Giving Up On Vegetarianism
Calm your nerves, I’m not giving up on veganism.
I am giving up on vegetarianism. This diet that espouses kindness but involves egregious animal abuse. I have a caveat – I don’t want to alienate anyone who is sincere in their efforts to cause less harm. A vegetarian diet, when used as a stepping stone to a vegan diet, can only be viewed as a good thing. If that is the path you are taking, or you are trying to be kinder to animals by modifying your diet the best you can, more power to you. I am not judging you, the person, but I am judging the idea that vegetarianism is, by necessity, “less cruel” than some omnivorous diets and, more importantly, that just being vegetarian is morally acceptable in terms of animal welfare.
But if you think vegetarianism is the end all, be all for showing compassion to nonhumans – reconsider.
I stopped eating meat when I was thirteen. I kept consuming dairy products and eggs. I contributed to the suffering of countless nonhumans. My shift in thinking occurred on a dairy farm when I helped a cow give birth. I was 22. When I saw what my behavior contributed to, the separation of mother and child, dairy products? Gone. No way in hell was I going to be a part of an industry that relies on maternal deprivation to thrive.
So I am not perfect. I get that.
That said.
Vegetarianism relies on a myth of kindness. It suggests that by not eating the bodies of nonhumans, but by consuming their milk and eggs, we are not harming the animal.
The egg industry is one of the cruelest. With the exception of pregnant sows, no other species endures the intense confinement of a hen on a battery or cage-free operation. A hen in a cage has between 67-72″ of space. Stand up. Measure a circle around your feet that almost, but not quite, touches the tip of your toes and your heel. That is your life. For two years. A hen in a cage-free operation has twice that space, about 144″ – maybe you could even stretch your arms in a comparable human living area. But you’d always bump into the person next to you. Then there is the de-beaking. And the male chicks, the nearly 200 million killed the day they are born. There is the slaughter. Chickens – the most killed species – are exempt from federal slaughter laws and most state slaughter laws. They can be killed with any method and it is legal. From day one, the life of a hen on an average egg farm is as awful, if not more so, than the cow, pig, sheep, turkey, goat or chicken raised for their flesh. Eating eggs, by definition, causes more animal suffering than eating a cow. Do neither, I’d say.
Unless it is absolutely imperative to your survival, eggs are superfluous and unnecessary. I know there are ethical gray areas, but I’m addressing the black-and-white ethics of industrial and profit-making egg production.
To anyone who consumes dairy products, attend a livestock auction. In California, the number one dairy state, you can visit a large auctionyard on almost any day of the week and encounter the living by-products of the dairy industry. Frightened “spent” cows, udders caked in grime and mud and dragging far, much too far, from their bodies. Day-old calves, the boys who don’t produce milk. They will nurse off your fingers, suckling and searching for what is by nature’s creed theirs – milk. You will hear the cries the calves make, the screams for mothers miles away. And your heart, I can guarantee this, will shatter a little more when the cows – who have never nursed their own calves – cry back, trying with all their might to comfort these orphans. To sit in the arena, you will feel alien as parents bring children, as people stare and bid by the pound or calf on living, feeling beings.
Vegetarianism contributes to the immense suffering of nearly 400 million egg-laying hens and 8 million dairy cows and four million male calves and 200 million male chicks in the United States alone.
It should never be the end goal to causing less harm.
If you aspire to cause less suffering, start simply be eating fewer animal products. Then stop eating them all together. Most human beings can thrive on a vegan diet. Most human beings do not need animal products of any kind to survive. It is admirable that anyone would commit to an ethos that extends respect and compassion to non humans. But as a movement committed to ending speciesism and oppression of farmed animals, I think we – as its representatives – must encourage the complete phase-out of animal products and stop encouraging vegetarianism as if it is free of suffering, as if it is less harmful to the animal as eating the animal. The end game for nearly every single farmed animal is slaughter long before their natural lifespan runs its course. Cows and calves, hens and male chicks on dairies and egg farms are no exception.
Stephanie Ernst
Marji
Kelly G.
Deb
Mary Martin
Would you ever allow me to share a story with your blog? I am trying to spread the fever in helping and loving on families that are not doing so well right now and I figure the more touching stories I could share the better.
Much love,
Chenzo
Marji, as always a compelling & articulate piece about why we do what we do.
