A recent article in The Daily World suggested that we “learn flexibility with meat eating.”  The scenario posited was this: imagine you have decided to go vegetarian, have tossed out all meat, poultry and fish, and stocked up on plant foods. Then you are invited out to a romantic steak dinner. Do you throw your ethics out the window or decline the invitation?  According to proponents of flexitarianism, you can hold on to you ethics and your steak by being flexitarian.  For anyone who is an omnivore, this might seem reasonable.  But the real kicker for vegans who care about animals is this: Bruce Friederich, Vice President of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is right there saying:

“If people influenced by health consequently cut back on fish and meat consumption, that helps animals. If two people cut their meat in half, it helps as much as one person going completely vegetarian.”*

Suddenly, Flexitarianism now has the PeTA stamp of approval, so it must be ethical, right?  First of all, vegetarianism does not improve the situation for animals; in fact, it may exacerbate things. How many newborn chicks die for the eggs, and how many babies (calves) die for the milk, cheese and yogurt that a vegetarian consumes?  Then there is the horrific life of a dairy animal, which includes rape, long hours of standing, mastitis, and hugely enlarged udders which become encrusted with sores.  If you have ever seen a video of those newborn calves taken from their mothers, you are not likely to ever forget it. And then there is the ultimate trip to the abattoir for the calf and mother alike, of course. Telling the public that going vegetarian or flexitarian helps animals sends a very muddled message.

This seems to be a new position for PeTA, whose director of research said in a Newsweek article circa 2009:

“Given the environmental, cruelty and health impact of a meat-based diet, going vegan is best, going vegetarian is good, and being a flexitarian is like smoking two packs of cigarettes instead of ten, beating one pig down the slaughter ramp instead of two, and pouring a pint of gasoline down a drain instead of pouring down a gallon.”**

Mark Bittman, noted author of Food Matters suggests much the same. After all, it is just too hard to go vegan, right? Usually those making that statement have never even tried; they are looking for an easy way out. But it is no easy way for the animals that must endure horrendous lives of illness, discomfort, pain, and misery. It does not help those that must suffer the terror and callous treatment at the end of the line at the slaughterhouse. And the truth is, there are thousands upon thousands of vegans who beg to differ: we find it extremely easy to be vegan. For most of us, one bit of information about the lives of animals, one video of the slaughterhouse, and we were done. It was easy, because every time we think of animal products, we see those images and we refuse to budge. We will NOT participate.

Earlier this year, Wayne Pacelle offered the following:

“It doesn’t take an all-or-nothing approach to make a major impact, and giving customers more meat-free meal choices will improve health, reduce the impact of global warming, and help animals,” Pacelle said.***

Pacelle, CEO of the Humane Society of the United States, is not known for taking all-or-nothing approaches to protecting animals. HSUS has owned stock in some of the worst animal exploitative industries, allowing them to profit from the consumption and slaughter of animals. This fact alone weakens any moral stance Mr. Pacelle could take.  Coupled with the fact that many if not most HSUS members consume animal products themselves, this appears to be one very flexible animal protection organization: for some of the animals, some of the time. While Mr. Pacelle is himself a vegan, he must as CEO of a large animal welfare organization protect the donations which come is to the tune of millions of dollars per year.

Standing in opposition to child abuse, human trafficking, rape, incest and domestic violence somehow does not make a person fanatical. Standing in opposition to abject cruelty and torture of animals does. Call me fanatical, but all this talk of flexibility and flexitarianism offends me, coming from supposed animal rights folks. Sounds like a lack of spine to me.

