Dairy, Pregnancy, Leather, and Newborns: What Are You Funding?
An earlier version of this post appeared in two parts on the previous blog. See also Deb’s recent “Tribute to Norman and Jake.”
Ice cream and cheese. “Quality” leather. Science. They all come together, in bloody, violent fashion, in the slaughterhouses where all animals exploited and killed for so-called food end up, the pregnant ones included. And do any of these — dairy-based cheese, dead-skin accessories, cheap science — justify any of the violence and injustices we perpetuate against our fellow animals, least of all fetuses being cut from the womb to have their blood excruciatingly drained or, alternatively, dying panicked, torturous deaths inside the womb while their mothers thrash and die too? Of course not. But these latter scenarios are a common, albeit rarely discussed, part of the dairy and beef industries as well as a part of how people get their “finest” leather.
In the last year or two, I ended up watching a video of a pregnant cow already stunned and hung upside down — and the video showed an apparently almost-full-term calf struggling inside and against the mother’s body, kicking in desperation, dying a horrible death inside the womb. Later came the image of that young calf’s presumably dead body tossed into a bin (though dying, but still living, calves may be tossed there as well).
This is one particular horror I’d previously failed to consider. Dairy cows especially (more than “beef” cows, that is, given that dairy cows are kept perpetually pregnant), like other female animals, may go to slaughter while pregnant if they become unprofitable before giving birth (e.g., because of mastitis) or if the producers decide to kill a bunch of cows even more prematurely than usual to save money when demand is down. And so while workers stun them, hang them upside down, cut open their throats to let the blood from their body drain out, cut off their legs, and pull off their skin, all that time, there is a calf inside them, fighting and dying a horrifying death. How soon in the process the calf inside dies likely varies according to how developed he or she was and how fast the slaughter process moves. In an “efficient” slaughterhouse, the calf could still be dying — dying but still living, still suffering terribly — at the time of her mother’s dismemberment and disembowelment.
A UK survey in the 1990s at one slaughterhouse found that, “of the slaughtered cows, 23.5 per cent were pregnant and 26.9 per cent of these were in the third trimester.” 23 percent were pregnant. That’s a lot. One percent — or even 1 calf — would be too many.
But it gets worse. In addition to the trauma of still being alive inside their mothers during the latter’s death, fetal calves may also be cut from their mother’s womb while still alive — so that their blood can be drained from their bodies for use in science, without anesthesia, for something called fetal bovine serum or fetal calf serum.
From the Australian Association for Humane Research:
After slaughter and bleeding of the cow at an abattoir, the mother’s uterus containing the calf fetus is removed during the evisceration process (removal of the mother’s internal organs) and transferred to the blood collection room. A needle is then inserted between the fetus’s ribs directly into its heart and the blood is vacuumed into a sterile collection bag. This process is aimed at minimizing the risk of contamination of the serum with micro-organisms from the fetus and its environment. Only fetuses over the age of three months are used otherwise the heart is considered too small to puncture.
The previous source was hesitant to say definitively whether (or how often) the calves are still alive during this process. But according to the following account (PDF), whether the calf is alive is not so questionable (emphasis mine):
The heart of the bovine fetus is functioning during the bleeding process via cardiac puncture. . . . The fetal heart must be beating in order to obtain an adequate harvest of fetalbovine serum production by means of cardiac puncture. Blood coagulates immediately upon death [17, 18]. . . .
It might be thought that the fetus dies at approximately the same time as its mother due to lack of oxygen supply to the placenta. However, since long it is known that the neonates and fetuses of animals are (very) resistant to hypoxia/ anoxia (lack of oxygen). . . .
The fact that the fetal heart is functioning during the cardiac puncture, indicates the fetus is still alive at the moment of the cardiac puncture - and therefore may experience pain because of the needle inserted into its heart, and because of terminal bleeding. As the fetus is never anaesthetised or stunned prior to the performance of a cardiac puncture for FBS harvest, it can be stated that FBS harvest by means of the method described above, represents an ethical problem which needs close consideration (→ 5, 6).