My transition to veganism (from lacto-vegetarian – I didn’t eat eggs) wasn’t at first driven by the ethics of it all. But as I phased dairy out of my diet & learned more about why other people were doing it, too, I felt myself compelled to pass along the word. My path wasn’t always clear in the beginning, but now I assuredly put one foot in front of the other and make well informed choices every day of my life.
I agree with most of what you say, but not all eggs and dairy products that come from animals that are abused.
I didn’t consume eggs for many years before I found out about free range. Now I only eat eggs that come from my friend’s very happy chickens.
Because I’m lactose-intolerant, I do not drink milk, but do consume some dairy in the form of butter or cheese from time to time. However, there are many local grass fed dairy choices here. I grew up across the street from a dairy farm and am well aware of the disgusting conditions some cows exist in. However, not all or mistreated or are all calves taken at a young age from their mothers.
Not trying to argue, but just remind others that this isn’t as cut and dry an issue as it seems.
What do they do with the male calves? How do the cows get pregnant? What do they do with the cows when they are no longer able to produce milk efficiently? Where do your friends’ hens come from? A facility that also crushes male chicks to death? What do they do with the hens when they can no longer lay eggs (= after 2 years)? Why are they, and you, in the first place, so obsessed about stealing milk from the calves and stealing eggs from the hens? After answering those questions, do you still think there exists such a thing as humane farming?
Are animals, in your opinion, only here for humans to use? Don’t they deserve the right not to be used as property?
Eggs and milk are highly harmful for human health and their taste is not exclusive to them. So why insist on exploiting animals?
@Seymour — Ditto.
My question is why do humans think so little of animals? Why don’t more of us feel remorse for the systematic domination forced on the lives of animals? It’s a corrosive process that has robbed them of their lives and ruined what remains of our humanity. Debate their suffering from dusk till dawn, but I think we owe animals whom we have enslaved for centuries much, much more. It’s time we didn’t dole out the bare minimum of what we think is acceptable humane treatment for them. The time is long overdue to ask, What about their everyday joyful experiences, sense of exploration and discovery, learning, and freedom from human-induced terror? What about their free will?
Definitely ditto to Seymour, sundog — and to you. Yes, corrosive in robbing animals of their dignity and their freedom and their lives, and corrosive in robbing humans of their compassion, the very quality that makes our own lives worth living. We can’t honestly say we are not terrorists if we’re participating in terrorizing and terrifying these innocent ones, can we?
What you say, sundog, about animals’ “everyday joyful experiences” reminds me of Jonathan Balcombe’s book “The Exultant Ark: A Pictorial Tour of Animal Pleasure,” which comes out in May 2011. Check out http://jonathanbalcombe.com to find out more.
Hi Hope,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Of course not all farms are created equal. But all profit-making farms have a bottom line. On dairy farms, that bottom line is milk. There are an exceedingly small number of farms that do not a) separate calf from cow within the first 72 hours; b) socially isolate young heifer calves in hutches; c) send male calves to slaughter; or d) sell cows to slaughter.
Which I think misses the point a little bit. The milk of a cow is for a growing calf, not for a human being. It is an unnecessary nutrient for human survival. For me, it always boils down to this: When given the choice between causing more harm and less harm, I have a moral imperative to do the latter. It is my mantra. Not consuming dairy causes less harm to the animals, environment and my overall health (the first two are guarantees, the last one certainly varies).
As to chickens, I think rescued birds can make wonderful companion animals. Much like I could care less if people knit stuff from their dog or cat’s shed hair, I find nothing unethical about SHARING the eggs. This means that so long as the chickens are receiving enough calcium and protein from their diet and can thrive without the added benefit of eggs, then not feeding the eggs back to the birds is not harmful. I would never eat eggs, because I find them gross. :)
But the same is true for profit-making egg farms as for any other farm. The bottom line is money. To make money, one needs eggs. To get eggs, one needs to breed birds and produce fertilized eggs. Half those eggs, by the laws of genetics, produce male chicks. While some of those male chicks on small hatcheries may be sold to egg farms for fertilized eggs or as pets, most are not. And on large hatcheries, all male chicks are killed. The number of eggs a hen produces decreases between the ages of 1-3, depending on breed, and soon it becomes profitless to feed a bird not producing nearly an egg a day (which is entirely unnatural and unhealthy for the birds). So by the laws of supply and demand, egg farms – even bucolic pasture-based ones – must replace hens with new ones. The egg industry relies on the exploitation and oppression of chickens. There are very few people, like your friend, sharing eggs with neighbors and loving their birds for life. So few that to claim this is not a cut and dry issue is misleading, at best.
