Biden.

In other words, it doesn't help. 

Especially in my part of Ontario that couldn't be bluer than blue politically, and is home to many farms and farmers. A lot of them, by the way, happen to be not only of Dutch descent (I'm a first-generation Dutch immigrant born in Holland, so have no qualms about discussing general characteristics of my own ethnic group), but also of a fairly strict and conservative Christian upbringing (as a member of this upbringing, also no qualms), and this is key.

Key because in this strongly upheld patriarchal hierarchy, God is top, Jesus is next, then comes the Holy Ghost, followed by men (literally, not mankind in general, but men), women, children, and finally, and usually reluctantly, animals. Maybe this is true for other religions and ethnicities as well, but I find it so strongly expressed that it's fairly common knowledge that domestic abuse is rife within the Christian Reformed Church. Because, you know, women have to be submissive to their fathers and husbands and all that.

I'm also reminded of a huge billboard that I saw while being driven in a more rural part of this place that not only declared abortion to be the most sinful thing anyone could do (by the way, there's a systematic campaign by members of these churches to elect government officials at all levels of government solely on the issue of whether candidates are pro-life), but that actually mocked in the same billboard anyone concerned with animal cruelty. I kid you not. Half of the billboard had an image of a fetus, the other half a puppy, with the captions more or less saying, animal cruelty okay, abortion not. I might be exaggerating slightly, but I remember being shocked, and that doesn't happen too often anymore.

So what I'm trying to say in a long-winded way, is that the notion of animals being property, and specifically, property to be used by man in any which way deemed useful or profitable, may be even stronger in this part of the woods than elsewhere.

Oh, but also in Alberta (which already has its own ag-gag law that Ontario eagerly imitated), BC and the Maritimes. And in case you think I'm making this Dutch demographic stuff up, here are some quotes from a book* I happen to own:

A look through the national poultry magazine's annual Who's Who reveals a strong Dutch presence in egg, turkey and broiler producers. p268

But it must be acknowledged that many within the Dutch Canadian community have assumed leadership positions in farming organizations. Nationally, the chair of the Canadian Egg Marketing Board in 1999 was (name omitted as it's likely out of date by now), and at the Canadian Turkey Marketing Agency, (name omitted for same reason). (Name omitted) was an executive member of the Chicken Farmers of Canada, while (name omitted) headed the department of Animal and Poultry Science at the University of Saskatchewan. p270

Now I'm not saying that only farmers of Dutch descent adhere to a "animals are ours to use" mentality, but that it may be even more strongly held or prevalent, and that would effect the industry wherever they are. And they're certainly here in Ontario!

Getting back to the bill, here it is in its entirety, and here is the submission by the influential OFA. Reading through their submission I have to admit that if I was just a casually if-at-all informed member of the public, I too might be swayed by their rhetoric and feel sorry for the poor disrespected farmers who love the animals they take good care of and are bullied by activists who aren't misguided, but plain mean. Well!

Okay, if you're a reader of this blog then I certainly don't have to tell you what this bill means, why it's atrocious, and that it's gotta go. 

But what do we do in the meantime? What do we do with our anger? (Other than posting all over farmers' and farming organization media accounts that they're parasitic scumbags who deserve to rot in hell, which I confess I'm still tempted to do.)

This is the plan for me for now:

• take the time to grieve (as this will have a huge negative impact on animals already in dire situations)
• take time to feel all my feelings (e.g., disappointment, helplessness, worry, etc.)
• take the time to feel my anger fully (without being too stupid, as that could backfire for those we're trying to help)
• figure out how to channel that anger constructively (what can I do that will make a difference? how can I help to get this bill declared unconstitutional?)
• figure out how to pace myself (make no mistake, this is gonna be a long war with many battles)
• make sure to leave some room for joy and fun to prevent burnout
• be prepared to get arrested! (only kidding, but it's probably wise for you not to know too much, again kidding, maybe...)

What about you? Any points you'd like to add to make all of us better warriors, and better equipped to deal with this colossal fuck-up?

p.s. can you tell I'm still boiling? maybe I should have calmed down a bit first?

