provocative? or simply the truth?

''[…] How removed from the screaming crowd of the dog pit is the laughing group around the summer steak barbecue?'' - Gary L. Francione (2009)

This quote I came across reading The Discursive Representation of Nonhuman Animals in a Culture of Denial by Karen J. Morgan and Matthew Cole (for further reading: Morgan, Karen J.; Cole, Matthew. Humans and Other Animals: Critical Perspectives. ed. / Bob Carter; Nickie Charles. London: Palgrave, 2011. p. 112-132.) and  since then I think about it all the time. I can't quote it i real life a lot, as it's quite offensive to people eating meat and I'm not naturally that much of a provocative person, but without trying to offend anyone: Isn't it true? 

Of course, attending and enjoying a dogfight is banned by society while being part of a get together centered around a barbecue is a norm, but besides from that - where is the difference? 

When someone enjoys the violence of two dogs tearing each other apart and another person enjoys the conjoined preparation and consumption of animal body parts that were slaughtered for mere enjoyment of humans (as are these dogs slaughtering each other for the same reason), is that not pretty much the same?

At first I considered the quote very provocative myself, but the longer i thought (and still think) about it, the more I agree. Still, this is not meant to be an offense to those who eat meat! I simply consider the mentioned quote to show the ambivalence our relationship to animals holds. The quote was used by Morgan and Cole for that reason also and there was no valuation or judgement in their text, for it is a scientific essay on the matter of todays culture of denial when it comes to the treatment of certain groups of animals. 

So: 
''[…] How removed from the screaming crowd of the dog pit is the laughing group around the summer steak barbecue?'' - Gary L. Francione (2009)

carnism and sexism

In the field of human-animal studies there is quite a wide field of sociologist exploring how the consumption of animals is relates to masculinity. In fact the number of female vegans and vegetarians is a lot higher compared to the number of males. This has various reasons, but is not what this post will explore.
Instead I will compare the the N's that Melanie Joy names as the main arguments for legalization of meat consummation to the same N's that have been used to legalize a patriarch society in the past.
I will not take quite the path Melanie Joy takes in the second chapter in her book to make this visible, but simply argument in the same manner for both carnism and sexism (which in reality I obviously both oppose).


Normal, Necessary, Natural

"It is normal to eat meat, because it has always been like this. History shows, that for the past two thousand years mankind has been eating meat."
is like saying
"It is normal, that men have more power and their opinion is valued higher, they are simply more important than women, because history shows, that until the feminist movement started it had been like this for over thousand years."
Exceptions in history can be found for both (women holding power / vegans+vegetarians) as they always existed, but the illogical argumentation of "it's always been like this, it must be right = it's normal" never mentions them.

"It is necessary to eat meat, because if you don't you get sick and also you will lack the protein for building up muscles. Anything else would be unhealthy."
is like saying (and this is in fact the argumentation that was used for denying women the right to vote)
"It is necessary that men can vote and women aren't aloud to, because their brains are designed differently and such a complex task that would demand understanding of various political matters is simply to much for them."
Both has obviously been proved wrong! And as a fun fact: Germanys strongest man Patrick Baboumian is a vegan.

"It is natural to eat meat, because we can. Also it is natural to farm animals, because we are smarter than them."
is like saying
"It is natural that the male status should be over the female, as most men are physically stroger than women. So as oppression of women through men is possible, that legalizes it, because it must have been intended."
As you have surely noticed this argumentation (just like the ones above) lacks the kind of logic a clear mind could and would ever trust.


While both argumentations seem equally silly sexism (at least as drastic as in this argumentation) is mainly overcome, while carnism has just been named. And it is not only sexism, carnism can be compared with, also there were various attempts through history to legalize racism and speciesism by there advocates in similar ways.
After knowing this, do YOU really want to continue to promote carnism and rase your children to believe in eating meat by arguing it is necessary, normal and natural?

reasons for veganism/vegetarianism part 1

1. Meat makes you sick.

"The vast majority, perhaps 80 to 90 perent of all cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and other forms of degenerative illness can be prevented, at least until very old age, simply by adopting a plant-based diet."
- T. Colin Campell, Ph.D., M.S., Professor Emeritius of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University

This quote was used by Melanie Joy to show how inconsequent the public health departments work, when they force labels on to cigaret packages (which itself is a good thing in my opinion), while not demanding labels on meat.

She then gives examples what those labels might state, such as "Surgeon General's Warning: Eating Meat Can Increase Your Risk of Dying from Heart Disease by 50 Percent." (quoted from Why we love dogs, eat pigs and wear cows, first published in 2010 by Red Wheel Weiser, pg. 92) or even more dramatically: "Surgeon General's Warning: Eating Meat Can Increase Your Risk of Developing Colon Cancer by 300 Percent [...]" (also quoted from Why we love dogs, eat pigs and wear cows, first published in 2010 by Red Wheel Weiser, pg. 92).