I’m not familiar with Jonathan Balcombe. Looks interesting. Thanks for the link, Olivia.
Happy meat, happy eggs, its all the same – still exploitation.
great post. salacious title :) it got me to read it.
Wonderful post (and title). I too was a vegetarian for quite a few years – But I wasn’t in “transition”. I honestly thought it was the most compassionate option, never thinking of the cruel things done in the dairy/egg industries. And well, guess I was just plain old dumb when it came to leather… Point is, I think a lot of people who are vegetarians just have no idea of the baby male chicks killed in hatcheries, the “spent hens”, the extreme confinement to get eggs. Many vegetarians just never questioned further about the impregnated cows, stolen calves or made the connection to “veal”.
Now when I meet an “ethical” vegetarian… I ask them – So do you know about eggs and dairy? Most look in shock and say “No! What’s wrong with them”? Of course I’m happy to tell and tell again and again.
I think it’s important to keep in mind that these industries have spent billions keeping their ugly secrets hidden. The whole culture is encouraged to see only the (happy) things that perpetuate the lies. I’m glad you’ve given up on vegetarianism, Marji. I’m glad I did too! Now lets dig in our heels and expose the truth to people who just don’t know they are being deceived! Most already want to do the right thing… It’s just a matter of revealing what that truly is! This post certainly heads in that direction – Thank you!
I thought vegetarianism was the end-all, be-all as well. It never occurred to me that a product not requiring the automatic death of an animal would nevertheless cause them suffering (and eventual slaughter).
The farmed animal industry is a multi-billion dollar machine with intense lobbying power in heavy ag states. It is a tough one to fight against, for sure!
And all we can do is keep up the effort to educate and share knowledge. It’s the most powerful tool for animal advocates.
I understand the impulse towards moral purity of action and it is clear that the egg and dairy industries have horrible records at animal welfare. Beyond that I recognize the desire to reject use of animals entirely.
However, to me it seems clear that a diet that is primarily vegan with some dairy would profoundly decrease the quantity of suffering and death caused by one’s diet. In fact in terms of deaths caused by diet it may be almost indistinguishable from veganism. Check out the he graphic here:
http://www.animalvisuals.org/data/1mc/
1 million calories would be enough for 500 days or 16 months for the average male I think. And if it were split equally between veg, fruit, grain, dairy, it would involve about 2.5 deaths from slaughter and harvest. And in fact, the slaughter due to dairy consumption would be the equivalent of 1/100 of a life (or one life in 100 years).
This is significantly less than a diet that adds 50% from meats which would add 50+ deaths a year (or maybe 100+ if it was primarily chickens you were slaughtering).
Obviously this does not include consideration of suffering and a lot of suffering is caused for dairy cows while before they are slaughtered.
I wonder sometimes whether the “veganism is the moral baseline” position isn’t backfiring in some of these cases, since some seem to conclude the only alternative to veganism is some sort of hypothetical “pseudo-paleo” diet. I wonder how many people jump to veganism before they’re ready and then fall back to a meat based diet rather than the much less harmful lacto-vegetarian diet.
Further, I think a lot of people find the idea of humane egg farming conceivable and so veganism is a much harder sell to most people out there in the world than vegetarianism. The idea that we wrong animals by taking their eggs strikes most people as romantic and ludicrous. Though the industry itself might be evil, many people think that in principle it could be done humanely. It is often harder to sell veganism especially to people who have grown up around farm animals.
Having probably helped 10 people become vegetarian, I’ve learned never to push too hard. Most people need to grow into over-coming speciesism. If they start by becoming lacto-vegetarian I count it a success. If they go vegan eventually I’m thrilled.
Every vegetarian results in around 50 fewer deaths a year, which means 50 fewer lives of misery and suffering. The move to veganism eliminates around 1 more death a year. Not inconsiderable by any means and ultimately I think I agree that we need to end these industries and their abuse. But, that first step is huge and I would never “give up on” promoting it.
And one last point about the graphic. There is no diet that is free from suffering and death. Harvest causes the death of many small animals both by increasing their vulnerabilty to predators and by direct killing. Even a vegan diet likely causes 2-3 deaths from harvest per 1 million calories of grains, fruit, and vegetables.
We all have different things we can tolerate, C, and other things we cannot live with. I cannot live with the idea of knowingly causing suffering and death to even one calf or one cow or one chick or one hen. Self-justification, which is what I call it when I either don’t take time to learn the facts behind my purchases or I have learned the facts but choose to ignore them, doesn’t make me feel comfortable.