The author of this same thesis elsewhere quotes a former inspector for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Gene Erickson, as confirming this: “For all practical purposes, a fetal calf’s heart must be beating to obtain an adequate harvest for fetal calf serum production.” And I don’t understand why we would hesitate for a second to assume they suffer — if they’re alive, why wouldn’t this cause suffering? Think about it in human terms (because we are similar in all the ways that matter here). A woman who is 8 months pregnant dies. As she is dying or just after she dies, you cut the fetus out of her. You lay the baby on a cart, jab a needle into her heart, and start draining her blood out. Do we really need to debate whether that would cause the baby pain and suffering?
This is all pretty terrible, right? But anyone who is still eating animals, consuming dairy, and purchasing leather is funding these nightmarish practices. The dairy industry is not only unjust but cruel. Leather is cruel. They are as cruel as, if not more cruel than, the “meat” industry.
In fact, though no leather is free of attachments to cruelty, suffering, and death, the skin of these unborn calves who died these atrocious deaths is considered to make especially soft and “luxurious” leather and is valued for glove-making, for example. And of course, the unborn calves aren’t the only calves skinned for human fashion. The calves killed after birth by the dairy industry — veal calves — are skinned for the same purpose. The skins peeled off the bodies of both tortured veal calves and tortured unborn calves fetch a high price precisely because the babies’ skin is so soft and unblemished — that is, precisely because it is the skin of newborns. Calfskin is just what it says it is.
Vegetarian and meat-eating readers, I hope you’re starting to rethink your resistance to giving up not only flesh and eggs but dairy and other animal products too. Every time we think we know about all the cruelties and injustices involved, we learn about another dark and horrible aspect to animal agriculture. Who wants to be a part of — who wants to financially support — what happens to these calves? How do we justify it when we are merely choosing to be a part of it, when we can so easily choose not to be a part of it? (If you’ve not been convinced by words alone, see this graphic image gallery at Viva! I can’t imagine anyone seeing it and not being profoundly affected.)
And in addition to getting violence out of your diet, the next time you’re eyeing a pair of leather gloves or shoes or a leather bag or a leather wallet, you might ask yourself how much suffering, how much torture, how many lives, rather than how many dollars. Maybe you’ll picture these dead calves rather than yourself in the accessories made from their suffering, from their skins. And perhaps you’ll walk away rather than to the checkout counter.
—
Photo by lackac retrieved from stock.xchng
Stephanie Ernst
Marji
Kelly G.
Deb
Mary Martin
When anyone points out that “giving up dairy would be too difficult” I often point out the only difficulty is reaching more to the left in the refrigerator section to grab the almond milk.
I *still* find removing leather from my life has it’s roadblocks. I am a musician and several very expensive instrument cases are leather bound. We’re not talking the cases that kids carry to school – for instance my oboe case is worth $1000, and to replace it with a vegan alternative I had to spend $600. Doesn’t leave many funds lying around to replace the $800 sax case… It’s about choices, and I take full responsibility for the ones that I can do something about and the ones that I am still not in a position to remedy. Critics feel free to send me money to replace my remaining cases, but until then, it’s about practicality & ability.
Definition of “veganism” : [T]he word “veganism” denotes a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude — as far as is possible and practical — all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.[1]
No judgments here, Lisa.
Put your Oboe in any ordinary bag…
Or better still carry it proudly in your hand, bag-less… It is just a Thing.
Stand Up
Leather is Fur With a Shave
We’re not talking about “bags” here. Do you know what an instrument “case” is? I won’t explain if you don’t know. They aren’t “bags” like purses.
But as I said before, I’m taking donations toward replacing the ones I can’t afford on my own. I’ll give you my mailing address if you’re willing to help.
Ughghg. After 3 years of veganism I thought that I had heard everything. Logically I *knew* all of these facts but, Stephanie, you have a way of writing that just cuts right to my heart. I am SO glad you started this website so you could share the horrors of animal use with us.
I’m posting this to facebook, people deserve to know the pain and suffering their vanity causes.
TheVegasVegan,
when people ask me for advice on what they should do with their old animal stuff, I simply tell to not call themselves vegan until they have rid themselves of it. I also suggest that they tell others that they’re close to being vegan or would like to become one. You can say “Although a lot of my stuff and habits are vegan friendly, I am not vegan because being vegan means to abstain from practices and products involving all forms of nonhuman animal exploitation. ” The reason why I suggest not calling yourself a vegan is not out of judgment but for educational purposes so that other curious and inspired nonvegans get the correct message.