* Uprooted: Dutch Immigrant Children in Canada 1947-1959 by Anne van Arragon Hutten, 2001.

hope is not required

Whether it's climate or another issue, you don't have to feel hope to be motivated to keep fighting for what you believe in. Find something that pushes you to do what is right even when the future looks bleak. Maybe even especially when the future looks bleak. 

Oddly enough, I found the above passage*, written by first-year Stockholm University student and organizer in the Fridays for Future climate movement, Isabelle Axelson, so freeing, that it actually made me feel more energized, and paradoxically perhaps, even a bit more hopeful. 

Because hope (defined by Wikipedia as being an optimistic state of mind that is based on an expectation of positive outcomes with respect to events and circumstances in one's life or the world at large) is something I don't really have. Not in terms of seeing a vastly improved world for animals within my lifetime, that is. And that, I believe, held me back. Almost as if I thought hope was a prerequisite for being an effective advocate, and that if I didn't feel hopeful, there wouldn't be much use in trying.

Well, forget that! Feeling hopeless doesn't preclude taking action. Take Bill 156 (as in please, take it and throw it away), an awful piece of "ag-gag" legislation that will have its final vote tomorrow. I wrote about it to my local MPP, not because I'm hopeful they'll change their mind (it was touted as an accomplishment in their spring update), but to at least let them know that not every constituent agrees. Same thing in the follow-up email I sent to their canned reply.  

Also wrote a letter to the editor of the local paper (unfortunately not yet published, if ever it will be) appealing to readers to contact their MPP as well. Again, not hopeful of results as such, but wanting to be on the record that not everyone agrees. If this bill passes, it will not be without vocal opposition, or I expect, a legal challenge.

So basically, hope is lovely, but not essential. Action, however, certainly is.

* read in the June 1-8, 2020 issue of TIME

animal exploitation is the bedrock

What we do to animals is an extension of what we do to other humans. This includes colonizing their lands, wrongfully incarcerating them, stealing their reproductive autonomy, commodifying them and killing them. Animal exploitation is the bedrock of imperialist white supremacist capitalist cis-heteropatriarchy. You want to abolish oppression, you gotta include other species. Sorry, not sorry. -- Christopher-Sebastian McJetters

From: 10 Questions: Vegan Rockstar with Christopher-Sebastian McJetters

new year, old battle

Can you believe 2017's here? At the beginning of each new year I like to start with an encouraging/optimistic post, and my favourite of that kind is one I sometimes feel could be reused every year. This year, however, no such post is bubbling up. 

I'm still struggling with the disappointment of the US election and the reality of the Donald being in power, and I resent the fact that December 19 (the anniversary of my cat's death) will now always be linked to his official election by the Electoral College. My antipathy towards this doofus was made clear in prior posts, and while you may wonder why the election of an American president would bother this Canadian resident so much, it's because I fear that social justice for all creatures will take a huge step backwards. His cabinet picks so far bear this out.

I will outline why the election was a bad one for animals, and then hope to be done discussing this despicable man once and for all. It's the only way I can cope I'm afraid, and as childish as this outlandish man is himself, I may have to resort to shutting my eyes and ears whenever I hear his name on any kind of media. I know, that means I won't be hearing or seeing much over the next four (two?) years, snort.

Stress and sadness over other non-political issues have also been key this past year, and while I posted earlier about burnout, acknowledging and addressing it are two different things. I hope to recover a bit more joy and enthusiasm before year's end, write the posts I've been meaning to, and focus on how to be a better advocate, because sometimes I feel that my having been vegan for the past eight years has accomplished diddly squat for those I'm fighting for.

So, who has Donald picked so far and why is that bad for animals, human and non-human alike? Well, in a nutshell, and with few exceptions, Trump has surrounded himself with old, ultra-rich white men who have shown no interest in protecting the environment, animals, or humans who don't fit their own demographic. Far from draining any kind of swamp, Trump is simply making it swampier and more dangerous for those who don't look like him. 

Flooding the swamp he promised to drain with people who are anti environment, pro oil, pro gas, climate-change skeptics, pro big business, pro animal agriculture, pro factory farming, anti animal-rights, and anti public health care folk who tend to see everything in black and white, they wouldn't recognize a nuance if it bonked them on the head. The only regard they seem to have is for dollar signs. To people, sentient beings of all kind, and the planet itself, they're saying a big FU.