Speaking of grains, fruits and vegetables: Recently I watched the short movie “Ripe for Change” on http://www.hulu.com. I highly recommend it. It helped me want to be serious about transitioning away from veggies and fruits that are raised by traditional methods and toward organic produce. I decided that a few more dollars a week was well worth spending to accomplish that goal. So that’s what I’ve done: the yams, butternut squash, lettuce, celery, carrots, green onions, apples have all been organic in recent weeks. When it gets warmer, I’ll be venturing over to farmer’s markets for more variety and to ensure it’s all local. I’ve also been mulling over the idea of finding some friends who would split shares in a raw vegan coop with me. The ideal would be to have access to local veganically raised produce. Visit http://www.stockfreeorganic.net to see what I mean.
Hello C, On the idea of humane egg “farming.” I think a series of criteria must be met in order to even come close to “kind” eggs which I distinguish from those coming from “egg hens.”
First, the chick or chicken would have to be a rescue… If one “bought” them, no doubt they would come from a hatchery and we know what happens to the “worthless” males. Secondly, the chickens would have to be kept in the best possible conditions… Geared to their well-being not their “productivity”… Finally, there would have to be the commitment to care for them long after their egg-laying days were through.
I have a small flock of rescued hens… I love them! They are my family. I feed them their own eggs – They devour them! What other eggs there are, my otherwise “vegan” dogs get… Friends, neighbors also get eggs on occasion. I’m not fond of eggs at all, but if I were — I would have no ethical problem consuming them as all my “humane” criteria would be met. This scenario works on a very, very micro-tiny scale. It would never satisfy the appetite of 6.7 billion people. Urging as many as possible toward a plant based diet seems to make more sense.
And a closing word about eliminating dairy and saving (only) “one life in 100 years.” Having just watched this short Farm Sanctuary video about the progress of 3 rescued calves, Alexander, Blitzen and Lawrence, I’m joyful to be the giver of 1/100th of a life to any one of them. I don’t feel “deprived” or that I’ve “sacrificed” anything… I guess in my mind… It’s more than being about numbers – It’s about the individual.
http://www.farmsanctuary.org/rescue/rescues/2011/newborn_calves.html
I certainly see your point and know that each of us must use the logic that works for us… And if you’ve helped 10 people become vegetarian – That surely encourages them to think and proceed further with their compassionate intentions. Knowledge is always good! :)
I applaud veganism and don’t consume dairy or eggs myself. And I agree that what goes by the name “humane” dairy and egg production is nothing I want associated my species :) And I also find that seeing these joyous animals as individuals is important in being vegan.
My only caution is that we not too quickly miss the HUGE progress that occurs when someone goes lacto-vegetarian. I love the Francione idealism that the world can be vegan if I want it, but the reality, I think, is that we are so far from even coming within sight of that mountain.
It’s the principle of triage–save as many as you can first of all, then consider the individuals as individuals. When a field hospital is overwhelmed with casualties, they treat according to the principle of maximizing the saving of lives. With 60 billion animals being killed (worldwide I think) every year for food, every reduction in demand should be encouraged and praised. And while my vegan diet causes perhaps only 2 or so deaths a year, I’m loathe to criticize someone whose diet causes the death of 2.04 deaths a year, or suggest that they care less than I do. I won’t “give up” on lacto-vegetarianism until it is commonplace, and eating the flesh of animals is a weird anachronism.
Public progress, personal purity. For the world we must reduce demand, for ourselves we pursue virtue.
http://www.animalvisuals.org/data/slaughter/m/slaughter_2008.swf
http://www.animalvisuals.org/data/slaughter/m/slaughter_2008.swf
Reducing consumption and replacing with alternatives is essential towards veganism. But I do not believe vegetarianism should be encouraged as an end goal.
I am also not sure I buy the idea that a vegetarian diet with eggs and milk causes only 2.04 deaths per year. More chickens in the egg industry are killed than turkeys, bovines, ducks, sheep, goats. The only two species killed more frequently are pigs and chickens raised for their flesh (and no species comes close to the 9 billion “broiler” chickens).
