Comments on: Cruelty-free means humans too: some thoughts on a more holistic veganism

By: B

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:56:55 +0000

Am I being mislead here and vegans somehow uniquely guilty of ignoring these problems?

N’ah, there’s this strange thing that pops up on the internet that I think Hugo has called the “Suffering Olympics” — although I think he uses it in a different context than I’ve come to understand it. Any time someone expresses concern about something, someone has to come along and “one-up” them by saying, “Well, Problem X is a MUCH bigger problem, why are you wasting your time worrying about Problem Y?” As if A) people can’t worry about multiple things and B) we must mention Problem X and Problem Z and Problem A in the same breath as Problem Y.

A rather extreme example - on a television blog, someone posted the news story about the recent fire at Universal Studios. People commented expressing their sadness at things being destroyed and saying they were glad no one was hurt. Someone had to one-up everyone by posting and saying, “You people are all morons, there are people dying in the war and not getting food in Africa, and you’re all crying over structures getting burned up at a film studio.” As if by saying they were sad about the fire, they were somehow not simultaneously concerned about the war and famine.

There are a lot of Causes out there. We all can’t take up every single one, and we should commend everyone for their efforts in their chosen ones and not curse them for ignoring the ones they aren’t expressly advocating at the moment. Compassion in one area generally indicates compassion overall, there’s nothing nefarious about wishing to not eat animals while not in the same breath bringing up the farm workers who work the fields.

By: Lee

Lee — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:04:12 +0000

I’m not a vegan, but I find it sort of puzzling to demand that veganism be an all-purpose critique and solution of all oppression everywhere, human and animal. Has anyone ever actually presented it as a panacea for all the world’s problems? I always thought animal rights proponents saw it as an extension of moral concern outward from human beings, not a focus on animal well-being to the exclusion of humans.

Also, just as an empirical matter, most of the vegans I’ve known (admittedly a small sample) have also been extremely concerned about other social justice-type issues. Am I being mislead here and vegans somehow uniquely guilty of ignoring these problems?

By: adrienne l. travis

adrienne l. travis — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:43:21 +0000

Er, should have been ‘worse than “NOT looking like a buddhist”‘ in my above comment.

By: adrienne l. travis

adrienne l. travis — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:42:16 +0000

I’m afraid the first thing that strikes me is: wouldn’t it have been less cruel, less hard on the environment, and require fewer (new) animal byproducts to just buy a *used* car?

The ethos of most of the vegetarians and vegans i know is one of reuse and sustainability. For example, the buddhist who won’t eat meat unless it’s being thrown away, because to him waste of an already-slaughtered animal is worse than “looking like a buddhist”. Likewise the vegan who buys shoes from Goodwill, even if they’re leather.

By: Antigone

Antigone — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:14:23 +0000

I’m just going to by-pass this entry, on the basis that I don’t feel that the vegan lifestyle is appropriate for me.

But “peta-bashing” and “all-too-common” sounds dismissive to the actual concerns feminists have about PETA.

By: Hugo Schwyzer

Hugo Schwyzer — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:28:38 +0000

Lester, I know you knew my late father, who passed away of stomach cancer two years ago. I am all the stronger an opponent of animal research as a result of his passing. I blogged about it here:

http://hugoschwyzer.net/2006/11/30/the-apparent-apostasy-of-peter-singer-and-a-note-on-my-fathers-cancer-and-animal-rights/

By: Lester Hunt

Lester Hunt — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:23:31 +0000

When you said “cruelty free means humans too,” I thought you were going to talk about using animals in medical research. A student in a freshman philosophy class recently said, “Well, if those cancer victims want those drugs, they can test them on themselves.” It’s seldom said so callously, but isn’t one of the tragic choices here? If we are absolutely determined to not kill rats, just as if they were people, then we have to let some of those sick people die. There is surely an area of either/or here, where being nice to the animals means being cruel to the people, and vice versa.

By: Robert

Robert — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:01:47 +0000

You don’t need to boycott anybody; you just need to take positive steps to get your food in the way you find ethical. Club together with other vegans and hire a farmer and pay him or her to pay the workers what you feel they’re worth. It will cost you a lot more, but you can be as ethical as you feel like paying for.

Alternatively you can grow your own food and swap with other self-growers. That’s a lot more work but a lot less money.

By: catie

catie — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:50:36 +0000

I completly agree Hugo (although I’m not a vegan-I’m more of natralist and an omnivore with a conscience.) However, I’m not completly sure that I know what sort of action to take regurading the condtions of workers, espeially because such conditons are all to prevelent through out the world. Thus making any type of boycot action difficult.