Trump's own two sons show complete disregard for wildlife by participating in the "sport" of trophy hunting, something that Donald is actually proud of. And given that the elder Trump is babysat by his own kids, their influence on his stance where animals are concerned can only be suspect. No, I'm afraid that the trumpnoxious (Trump-style brand of obnoxniousness) President-elect, his silly trumptirades (usually conducted on Twitter), and his downright scary-as-hell cabinet picks are filling me with nothing but trumpidation (the specific trepidation felt by almost everything the Trumpster says and does). The only silver lining is that perhaps things really do have to hit a rock bottom we didn't even envision before the world wakes up to the nightmare that the human species has created.

The stakes have NEVER been higher. And if we thought it was a battle before to have the rights of sentient beings recognized and respected, to have veganism be more than a scoffed-at movement consisting of a few, than I would say it's looking more like a war. As I said, I don't feel particularly encouraged or optimistic right now, and that's something I hope will change over the course of this year. In the meantime, let's all soldier on, because every single living being is counting on us. 

Not a great way to begin the year and end this post I know, so please reread my way-better-way-to-begin welcome of a few years ago. :)

be kind to animals week 2016

Begins today!

What sorts of animals should we be kind to?

• old ones
• young ones
• cute ones
• not-so-cute ones
• sick ones
• healthy ones
• big ones
• small ones
• companion animals
• farmed animals
• land animals
• aquatic animals
• all animals, actually
• including, ahem, human ones

What does being kind not include?

• eating them
• breeding them
• experimenting on them
• turning them into clothes
• stealing their young
• stealing their milk
• withholding care and respect
• confining 
• mutilating 
• killing 
• or using them in any other way for human gain

What are the best ways to be kind?

• rescuing them
• treating them as beings rather than things
• seeing them as kin -- the word kind is very useful for this
• unless already living with you (or in need of help), leaving them alone

So please be kind to animals this week, next week, and every week. Thank you! 

my summer of '14 vegan tees

As you know, t-shirt activism is one of my favourite ways to spread the vegan word. This past summer (yikes, can you believe we're already talking about summer in the past tense?), I got three new ones and pretty much wore them all the time. The first Captivity Is Cruel tee got a few nods and "I like your shirt" responses:

The second Not Your Mom, Not Your Milk tee got the most polarized response ranging from a cold stare (given by a Farmers Feed People in Cities clad person, snort), to an enthusiastic "You're vegan? Wow, my respect for you has just gone way up" exchange with the checkout clerk (thanks again, Monika, in case you're reading this!) at my grocery store. I didn't hear it, but apparently, the otherwise-hip young couple behind me were rolling their eyes and saying how veganism was too extreme while M and I were discussing the tee.

And grocery stores, by the way, are one of the best places for vegan tee advocacy because when people are stuck in line, you've got a captive audience. Did I ever tell you about the time when a teenager behind me excitedly told her mom to look at my Food Is To Eat, Animals Are To Love shirt, and the five people behind them promptly demanded to see it too? Now THAT made waiting in line worthwhile. :)

But the vegan tee that got the most response this summer was the sweet and gentle Friends, Not Food, as it elicited a smile from just about everyone who saw it. It also got quite a few "oh, that's SO cute!" responses as well as initiating a couple of more serious discussions. But what I really liked about this t-shirt in particular was how it seemed to get non-vegans to see their food in a different light. I swear I saw at least one mental light bulb going off!

So, as a cooler fall begins, my tees will get a final wash before they're put away for their well-deserved rest. They did a good job this year, and will be summoned for vegan duty again next summer, along with a few reliable others. :) 

some more thoughts on speciesism

Two weeks ago, I wrote about being speciesist as I found myself feeling both relieved and guilty when I discovered that the dead animal I removed off the road was not a dog or a cat but a raccoon. Upon reflection though, I think one of the factors that made me less upset involved human responsibility. Or irresponsibility, I should say. While it's always sad when a sentient being meets its end, living near humans (especially when we've encroached on their habitat)  is risky for wildlife. And even though humans shouldn't strike an animal on purpose and should do their best not to run over them again in passing, squirrels, raccoons and rabbits who scamper across the road risk being hit.