For example, the average person in the United States consumes 250 eggs a year. That corresponds to one hen’s annual production. The average age at slaughter is 1-1.5 years. So that is, for argument’s sake, one hen killed for a year’s supply of eggs. That does not include the male chick also killed to produce that hen. So that’s two chickens per year. That does not include the hens killed during the production of eggs from starvation, dehydration, death during transport from the hatchery, disease or cannibalism. For a year’s supply of eggs, at least two birds must die, but definitely more.
The annual per capita consumption of beef is 65 lbs. One slaughter weight cow could conceivably feed about 4 people for an entire year. If we are speaking solely of death as an indicator of “less harm”, consuming beef – at the current per capita rate – and no other animal products is a less harmful diet than the same one but with eggs instead of beef. The same would be true of sheep, ducks, goats, and even turkeys. With pigs, based on per capita annual consumption, one pig could feed two people for a year.
One could conceivably argue that eating certain species while abstaining from eggs, for example, is causing less harm than eating eggs but not other species.
I won’t make that argument, of course. My position for animal advocates remains the same – encourage the reduction of animal products and the elimination of them, and explain why. But please stop encouraging vegetarianism as a diet that eliminates suffering or as the ultimate alternative to the traditional omnivorous diet.
I distinguish eggs from dairy (my argument is for not “giving up” on lacto-vegetarianism as a possible end point for many people given the current situation of animals in the world). Egg production involves a lot of deaths. According to Mark Middleton’s calculations 1 million calories involves the death of 92 animals (10% from harvest, most from slaughter–see his explanation in the pdf at one of the above links). Eggs are worse than Pork and Beef for total number of deaths per 1 million calories as they are currently produced.
But, dairy is relatively “efficient.” Insofar as the vast majority of the deaths caused to create 1 million calories of milk is from harvesting for feed.*
No diet eliminates death and suffering–(well perhaps fruitarians might). But, if we eat grains, vegetables that are harvested we are complicit in the deaths of many animals (see Stephen Davis’ original article in the Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics cited in Middleton’s article for the “high end” calculations to which Middleton’s much more reasonable calculations are directed).
I don’t suggest that a lacto-vegetarian diet is free from suffering, but then neither do I claim that a vegan diet is free from suffering. I do claim that lacto-vegetarianism will dramatically decrease the death that a person’s diet causes (to approximately 4% or less) and that a vegan diet will decrease it a bit further (approximately to 3.5% or less).
This is not the only suffering caused by animal use, but the vast vast majority of the animals that are abused in the world right now are abused for their meat, and this is only going to get worse–so much worse–over the next 50 years. With a problem so vast, I find my personal purity is not a mark of achieving anything other than a virtually insignificant contribution inflated only by the unavoidable sense of my own importance in the world.
* I’m not certain that Middleton’s numbers are exactly right, but having studied the debate a bit I think his numbers are fairly plausible. I assume that a lacto-vegetarian diet will involve roughly 25% of calories from each of fruit, vegetables, grains, and dairy. This would involve for a 2000 kcal a day diet about 180,000 kcal from dairy a year. According to Middleton 1 million calories of dairy results in .04 animals from slaughter (though he does not count the complicity in veal production) and 4.74 animals from harvest. But remember that is .008 animals from slaughter and .96 animals from harvest (if a person eat 25% calories from dairy). If this were replaced by vegetables it would be 0 deaths from slaughter and .50 animals from harvesting.
So the difference is closer to .50 animals from harvest and .008 from slaughter (excluding veal) between a vegan diet and a lacto-vegetarian diet each year.
Marji, props for forthrightly stating your case. May I ask, with respect, whether this means that you do not support ballot initiatives that aim to make animal farming more “humane” — like the upcoming one in Washington State involving battery cages? Such initiatives are, to me, an endorsement of vegetarianism. Your latest thoughts on that sticky subject? :-)
Sticky subject, indeed! For me, welfare initiatives are feel-good techniques that offer a VERY slight improvement in animal welfare after a long wait but may do more harm than good in the long-term.
May is the key word. The reality is we do not have any meaningful or sufficient data to indicate these initiatives harm the animal protection movement or bolster the economic stability of the affected industries. They take a long time to implement – California’s won’t go into effect for another year, and we won’t know any effects for years afterwards.
They may be an expensive, interesting tool, but there should always be a major caveat from animal rights organizations – want to help farmed animals? Stop eating their flesh, milk or eggs. And unfortunately few organizations promoting initiatives add that caveat.