@Lisa: I strongly disagree with Chastity. Arguments related to classism, purity, and so on have been going on elsewhere around the vegan Web as well, though I stopped reading them days ago to keep my blood pressure from blowing my body into a million tiny pieces. I find it infuriating that so many think they can make things black and white, without context, and create definitions for everyone else. As I’ve said elsewhere, unless the vegans who are so intent on telling other vegans they’re not allowed to use the word are okay with people even more pure than they are deciding they can’t be vegans either because of all the ways they use and benefit from ubiquitous animal products, animal testing, etc. in our society, I find these purity judgments ridiculous and completely unproductive.
Being vegan isn’t just about using or not using. Intent matters. What you can do matters. It’s not a goddamn purity contest.
Thank you!
I consider myself vegan, however I still have some leather and wool clothing/accessories which I continue to use. I am a student from a working class background with almost no financial support from my parents, so the idea of getting rid of clothing that still does the job, just to spend money to buy new ones is totally out of the question for me. Also, the idea of throwing these things out seems ridiculous, because it is then WASTING the products of this already cruel practice.
Classism is something that I have become really aware of recently in activist communities, and it is good to hear that other people are talking about it =)
Stephanie, by the way, you wrote a fantastic article.
HOWEVER, veganism is not about being pure, classist and whatever other predictable mud slinging. It’s funny that you seem to believe that there’s an elitist mentality behind genuine vegan advocacy. It’s about being consistent and explicit. It is also a social justice movement.
I don’t undermine nonvegan individuals but surely you undermine their interest and the efforts of animal advocates such as myself. It is black and white. For those who want to keep calling upon a gray area are those who subconsciously feel guilty of their own consumption–be it munching on a BK veggie burger, adorning themselves in the non-animal tested line offered by L’Oreal, etc.
I also made it very clear that it was not a judgment I was placing on The Vegas Vegan. The easiest thing that she can do at the moment since she is unable to pay for vegan goods, is to simply refrain from the title. It’s that easy. Should she throw out those items? Ideally yes but she cannot due to financial reasons. Her heart’s in the right place but for the sake of EDUCATIONAL purposes, it is best not to unintentionally morally confuse the curious and interested.
Haven’t you seen the results of such activism? We have people stating that they are vegan for health reasons. Veganism primarily focuses on nonhuman animals. Not the secondary benefits of a plant based diet. This is fact and if you want to dispute this, you may as well dispute this with the inventor of the word, Donald Watson (who also started The Vegan Society). We have “vegans” who think they can occasionally eat fish. We have people who think that it is acceptable for vegans to consume oysters. This isn’t because people are stupid. This is because the person who called themselves “vegan” is displaying habits and mentalities that do not convey the seriousness and urgency of nonhuman animal justice. Once again, I am not saying that Vegas Vegan is a shitty activist but it’s important that we are aware of the repercussions of our activism.
I’m not wasting my time hashing this out in yet another comment thread. My positions will be outlined pretty clearly in a post to come. For now, I’ll say that this — “it’s important that we are aware of the repercussions of our activism” — is painfully ironic.
I agree with Stephanie – it is all about intent. I, like so many others, do what I can to function in a society that relies heavily on animal agriculture. Can anyone be a true, pure, vegan, in this world? I doubt it. We do our best, we try our best, and you know what? I find it VERY IMPORTANT that I tell people that I do still have some leather around, we’re not perfect beings just because we like the word “vegan”. And I think it does a serious injustice to make “vegan” an exclusive club that only those who have found the magic path that includes no animals.
I am *not* vegan for so-called “health benefits”.
By the way, I also invite you to read “Invasion of the Movement Snatchers.” This is EXACTLY the bickering that agri industry wants.
http://www.satyamag.com/oct06/laveck.html
Um, the “bickering” you yourself started by coming to this thread to tell a vegan she has to stop calling herself vegan until she has more disposable income? Yeaaaah.
I’m perfectly aware and admiring of James’s essays — this one and others. I don’t need the schooling.