With saying this I like to address those people, who aren't responding to the more obvious reasons for not eating meat just like how the animals are treated and (also the fact that they are) killed. I made the experience that those people are at least concerned about their own health, even so they are still too deeply in the carnistic state of self-protecting denial.
But what this also demonstrates: We are constantly lied to by doctors and nutritionists. Maybe they don't even know better, but more likely they know that most people wouldn't accept the suggestion of simply changing their eating habits and of course they make much more money of us, if they can make us buy expensive medication...


2. Vegan = delicious

People often tell me: "But if your vegan, you can't eat anything!". I usually tell them the following: "Well, what do you eat now? Your staple foods are most likely (if you live just a little bit healthy ;) ) noodles, rice and potatos. These are all vegan. So for my main meal I usually eat one of those with vegetables, as part of a soup or stew or with a sauce. It's not that different to what you eat!".  And just to have mentioned it, there is a wide range of "burgers", "sausages" and such made out of soy or bean curd, in case you feel like that also needs to be part of you meals.

Usually most people then agree that a vegetarian diet is at least possible, but still not a vegan one, as that would mean no chocolate or cheese (of course no other products made out of milk, no egg, no honey, etc. - but chocolate and cheese is what many feel like they would crave for most). But what they don't know is that in fact most chocolate with a cacao percentage around 75% or higher is naturally vegan. Of course there are also other products that can replace milk chocolate. When it comes to cheese there are also products that can serve as substitutions, actually there are products replacing most kinds of cheese, so if you feel like having lasagna, thats also possible for vegans! Just put spinach in instead of the meat and put soy-cheese shreds on top.

The pictures you can see in this article here are of course of vegan dishes and I'm sorry if they aren't that mouthwatering to you. I have to admit I'm really not the best nor the most patient cook and these where just my main meals for the past few days. So if you check out some vegan websites, there are really good recipes and more appealing pictures ;) If you're on facebook there are also various groups exchanging vegan recepies. You can make vegan brownies, muffins, pancakes, cakes and pretty much anything else you can think of! Often it's not even a bit harder than making them the way you are used to now.

Just try out some stuff!

And in case you would like to become a vegan, but you're not sure how to do it then just try to be vegan for a week and then go back to before. Then live vegan for another week some time later and you'll see how easy it really is and how much you will benefit from it!

CARNISM - a violent ideology

Recently I attended a lecture that Melanie Joy, who is a professor of psychology and sociology at the University of Massachusetts, gave on her new book WHY WE LOVE DOGS, EAT PIGS AND WEAR COWS - An INTRODUCTION to CARNISM. Being a vegan myself, a dog owner and a sociology student especially interested in the field of human-animal studies, I was deeply moved by her (not exactly scientific, instead a more politically influenced) presentation on the matter. 

After reading her book, which I recommend to EVERYONE, I felt like more people should know about the violent ideology that Melanie Joy named carnsim. In this blog I would like to deal with this concept, but also promote veganism, vegetarism and the animal-rights movement. 

For starter I would like to introduce the concept very briefly quoting Melanie Joy. The quote is from an interview she gave in 2010 (full interview here = http://our-compass.org/2010/10/09/my-conversation-with-melanie-joy-on-why-we-love-dogs-eat-pigs-and-wear-cows/ ) : 

"Carnism is a violent ideology that enables humane people to participate in inhumane practices without realizing what they’re doing. The tenets of carnism run counter to the core values of most people; most of us would not willingly support unnecessary violence toward other sentient beings. So carnism, like other violent ideologies, must employ a set of defense mechanisms which operate on both a social and psychological level to ensure the participation of the populace; without popular support, the system would collapse. 

The primary defense of the system is invisibility, and the primary way the system remains invisible is by remaining unnamed: if we don’t name it, we can’t see it, and if we can’t see it we can’t challenge or question it. 
The system also defends itself by teaching us to justify eating animals, by promoting what I refer to as the Three Ns of Justification: eating animals is normal, natural, and necessary. (Not surprisingly, these same arguments have been used to justify other violent ideologies as well.) There are many other carnistic defenses, but all defenses serve the same purpose: to “numb” us, psychologically and emotionally, when it comes to eating (certain) animals. Carnism disconnects us from the truth of our experience, blocking our awareness and shutting down our empathy."

(quoted, Melanie Joy 2010, http://our-compass.org/2010/10/09/my-conversation-with-melanie-joy-on-why-we-love-dogs-eat-pigs-and-wear-cows/ ) 

Reading her book, informing myself further and thinking about this has troubled my sleep and made me rethink many of my habits and choices. I believe carnsim is no better than sexism or racism and it is the responsibility of our generation, my generation, to face and overcome this threat to our moralistic wellbeing. Living by the morals we promote and not denying that we act against them has been an empowering experience for me and many others I have spoken to about this matter. 

If I can only reach out to a single person through writing this blog, it will have served its purpose fully. 

Start questioning! It is past time we do!