Thanks for that good answer, Marji. Your last sentence says it all, for me. These “expensive,” as you say, and time-consuming ad campaigns cause consumers/voters to associate those organizations with these feel-good ballot initiatives instead of with the truthful message: “Let’s take real responsibility by changing our behavior. Let’s stop exploiting animals altogether, because it’s unsustainable, it’s unhealthy, and it’s unethical.”
This is awesome to hear! Good luck with it! You’re making the right choice!
I have to say that the title of the article really pulled me in. I thought that you were going the other way with it and was about to defend the life we’ve chosen. I still get a lot of flack about not eating any animal product (“don’t you miss it? Is it fair to your children? But it tastes so good…”) so I find myself going on the defensive. Thank you so much for a well thought out article. I agree with you completely.
Marji: I am curious whether this also reflects a shift in your thinking about incremental “welfare” changes, which you defended in the discussion following Stephanie’s post in July: “Eating Animals to Raise Funds for Animals”.
I am unclear about what you mean when you write: “Unless it is absolutely imperative to your survival, eggs are superfluous and unnecessary”. When is eating another species’ eggs a biological requirement for human survival? Or were you envisioning an “edge of existence” scenario where there is nothing else available? And if so, why would the survival needs of the human animal outweigh those of the nonhuman animal?
C: Reducing hurting and killing animals to statistics, numbers, percentages, and kilocalories loses sight of nonhuman animals as individuals. It serves to perpetuate the notion that nonhuman animals are simply units of production, which is exactly how animal-exploiting industries want us to view nonhuman animals.
If our goal is justice, a “lacto-vegetarian” diet cannot possibly be deemed “HUGE progress” as you argue. When advocating for the elimination of child soldiers, for example, we would never “praise” and “encourage” a reduction in the number of children used in warfare. Why should it be any different when we advocate for nonhuman animals who are oppressed?
Your use of triage as an analogy is not appropriate here. Triage is the process of analyzing the needs of injured casualties and deciding priorities for treatment. Nonhuman animals deliberately bred for exploitation are not incidental casualties and there is no hierarchy for intentional brutality.
It is our responsibility as advocates to work to change public consciousness so that nonhumans are regarded as deserving of moral consideration equal to humans. The message that drinking the milk of other species is more acceptable than eating their flesh does nothing to change the current paradigm. It simply perpetuates the notion that nonhuman animals are ours to use because we want to and because we can.
It absolutely does reflect my shift in thinking! I’m always evaluating and re-evaluating my set of beliefs. Of course, the core one – that veganism is going to save the world (okay, being a little silly there) – will never waver. But everything else is fair game for a change in my perception and how I think. For me, it is a healthy approach to the world.
I think we are all selfish beings capable of selfishly selfless acts. This is as true of the human as it is of the chicken. In an “edge of existence” scenario, I think the issue of “rights” tend to get reduced down to “survival”. My right to live may not objectively take precedence over the right of a fertilized egg to develop and hatch, but subjectively it does – if I was starving and desperate, I am probably not going to give much thought to eating the egg.
I certainly hope to never be faced with that dilemma, but it would be elitist and ignorant of me to think that there aren’t other people on this planet in dire straits faced with unfair choices, doing the best they can with the resources available to them…and that I in similar circumstances may do the same.
The impoverished citizens of the world are in dire straits in large part due to the impact of global animal agricultural practices and the policies of corporate oligarchies. Policies that write off humans and nonhumans as acceptable collateral damage. But in the U.S., especially regions such as Appalachia, access to vegan foods would actually help cure many of the nation’s health problems. It would also begin the necessary shift in human consciousness that has been delayed by agribusiness and other animal industries. In an end of the word scenario, maybe high nutrient foods such as oranges, broccoli, walnuts, cherries, blueberries, etc. have been wiped out in a blight. I find it difficult to think of a realistic situation where a person’s immediate or long-term survival in this country would require her to eat an animal. I think most of us can hunt down a bag of dates and a banana for starters. :)
On a different but perhaps related tangent, we should be skeptical of claims and rumors, especially on the internet, about ex-vegans who couldn’t survive without food products made from the bodies of animals. Unless such cases are scientifically documented and verified by third parties with no vested interests, we have nothing more than mere anecdotes. Repetition of anecdotes as if they’re facts can inflate into mythic proportions. That’s exactly what agribusiness wants. To form the specter of fear and doubt to confuse the issue: that we have no business doing everything we arbitrarily desire to any other animal species.
Marji: Thank you for your response and clarification.