Cats and dogs, however, have no business being on the road and unless they happen to be feral, it's up to humans to make sure that they're not. In other words, when I see a dead cat or dog on the road, I blame their guardian. All dogs should be leashed when walked (I always cringe when I see dogs off leash on the sidewalk because you never know what will cause them to suddenly dart onto the road), and cats supervised if let outdoors. No, when dogs and cats end up dead on the road, it's not so much an accident I feel, but a dumb decision leading to needless death. And that, I think, is partly why I get more upset with certain species getting hit by cars.

A reader mentioned being more moved to tears about stories involving animal than human suffering, and I wonder if the same element is at play here. Most animal suffering is intentional in some way or for the benefit of human desire (e.g. factory farming), so when we see, for example, stories about chicken or pig barns going up in flames, it's even more heart-wrenching because we know that raising animals for food isn't even necessary. It's based upon human greed and appetite, and a complete denial about a sentient being's emotional life and a right to live their lives as free from human harm as possible.

Stories of human suffering though, are often self-inflicted, and involve humans doing stupid things to each other when they should know better. Unlike natural disasters, man-made disasters usually reflect greed at some level, meaning that humans are at least partly to blame. Actually, one could argue that certain natural disasters are the indirect result of climate change and global warming, which are the more direct result of humans not being as bright as they claim to be. While any kind of suffering is to be lamented, there's a greater innocence where animal beings are concerned, especially when it's through direct human action.

Familiarity, though, is also a key factor. We respond differently to beings that we identify as being more similar, or that we have more knowledge of. It is thought, for example, that folk tend to think of cats as being so cute because their round faces and pleading meows remind us of human babies. (For an illuminating discussion of how we, women especially -- myself included! -- infantilize other animals, please read the comment section of veganelder's post.) People have begun to respond to Esther the Wonder Pig on a large scale because they can perceive her personality (through the photos and words her dads share) and realize that when they eat pork, they're eating someone who could be Esther, someone who shares traits with humans that they can recognize. They're experiencing what Krissa means when she wrote, "...the more interactions and experiences that one has with different species, the more it's revealed that we are all the same."

So am I speciesist? Likely (probably, given that I wouldn't max out all of my credit cards if my cat got sick, but maybe would for a relative), but it's a matter of degree. And just as it's foolish to claim that because no one can be 100% vegan one shouldn't even try, recognizing speciesism when it rears its ugly human head (are all species speciesist though?) is better than not recognizing or acting upon it at all.

and the "Humans Are Too Horrible For Words" award goes to...

(Will update my speciesism post next, but needed to get this off my chest first.)

Within twenty-four hours three different kinds of animal abuse situations (actually, four, but one was so heinous I won't even mention it) came to my attention with the result that I felt like crawling into a misanthropic bunker for the rest of the weekend. "Misanthropic bunker" is a term I came across in Kim Stallwood's interesting memoir Growl, currently campaigning (ending tonight!) on Indiegogo. 

Let me introduce the runner-ups first. Third (and definitely NOT honourable) mention goes to sheep-shearing sadists. Shearing sheep may not initally sound like the worst form of abuse, but as Debra Roppolo points out, sheep are gentle and kind beings, which makes the vicious violence demonstrated in these videos even more hard to take.

Second prize (although there are no winners here) is awarded to all who participate in, get ready for this, pig wrestling. Yes -- PIG wrestling. I thought I had pretty much heard of all the asinine ways in which humans treat other sentient beings (who in my opinion have more dignity than a lot of humans at this point), but no. Even worse is the fact that this dubious activity is being sponsored by grown-ups (the idea of pig wrestling could be amusing, you would think, only to drunk male adolescents) as part of a church event. Call me stupid, but I can't see the connection to spirituality here. Now, one church in particular is getting a lot of heat about this (despite massive protest the event went ahead yesterday), but sadly, pig wrestling is actually fairly common "entertainment" at many county and state fairs. 