Chastity – I’d be very happy to accept donations toward the replacement of my remaining instrument cases, so that I can continue to use the word “vegan” in my life.
Here’s the ones I want:
Bam Trekking Alto Sax Cases Black
Bam Trekking Double Clarinet Case Black
http://www.fluteworld.com/index.php?action=prod&wart=13939&ppk=case
I’ll give you my mailing address if you’re interested. Thanks.
“Being vegan isn’t just about using or not using. Intent matters. What you can do matters. It’s not a goddamn purity contest.”
Just because you intend to do something or to be something, it does not mean you are. And no, it’s not a goddamn purity contest like you assume but it is a principle and a social justice movement that serves as the antidote to speciesism. It is action based. “Do I say not as I do” need not apply to the rights of nonhuman animals. Like all social justice movements, they call for consistency. Using nonhuman individuals for pleasure, profit and convenience is not vegan nor is it consistent to the vegan principle. This is fact. There’s no need to get offended over facts. It also does not take the rights of nonhumans seriously. Desperately clinging to moral confusion is doing no favors for the nonhumans you claim to be fighting for. As we wouldn’t go around using items encased in human skin, as vegans–human animals who eschew products, practices involving nonhuman individuals–we would not find it acceptable to use items encased in nonhuman skin. Why is this debatable? I find this patently absurd–especially for someone who devotes countless essays on the topic of nonhuman animal oppression.
“Can anyone be a true, pure, vegan, in this world? I doubt it. We do our best, we try our best, and you know what? I find it VERY IMPORTANT that I tell people that I do still have some leather around, we’re not perfect beings just because we like the word “vegan”. And I think it does a serious injustice to make “vegan” an exclusive club that only those who have found the magic path that includes no animals.”
When one claims to be vegan, they are immediately a representative of the movement. It also makes them an educator. Is it an exclusive club? No. It would be a serious injustice to nonhumans to misrepresent them for the sake of gaining followers. If we want followers, it’s important to tell them the truth and let them know that it is provocative and that it may send their defenses up. But it is what it is.
The concept of doing your best is not about saying “fuck it, we can’t really prevent it from happening, so why not?” For instance, tires are not suitable for vegans yet they are a part of every mode of transportation we can think of. So what do you do? First step: look for the alternative. Second step: obtain the alternative. If there is none, you did the best you could do. However, in the instance with instrument cases, since you cannot afford them at the moment, the cheapest thing you can do is refrain from the title until you can. After all, there is such a thing as accidental and intentional harm. In this case, it is intentional. Even if it were recycled leather, it does not mean that it is okay. I will admit that you haven’t paid to kill anyone BUT you still create a demand by endorsing nonhuman animal usage–which is counterproductive. Say someone is looking to you for advice on becoming vegan but then they see that you have leather covered instrument cases. They will then be misinformed and think that it’s okay to go out and use leather because their “vegan friend uses leather.” Who wins? Certainly not the animals in this case. You can try and seek validation for the occasional nonhuman consumption as much as you like–and it is still consumption, regardless of whether it is rare, occasional or often– but as I said earlier, it is not vegan to do so.
Then I think the only solution is that you call yourself a “pure-vegan” instead of stripping the rest of us of our ability to use the word.
I’m at a loss here… but I’m hoping you can give me a solution. I’ll need a job where there is no use of animal products, no direct conflict with the vegan way of life, something that I am qualified to do with my degree…. something near where I live because I have no intention at all in buying vegan tires which means I’ll have to walk…. This is complicated to say the least. But I’m open to a solution – as are, I’m sure, the rest of the so-called vegans here.
What’s wrong with, “I’m vegan except for a few leather instrument cases I own that I haven’t had the money to replace yet”? It’s not like one can’t provide more information than the word “vegan,” can’t qualify it, can’t provide some exegesis in normal conversation–and doing so doesn’t necessarily demand many words or otherwise entail derailing a discussion.
Hello there, I could not find a means to contact you, and so I really hope that you see this comment. I own a website about leather purses, and wondered if you would like to exchange links with me. I have entered my contact address if you choose to get in touch. Thanks.
i hate seeing animals being killed and we are supporting people to do by eatingg meat so STOP EATING MEAT