I meant the rights of an existing nonhuman (the someone who laid the egg/s) vs. the rights of a human, not the rights of an embryo. I would hope that my ethics would not become a mere intellectual construct in an “edge of existence” scenario and that killing another being or taking someone’s eggs while she, like me, is fighting for survival, would be as unacceptable then as it is now.
mct: Your last sentence reminds me of a portion of an essay titled “Love Your Enemies” by theologian Mary Baker Eddy. She writes: “Love is the fulfilling of the law: it is grace, mercy, and justice. I used to think it sufficiently just to abide by our State statues; that if a man should aim a ball at my heart, and I by firing first could kill him and save my own life, that this was right. … If one’s life were attacked, and one could save it only in accordance with common law, by taking another’s, would one sooner give up his own?”
I realize that in the “edge of existence” scenario described above, it’s not an enemy being talked about, but a competitor for food or a source of food for survival. I agree in theory with both you and Eddy; I hope I would have the trust in good and the unselfish love and the moral courage to agree in practice, if faced with either kind of fight.
C: I commend you for all the work you put into gathering those statistics. It’s obvious to me you care about every animal life as much as anyone commenting here. What I wonder, though, is that when we concern ourselves with the *quantity* of physical deaths we’re willfully or inadvertently causing with each egg or glass of dairy milk we consume, are we losing sight of the moral imperative to transform the *quality” of our thinking from selfish to selfless, from sensual to spiritual, from indifferent to caring, from speciesist to just, from arrogant to humble? Isn’t the cultivation of these qualities what makes life worth living?
If our own motive is pure–to do good to others (yes, I agree, Marji, it does feel good to do good, even if you DO call it “selfishly selfless”!!!)–then why do we think others wouldn’t be attracted by same noble purpose, the same giving spirit? I believe each of us truly desires to live a charitable life, because we know deep down that it’s the only way to be truly happy, at peace, and free!
“What I wonder, though, is that when we concern ourselves with the *quantity* of physical deaths we’re willfully or inadvertently causing with each egg or glass of dairy milk we consume, are we losing sight of the moral imperative to transform the *quality” of our thinking from selfish to selfless, from sensual to spiritual, from indifferent to caring, from speciesist to just, from arrogant to humble? Isn’t the cultivation of these qualities what makes life worth living? ”
Well, I’m concerned first of all with the vast unthinkable amount of suffering that occurs every second of every day that culminates in the slaughterhouse. Every person who gives up meat and eggs significantly decreases that. If they can be persuaded to go further to eliminate their reliance on dairy or on wool, etc. then that is great and I applaud it. But, if, for whatever reason, they remain at lacto-vegetarianism they have done more to reduce animal suffering than 97% of the nation. They may not be perfect, but suggesting that this is an inadequate step, I think, is counter-productive. I will encourage them and show by example that one can go further, but if they aren’t ready or aren’t able (for whatever reason they have) I will not castigate them or look down on them–I certainly will not “give up” on them and suggest that they might as well be meat-eaters.
Cultivating personal virtues is a noble and beautiful task, and perhaps we can lose sight of its importance in focusing on the actual consequences of our decisions and measuring the significance of our choices in the light of whether they make the world concretely better or worse. And I would certainly not discourage the pursuit of virtue that you eloquently describe. But, I would also suggest that the stakes are so high, that losing ourselves in our own perfection is a real danger, especially when this leads us to judge and dismiss others who are working for the same goals but who do not meet our expectations for purity.
I discovered your blog site on google and check a few of your early posts. Continue to keep up the very good operate.
C: I fail to see how consistent ethical vegan advocacy is a call for “moral purity” or a “pursuit of virtue”. I see it as an indication of moral integrity. Exempting one class of nonhumans from full protection as you do, and suggesting that “lacto-vegetarianism” is an acceptable choice, is a betrayal of the very beings for whom we advocate and claim to respect.
mct, thanks for saying what I was trying to get across all along!
C, I now understand where I think you misunderstood me: when I was talking about motives being pure, I meant having the motive of benefiting others. That is NOT the same as your expression “moral purity,” which you equate with “personal virtue,” making it sound as if Marji’s desire to be more consistent ethically (and our hailing of her progress) is premised on absolutism, on unrealistic idealism, on holier-than-thou presumptions, on personal decisions and opinions and lifestyles.
This moral battle is, for the animals, earth, and society as a whole, the equivalent of the abolition of human slavery. One would NEVER speak disdainfully of the latter movement’s “moral purity” or regard a few human lives lost at the hands of abusive “owners” as being acceptable. Eating or drinking any portion of one animal is no more tolerable than consuming a portion of one human would be — unless we’re talking about human infants breastfeeding from human mothers.