No drum roll please, but first place (not that ranking animal abuse makes sense except to human animals who seem to want to rank everything) is bestowed on the f@*#ing a$$holes who decided that Harry Harlow was such a hero that his despicable monkey "pit of despair" study should be replicated. Yep, "scientists" (I don't know how to convey sarcasm better than that I'm afraid) are being funded to study monkey maternal deprivation all over again. As if the original studies weren't horrendous enough, repeating them is monstrous.

At the moment I can't think of anything more dumb (although using monkeys to try and figure out whether smoking is bad or not for pregnant women--um, we don't know that yet?--is pretty close) and cruel and heart-breaking and possibly evil, and it's making me want to email the numbskulls involved and use language that would make the above slightly altered swear words sound like something a nun might say. Channel anger constructively is what I'm repeating to myself over and over lest I compose undiplomatic and tactless (but who says polite is always best?) messages that likely shouldn't see the Send button. So, there you have it. Never fear that human stupidity and cruelty will ever end, or that our work will ever be finished. :(

It's at times like this that I like to go visit Esther, who along with her two fine dads, reassures me that not all humans are hateful. In fact, I say we nominate them for a Most Likely To Put A Smile Back On Your Face award right now. Anyone second the motion?

I'm a traffic stopper AND a speciesist?

The incident in question took place last summer, but honestly, I'm still not quite sure what to make of it. Looking out the kitchen window one morning while getting my lunch ready for work, I noticed an injured animal in the middle of one of the traffic lanes in front of my house. It was hard to see, but it looked big enough to be a puppy, so I quickly grabbed a plastic bag with the intention of at least removing the poor thing off the road so that they wouldn't be run over again.

Cars dutifully stopped (at 7:45am they may not have been too happy about it, but the alternative was to run me over as well) while I gently scooped the now-clearly-dead creature with the plastic bag and placed them underneath a tree across the road. I was late for work, so said a few words of "I'm so sorry this happened to you, rest in peace." and went on to do my shift.

The kicker of the story though is that while I felt badly for the being and was glad I had at least prevented more cars from carelessly driving across them, I also felt more than a tinge of relief (and subsequent pangs of guilt) when I saw that it [clearly it wasn't an it, but the rules of the English language are complicit in reducing animals to objects] wasn't a puppy, or even a large cat, but a raccoon. So what does that say about me? Because the truth is that I would have been more upset had the dead animal been a dog or a cat. Does that make me speciesist?

I believe the general definition of speciesism is being prejudiced when it comes to species and favouring your own above all others (please correct me if I'm wrong), but what about favouring some species over other species? Omnivores do it all the time when they happily munch on a pig while petting their pup, and while vegans make an effort to be less speciesist, is it possible to eradicate this tendency entirely? (Please note that I'm not trying to justify speciesism, but to understand it a bit better.) Especially when studies have shown that human infants as young as three months already exhibit signs of favouring those they perceive to be in their own group, and "othering" others, I can certainly see that discrimination based on species is the most difficult ism to recognize, let alone tackle. 

And it reminds me of when as a brand new vegan six years ago, I ran across a group on Flickr called Speciesism and thought that that was going a bit far. Or when my sister-in-law (the most supportive of veganism in my family and the one who actually purchases some vegan products for herself) saw my Alice Walker "The animals of the world exist for their own reasons. They were not made for humans anymore than black people were made for white, or women created for men." button and let out an abrupt whoa as if to say, now that's definitely going too far. Ms. Walker, by the way, is no longer vegan and has decided that chickens are, for example, made for humans, otherwise I can't imagine why she's eating them again. Tsk, tsk, Alice.

My point is that speciesism is probably not the best place to start with pre-vegans or perhaps even vegan newbies, as the indoctrination of Animals Are Ours To Do With As We Will is just too strong and deep. Better to begin with animal cruelty and suffering methinks. But even to a more-seasoned-by-now vegan such as yours truly, speciesism remains a challenge. Because let's take those silly and worn-out hypothetical scenarios involving burning buildings or leaky lifeboats where you're asked if you'd save the puppy or the baby. First, why is it always a dog and a baby? Have we no imagination? What if you had to choose between, let's say, a piglet and an opossum? Or a rabbit and a baby rhinoceros? Then what? If the deciding factor is no longer our species versus any other species, what factor determines who gets saved? Familiarity? Cuteness? Fairness? And how the hell would you decide what's fair? And to whom? As for the hypothetical burning building, if I was babysitting my niece in my apartment and a fire broke out, speciest or not, I'm fairly certain I'd instinctively grab the baby before the kitty no matter which one I loved most.

