Archive for the 'Food' Category

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

On some feminist blogs, there’s been good discussion about veganism and larger issues of race and class. Here’s Elle, BFP, and BFP again. The last of these posts deals with the much-ballyhooed “three-week vegan challenge” that Oprah Winfrey recently completed. There’s a lot of PETA-bashing that goes on, but that’s all-too-common on feminist websites, and I’m not interested in dredging up that old issue once more.

What is valuable in these posts is the discussion of whether or not veganism is, inherently, a cruelty-free lifestyle. Those of us who, like myself, don’t consume animal products in any form (food, clothing, etcetera) tend to describe our modus operandi as “cruelty-free.” When my wife and I were buying our new cars, we went out of our way to special order vehicles without any leather in the interiors whatsoever, a request that led to several months wait and not-inconsiderable expense. Of course, not only was our ability to make that choice rooted in privilege, in some sense it was imperfect — animal byproducts end up in tires and other places. We spoke to the car dealers about our desire to be “completely cruelty-free”, but we both knew as we did so we were pursuing an imperfectly attainable goal.

A vegan lifestyle, of course, doesn’t automatically mean an absence of connection to death. When even organic farms are tilled, little field mice are not infrequently cut to pieces. Most organic vegetables are grown with animal manure, usually collected from farms where animals are raised for meat. Trying to avoid all complicity with the machinery of death is, alas, nigh on impossible. Most vegans know all this, of course. They don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good, however, and with the limited options at their disposal, they seek to exercise the best possible choices available in any given situation, recognizing that few if any choices they do make will be truly “cruelty-free.Continue reading ‘Cruelty-free means humans too: some thoughts on a more holistic veganism’

Oprah, veganism, and the real inconvenient truth

It’s been a happy birthday so far. I admit I really appreciate Facebook, which I didn’t have for my last birthday — all the kind notes showing up on my “wall” make me very happy.

The vegan world has been abuzz with the news that Oprah Winfrey is on a 21-day cleanse, using only plant-based foods. The queen of all media is blogging about her experience here. I love what she says in her first entry:

Wow, wow, wow! I never imagined meatless meals could be so satisfying. I had been focused on what I had to give up—sugar, gluten, alcohol, meat, chicken, fish, eggs, cheese. “What’s left?” I thought. Apparently a lot. I can honestly say every meal was a surprise and a delight, beginning with breakfast—strawberry rhubarb wheat-free crepes.

Now, most vegans don’t go as far as Oprah’s going. I eat wheat and sugar everyday, and my wife likes a nice glass of wine quite regularly. Those of us in the animal rights community respect Oprah’s enormous cultural power; we know what she can do for books and presidential candidates. We also know that she’s been very candid about her many years of struggle with body image issues; the world has watched her weight fluctuate for two decades. Though veganism is much more than a weight-loss regimen (and indeed, there are plenty of plump vegans), I’m confident Oprah will be amazed by how much energy and “bounce” she has over the next seventeen days or so. Continue reading ‘Oprah, veganism, and the real inconvenient truth’

Sex worker bodies, farm worker bodies: a musing on agriculture, porn, and cheap grace

In the midst of the latest round of debates over sex here in the progressive blogosphere, I was struck by BrownFemiPower’s post about the kinds of oppression we sometimes ignore in our eagerness to focus on pornography.

I’m very very *very* tired of how sex work is framed as a labor issue by many anti-pornography activists–they chronically insist that porn is the worst worst worst job ever because it hurts females.

I hear this logic, and all I can think is, “Really?”

I’ve known women who have had to work 12-15 (or more) hours a day in 100+ degree heat with no breaks for water and no place to pee (I was one of those women). I’ve known women who have had to work on their knees the entire 12-15 hour shift (or in a squatting position), with a bag that digs into their backs and can carry 20-25 pounds of vegetables or fruits. I’ve known women who can not kneel at mass because their knees are so shot from the hard labor they’ve done most of their lives. I’ve known women who have worked in the fields since they were five or six. I’ve seen pregnant women, elderly women, young girls, disabled women all forced to walk up to two miles (after 12 or 15 hour days) to get back to their cars so they can go home.

I know women are being exposed to some of the most dangerous chemicals known to mankind. I know young girls are working in fields rather than going to school because their mothers aren’t being paid enough for the job that they do. I know women are being locked up and only allowed to leave the farms for up to two hours a week. I know women are working for wages that have not increased in 27 years. I know women who go to company doctors after exposure to pesticide clouds are being told that they have ‘female problems’ (rather than pesticide poisoning). I know women are giving birth to babies that die because of pesticide exposure. I know women are out digging ditches 20 days after they give birth. I know women are being sexually harassed by field bosses. I know young girls are being sexually harassed by field bosses. I know 90% of the female farmworkers in California say that sexual intimidation and harassment is a major problem at their jobs. I know women refer(ed) to a field in California as the “field of panties” because so many women were raped there. I know women are being threatened with guns by their field bosses.

At BFP’s, these last two paragraphs are filled with links that document what’s going on. Continue reading ‘Sex worker bodies, farm worker bodies: a musing on agriculture, porn, and cheap grace’

Fat is not a moral crisis

Zuzu has a fine post up this morning: Rejecting the Frames. It’s a follow-up to this piece at Feministing which sparked a heated — and at times — ugly comment thread.