*“Learning flexibility with meat eating,” Daily World, July 14, 2010

**”Part-time Vegetarians”, Newsweek, September 29, 2008, by Karen Springen

***“Compass Launches Landmark ‘Flexitarian’ Initiative”, HSUS website

When I heard that Moby was softening his message, I grew concerned. I am aware that most celebrities do not understand how their support of institutions like the Humane Society (HSUS) amd PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) are counter-productive to ending animal exploitation. Moby does a lot for the vegan community; he donates music to upcoming filmmakers and makes pro-vegan videos for YouTube. He advocates for veganism. He is talented, creative and likable. By his own admission, he has decided that he was too “militant,” too strident in promoting veganism, and it was turning his friends off. In his new book, Gristle, written along with Miyun Park, he presents a series of essays and lets the audience decide for themselves. No more preaching for Moby, just the facts.

The first essay was by Branden Brazier, author of Thrive Fitness, Thrive Nutrition, triathlete, and vegan advocate. So far, so good – I was glad to see Brazier included. He advocates not only for veganism but for high-density nutrition and brings some often overlooked foods to the fore. He puts an emphasis on the recovery phase of training and has achieved great personal and financial success in so doing. He promotes fitness from a vegan perspective – and lives what he preaches. There is Christine Chavez and Julie Chavez Rodriguez, who make a case for the workers in the factory farm industries, most of whom have coughs, chronic bronchitis and/or respiratory problems due to the toxic air quality in which they work.  The workers die in horrific ways,as do the animals they kill: sliced by the hog-splitter saw, death by falls into manure pits, crushed by the grinder. Amputations. Crushed bones. Mental stress. A disassembly line that brutalizes animals in mechanized horror while spewing blood, disease and depression on the workers and their families.  Important things to know about an industry, indeed.

But other authors are not quite as hopeful. John Mackay, founder and CEO of Whole Foods Markets, Incorporated – a man who himself makes money from the sale of animal flesh; Wayne Pacelle, President and CEO of HSUS, an organization that owns stock in some of the worst animal exploitation industries and benefits financially from animal exploitation; Paul and Phyllis Willis, owner of the Willis Free-Range Pig Farms, also financially benefitting from the exploitation and commodification of animals. If this is the new Moby, I would prefer the old — the one that believed in veganism and would not hesitate to speak out for it.

Despite the fact that this book does not promote veganism, the book has lots of statistics and information easily assembled for the use of the reader. The cover has an outline of a steer carved into those dotted lines which so often delineate cuts of “beef,” only this time they say things like: health, animals, workers, environment, global hunger, zoonotic diseases, climate change, communities, taxpayer cost. It is a book that may attract someone to pick it up and that might become more informed about what is going on with animal agriculture. I found the book helpful, if disappointing.

When one’s friends call on us to sacrifice our core beliefs, maybe it is time to get some new friends.

As a young teenager, I used to surf the coast of Southern California. My vision was poor, so I learned to feel the currents of water beneath me. When there was a light drawing back, it meant a swell was coming and I needed to get paddling. If I delayed, I would miss the ride, and if I was too fast, I would have the wave crash down on me and would wipe out. Lately, I have been feeling a shift in the currents beneath me once again, only this time I do not plan to miss it.

PETA’s Failed Policies

There have been rumblings on the vegan blogosphere about some of the latest new lows reached by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.  Their pie-in-the-face disrespect to a person in authority seems contraindicated when requesting more respect for other beings.  It is assaultive and inappropriate behavior not becoming adults with serious intentions. Then there is the full frontal nudity of a young woman in their State of the Union Undress (deliberately not linked here) – disrespectful not only to women but also to our elected leaders. Even Ingrid Newkirk‘s response (A pragmatic fight for animal rights) to Victor Schonfeld’s article, Five fatal flaws of animal rights activism, in which she defends “silly antics” as being part of animal rights activism misses the mark by a mile.  While Ms. Newkirk may be well-intentioned, her behavior is the same old tired tactics that have been failing to do anything but increase the PETA budget and gain some press for many years.  At every turn, Ms. Newkirk sells out the animals and any chance to show respect for their lives, whether it is by cooperating with fast food enterprises that kill animals for food and profit, or partnering with corporations by buying stock in animal exploitation schemes. Ms. Newkirk never draws a line in the sand, never acts as if she believes what she says that animals are not ours to use; she uses and exploits them freely to draw attention and financial support to her organization while they remain in a living hell. I have noticed lately that when an outrageous behavior occurs in the news, such as the recent intrusion into Senator Mary Landrieus’ office by men dressed as phone company repairmen, the allusion on a recent MSNBC news discussion was to liken them to “PETA protesters.” Meanwhile, only 7 animals were saved in PETA’s “shelter” in 2008, while nearly 2,000 were killed.  With millions of dollars in annual income, it seems impossible that those lives were valued, because with the will to save them, they could have. If PETA wants ethical treatment for animals, they should begin by delivering some themselves.