So there you have it. Speciesism is a toughie, even if you're a vegan who believes that beings of all species have a right to their own lives, and that human animals don't have the right to discriminate based on species, especially when said discrimination is manifested in cruelty or exploitation.

I have, sadly, in the past year, removed several kinds of animals off the same road. :(

p.s. I was serious before -- feel free to explain or elaborate on the notion of speciesism if I haven't gotten it quite right.

world day for animals in laboratories

Odd, isn't it, how scientists, a secular bunch for the most part, seem to play an almost God-like role when it comes to deciding who shall live and who shall die, who is good and who is bad, who is worthy and who is pre-destined for a life of experimental hell. 

Strange too, with all the emphasis on science being rational, logical and objective, that most scientists have no idea how subjective their work really is, and how blind they are to their own biases. Even the very question you ask is bathed in bias and automatically influences or even taints whatever results you get, and as someone who once dabbled a bit in statistics in a previous occupational career, I can tell you that you can skew or present numbers in ways that will reflect whatever it is you want.

You know my thoughts already on the hideous practice of vivisection including less invasive types of experimentation. What you wouldn't do to a human, you shouldn't do to any sentient being. No day, week or even year can ameliorate this abomination until scientists wake up and become more honest about what it is they're doing and why, both to themselves and to the general public. But we sure can pressure them, and do our bit to inform that public of what's really going on. Hell yeah! 

Easter always makes me angry

Other holidays do too, but the more dominant emotion that both Thanksgiving and Christmas evoke for me, for example, is sadness. Sadness at the senseless slaughter of all those sentient beings who would rather stay alive. Who so deserve to stay alive.

Easter, on the other hand, being such an important Christian holiday, stirs up more anger in me not only because animal beings and products are the theme of this equally secular holiday, but because of the Christian justification of animal use. This justification hits even more close to home as all of my siblings and parents are active church members, I currently work in a Christian retirement home, and live in a small town with a seemingly disproportionately large and vocal Christian population.

This isn't to say that I'm anti-Christian per se. Religious upbringing (indoctrination some would say) can be hard to shake, and I believe that being vegan is the Christian thing to do. (In my opinion, you can be vegan without being Christian, but you can't be a true Christian without also being vegan. Otherwise, it would render the term "Christian" empty and meaningless.) It isn't to say that Christianity doesn't have lots of doctrine that supports veganism. Christ himself, I believe, (whether you view him as a once living or mythical figure) was vegan at heart, and would be vegan if he were alive today. And it isn't to say that I don't know of some very fine vegan Christians. 

But the fact of the matter is that most Christians aren't vegan, the Bible does not explicitly endorse veganism enough, and Christian teachings are actively misused to justify animal exploitation. The word dominion, for example, has been bastardized to mean domination instead of stewardship. And if ANY group of people could be thought of as having a mandate to care for all of God's creation (if you happen to believe in any of the various forms of creationism), wouldn't it be Christians? Secular vegans rightly believe that all sentient beings are worthy of respect, that caring for them is the ethical thing to do, the morally right stance if you will. But Christians, one would think, would have an even deeper reason to not use and abuse any living creature if they truly believed that God loves all. Sadly, most Christians do not adhere to this. And in a sense, I believe this makes animal cruelty all the crueler and morally wrong when inflicted by a person who espouses to being Christian.

On a more personal level, it irritates me that my Christian family has no real interest in why I'm vegan. They're all smart, so unfortunately I can't lay the blame on them not being bright enough to grasp vegan principles. And while it's possible (okay, likely) that I'm hugely projecting here, I sometimes get the sense that while they're a bit sad I'm not "saved", they're actually quite pleased with themselves for tolerating my "vegan lifestyle" and for not saying too much about it. Actually, for the most part, not anything. In this way, they can view themselves as liberal without having to examine their own morals and their own role in perpetuating animal violence. Can you tell this bugs me? Because a part of me feels that if they truly thought I was an intelligent and moral person, they would actually listen to what I have to say. Ah, family dynamics. No wonder so many vegan organizations suggest concentrating on strangers rather than family!