By degrees, I have grown in my understanding and my willingness to drop the old for the new. So has Marji. So has everyone posting here. None of us are judging anyone else, least of all those who are on the same honest path but are a few steps behind (maybe because they started later or because they’re taking a little longer between steps). It’s the content of the heart and the actions that proceed from the heart that count, in every case.
Thanks Marji, for an extremely interesting and thought-provoking essay. In particular your description of birthing a calf and the aftermath has stuck with me.
I think it is not as simple as it seems, though, to find the most ethical choice of foods. All of us need protein to survive, and for vegans that protein must come from nuts or beans. There are very few beans and no nuts grown in the Northeastern United States, so someone who is a vegan and living in, say, Boston, will have to get these things from many miles away (before they are put onto the shelves at the local grocery store).
Transporting food across distances such as these uses up alot of gas, causing environmental problems leading to many animals’ deaths in both the methods used to obtain the gas (exploration, drilling), and the pollution and greenhouse gases emitted from burning the fuel. So would a soy-based veggie burger or some almonds (grown in California’s Central Valley) really cause less animal death and suffering than lacto-ovo products purchased locally?
These are factors in my mind when standing in the grocery store or food co-op trying to make a choice, as there are no perfect choices out there, only lessers-of-two-evils, and which is the lesser is often very hard to ascertain.
I can understand your dilemma, Lisa. There are so many considerations when trying to do our best for our planet and our animal friends.
One way I get my moral bearings is by asking myself this question:
If I could cause the least harm to the planet by eating the cooked leg of Aunt Lila, who lives right around the corner from me in Beantown, would I do that instead of eating green bean almondine casserole, knowing the almonds must be shipped from the West Coast?
No, I’m not going to eat Aunt Lila’s leg, because that deprives her not only of her limb, but of her life, which is immoral, not to mention illegal. My conscience would torture me, even if I somehow escaped being caught and sentenced to prison.
Well, at this juncture in my journey, I would feel equally “criminal” eating the cooked leg of Steer Samson. Whether he has been named or not, he and all of his kin are intelligent, emotion-laden beings who value their lives just as much as I do mine and Aunt Lila does hers. Moreover, I value Steer Samson as if he were my son.
I don’t think the universe is designed to force us to pick from only bad choices. If I care enough about my fellow beings and humbly desire to do right by them, which I do, I can find food that is acceptable to my environmental conscience, too, and that provides me with sufficient protein (I understand that only 5% of calories per day need come from that source to be considered sufficient).
For example, there are farmer’s markets in Boston’s Copley Square, not to mention throughout the towns surrounding Boston. If I still lived there, I am sure I could quickly find plenty of local organic farmers from whom I would buy protein-rich broccoli, cauliflower, corn, zucchini, tomatoes and, yes, even soybeans and potatoes. (Searching the Internet, I even found a rice grower with paddies in Vermont! And I see that strawberries and peaches and watermelons, all grown in New England, contain protein!)
If I had time and wanted to cut my food budget, I could grow most of these fruits and veggies in my own garden, then can or freeze them to eat during the New England winters, just like my mom and dad used to do when we lived in Connecticut.
No one in Boston can grow *every* kind of fruit or vegetable or legume locally, so there is no decision to make about being vegan or omni when it comes to eating almonds, peanuts, Brazil nuts, coconuts, pineapples, and oranges (all protein-rich). BTW, I have read that one can grow avocados and bananas hydroponically indoors or in a greenhouse in New England.
So here’s my point: if we have done enough thinking and research to know that we no longer want to contribute to the breeding, raising and killing of our other-than-human friends, we can extend ourselves even further by finding other ways to minimize our impact upon the land (and its inhabitants) in the rest of our food selections.
It makes no sense to me that every choice must involve harm. In fact, there are caring, creative people out there who have figured out how to coax plants from the ground without the use of animal fertilizer. I found an entrepreneur who’s learning the ropes of vegan organic farming in Maine: http://permavegan.blogspot.com/2011/01/my-2011-veganic-permaculture.html. Some veganic farmers in our “mother” country, England, are far ahead of Americans — see http://www.veganorganic.net and http://www.stockfreeorganic.net. Just think, there’s a whole new animal-free ag industry just waiting to be developed in the States.
What about if you have pet hens and eat their eggs
<3