HSUS Sells Out to Flexitarians

HSUS recently got into the fray, decrying the criticism from abolitionists this organization has been receiving.  While HSUS does not stoop to media madness in the same vein as PETA, they still have quite a few things in common with them and appear to be becoming more and more aligned with similar policies. While Wayne Pacelle is a hired hand whose position requires him to support the policies of his agency, unlike Ms. Newkirk who is a founder of hers,  it is still his choice to do so.  Reportedly he is a vegan; however, his organization does not support veganism to any significant degree. They have recently sold out by also partnering with fast food companies that kill animals for profit and joined in a “flexitarian” campaign with a major food service corporation. While it is admirable that this corporation is providing more meat-free meals, it is a far cry from HSUS taking the stand that all animal commodification is not to be tolerated. There are many vegan businesses that HSUS could profile; they deliberately chose a corporation that will allow their supporters to feel the warm fuzzies while consuming animal products. With friends like these, who needs enemies? If no one in an organization called HUMANE is willing to say commodifying animals is unacceptable, one would assume that, like PETA, HSUS considers the commodification of animals acceptable practice, at least in the immediate sense. Most would not deny that HSUS does some good; indeed, with millions annually, they have ample opportunity.  Stopping dogfighting is a noble idea, but doing so while participating in eating and commodifying other animals is not.  In the big picture, their policies are failing the bulk of animals yet they lack the moral courage to take a stand on the animals’ behalf.

It is interesting that Gary Francione has done more to change attitudes without any organization and without any budget than all of the high profile organizations put together.  Neither Wayne Pacelle nor Ingrid Newkirk are willing to debate Gary Francione, either. Put simply, he has remained consistent and has not sold out. So please do not write a check to any organization to make yourself feel better about the plight of animals without reading the paper – the news is not good for most animals on any given day. And despite what  you may be told, things appear to be getting much worse.  But within the vegan community, things are growing bigger, too, and a swell is developing. There are a number of individuals who will not sell out, who are quietly working hard to improve the status of animals, to promote peace, to save the earth, and who draw a line in the sand — animals are not commodities, not “things” to be modified and abused for commercial gain, profit, research or entertainment.  Recent reads of letters such as Mr. Schonfeld’s reveal numerous abolitionists agreeing about failed welfarist policies; letters in response to Ms. Newkirk’s letter offer contempt for that agency’s tactics.

This is not to lump all animal organizations into one.  There are some good organizations out there doing some very good work with limited financing.  They support veganism, allow space for ethical discussion, support no-kill shelters and spay-neuter programs, and work to improve and preserve habitat so there will be wildlife left for the future.  Organizations exist that provide sanctuary to homeless animals who would otherwise be destroyed. Working for justice and respect for life, promoting non-violence, and building a vegan community of support are all important work.  There are those that take in homeless animals and try to find homes for them. There are companies producing some excellent vegan products and some wonderful human beings developing innovative ideas for the future.  But even without that kind of structure or vision, each of us individually can reach out to change attitudes.  It is through individual activism and outreach, especially in this era of the internet, that real change will take place. Keep challenging those who harm the movement by behaving in violent or disrespectful ways. Become part of the rumblings, and let the volume grow. Make disrespect for other forms of life totally unacceptable.

A vegan tsunami is coming; add your voice.