Another aspect of Christianity and veganism is that on a certain level I think Christians are even harder to reach than folk who aren't religious. Because while you would think the Golden Rule would hold even more weight with those religiously inclined, Christians in particular seem to feel that their god has given them permission to do whatever the fuck they want with animals use and abuse other animals as they see fit. It's almost as if you have to do an extra layer of work: No, the cruelty and death we inflict on other sentient beings is wrong, no, we don't have the right to do that, AND no, we don't have God's permission to do so.

Where I stand on animal sentience and rights is pretty clear to me. Not so clear is Christianity. Having been immersed since birth (similar to how society immerses us in trying to accept animal use/abuse as normal), I still want to accept the good of this religion while rejecting the bad. I remember as a small kid arguing with my mom that if God was perfect and just then of course Jews and Muslims would be going to heaven as well, in large part because I think kids naturally have a strong and innate sense of justice. By the time I was twelve I vacillated between thinking I'd be a church minister when I got older, or an atheist. Talk about all or nothing, snort. Instead, I've been on the believer-agnostic-atheist circular loop numerous times, and that will likely not change. Which is fine, because ultimately what you DO is more important than what you say or believe. 

I still believe that the Christ figure (whether real or mythical), was a fine dude and a social revolutionary of his time. An early feminist (he believed women could be teachers, and working women, even prostitutes, were not untouchable), animal liberator (that whole Temple thing), and champion of the poor and downtrodden. I often quip that I get along with Jesus just fine, but that it's his dad I have issues with. And would give a real piece of my mind to, if, um, given that chance.

Anyway, thanks for listening to my Easter rant. Please hug a bunny if you can this weekend, or donate to a rescue organization that provides homes to these fellow beings.

A peaceful and blessed Easter to you all! :)

please support me as a member of Team Vegan!

Yep, I'm helping Vegan Outreach raise funds this year, and need your support. As you know, information is key in getting folk to open their minds (and hopefully hearts) in the battle against animal use/abuse, and this organization does a terrific job in getting the word out. Since 2003 their leafleters have handed out booklets to over 7 million students through their Adopt A College program. You can help reach even more young people, and every dollar you donate will be MATCHED by other supporters. 

My goal is to raise at least $500 and to jumpstart the process I put in $100 of my own. Two anonymous donors who wanted to help each Team Vegan member reach a minimum level put in an additional $250 (how awesome!), so I'm already at $350 -- woot! I'm hoping though that blog readers will help raise the final $150, so if any of my blog posts have ever inspired, amused or enlightened, please consider showing me some love and support this great cause. I can easily be found on the Team Vegan page (recognize the familiar name and logo?) or you can skip to Have Gone Vegan directly.

Want to donate but not have your complete name visible for everyone to see? I hear ya, and valuing a bit of privacy as well, got around that obstacle by providing the first letter of my surname only. So whether you don't mind if the whole world knows how terrific you are, or if you'd rather be a bit more anonymous, please donate either way. Thirty readers donating $5, or fifteen donating $10, or ten donating $15, or five donating $30 -- any scenario would get us there! And, $500 would morph into $1000 through the matching program! :)

Thank you in advance for ANY and all help you're able to give. It's highly appreciated. 

Update: A very generous donation has been made by my pal Debbie, so the total raised so far has gone up to $450, which means that through the doubling process $900 will go towards the battle. Awesome! Therefore dear readers, I now humbly ask that ten of you donate $5, or five of you donate $10, or two donate $25 so that our sentient co-beings can count on $1000 being raised from this collective pool. I know we can do it! :)

Update #2: We have reached and even surpassed the goal! Thanks to gentle Harry and a lovely donor couple who wishes to remain anonymous (thank you all very much!), the fundraising amount now stands at $525 -- so $1050 will go towards raising awareness that ALL sentient beings matter. I'm really pleased, and because the goal has been reached I won't badger folk in every upcoming post (although I may issue a reminder of the campaign towards the middle and end of June), but feel free to contribute more to this worthwhile cause anytime you like. :)