The topic of the two posts (and this third brief, powerful one from Jill) is fat, the so-called “obesity crisis”, and the feminist response. Zuzu:

One of the things that bothers me… (as well as the whole “Diets Don’t Work!” mantra, which also usually puts in an appearance) is that it puts the focus on the individual fat person rather than on the treatment that the fat person is having to deal with. Indeed, this is a good example of the “personal is political” phenomenon as it was originally put forth: our weights may be within our individual control, but the way society treats us because of our weight demands a collective solution. Being turned down for insurance because of your BMI isn’t truly a personal problem, it’s a political one — why should insurance companies get to draw arbitrary lines to deny coverage, and by the way, why is it we still don’t have universal health care, again?

And your doctor’s berating you about your weight may seem like an individual problem, but the fact that fat hatred kills demands a collective solution. But if shame keeps us off-balance and justifying why we weigh what we weigh, or why we should (or shouldn’t) do something about that, then we never really think of the problem as being bigger than ourselves.

The self-justification also sets up a certain group (those who engage in healthy behaviors) as more worthy of being left alone by the Obesity Crisis™ Watchdog than those who don’t. But why should healthy lifestyle be the ticket to being treated as a human being? I shouldn’t have to do a damn thing to claim my right to being treated equally other than exist. Who the fuck has the right to deny me that just because I like to have a piece of cake every now and again, or because sometimes I eat too much or don’t exercise?

Amen, zuzu.

I was at my boxing gym early this morning for my regular Monday meeting with Pepe, my trainer. I know lots of other folks who work out there, and as I was packing my bag, getting ready to leave, a casual acquaintance of mine and I started talking about our Thanksgiving plans. As we said goodbye, she said laughingly, “Don’t eat too much this week. Oh, wait, go ahead — overeat! You’ve earned it!”

I was fairly groggy this morning, and didn’t think about what my friend said until I read Zuzu’s post. The language of “earning” is used a lot in fitness circles; it’s an economic and a moral term. And it’s got some fairly troubling implications. Continue reading ‘Fat is not a moral crisis’

The Times on meat and dating

Here’s a New York Times article guaranteed to make this vegan feminist groan: Be Yourselves, Girls, Order the Rib-Eye. (H/T: Feministing)

It begins:

MARTHA FLACH mentioned meat twice in her Match.com profile: “I love architecture, The New Yorker, dogs … steak for two and the Sunday puzzle.”

She was seeking, she added, “a smart, funny, kind man who owns a suit (but isn’t one) … and loves red wine and a big steak.”

The repetition worked. On her first date with Austin Wilkie, they ate steak frites. A year later, after burgers at the Corner Bistro in Greenwich Village, he proposed. This March, the rehearsal dinner was at Keens Steakhouse on West 36th Street, and the wedding menu included mini-cheeseburgers and more steak.

Ms. Wilkie was a vegetarian in her teens, and even wore a “Meat Is Murder” T-shirt. But by her 30s, she had started eating cow. By the time she placed the personal ad, she had come to realize that ordering steak on a first date had the potential to sate appetites not only of the stomach but of the heart.

Red meat sent a message that she was “unpretentious and down to earth and unneurotic,” she said, “that I’m not obsessed with my weight even though I’m thin, and I don’t have any food issues.” She added, “In terms of the burgers, it said I’m a cheap date, low maintenance.”

Yikes.

One serious problem in talking about veganism/vegetarianism in a feminist context is that so many people associate not eating animal products with the desperate attempt to conform to an ideal of thin-ness. Those of us who embraced vegan living out of a desire to live cruelty-free are keenly aware that there is a lamentable perception that others, particularly women, use the vegan label to mask an eating disorder. As is often pointed out, it may seem more socially acceptable for an already slender woman to say “Oh, I don’t eat meat or cheese, I’m a vegan” than for her to say “Oh, I’m on a diet.” The former suggests a commitment to justice and kindness; the latter suggests self-absorption and narcissism.

Of course, the reverse is also true, as the Times article suggests. If a popular perception develops that vegetarianism/veganism is simply a socially acceptable way of masking an eating disorder, than being an enthusiastic carnivore becomes a clever way to announce (like Mrs. Wilkie) that you’re “unneurotic.” It also subtly suggests a strong libido. There’s a strong (and may I say, as a vegan man married to a vegan woman, utterly false) perception that a woman with a strong appetite for steak may also have a stronger appetite for sex than a woman who avoids meat altogether. (Some Victorians certainly believed this, and discouraged female carniverousness for reasons that had damn all to do with animal rights.)

For those of us committed to gender justice and to animal rights, the challenge is to make the case that veganism has nothing to do with neurotic self-denial. We do need to do a better job (I know I need to do a MUCH better job) of making the case that living a life without consuming animal products can be a life filled with pleasure, delight, fulfillment. My own character runs to the Puritanical side these days, but I know plenty of vegans who are, as Martha Flach Wilkie claims to be, “unpretentious and down to earth and unneurotic.” It is possible to be very interested in the “pleasures of the flesh” while being firmly committed to not eating animals. The “female carnivore = sexy” trope is a false one.

The article notes that for some women

…especially those who are thin, say ordering a salad displays an unappealing mousiness.

“It seems wimpy, insipid, childish,” said Michelle Heller, 34, a copy editor at TV Guide. “I don’t want to be considered vapid and uninteresting.”

My wife is a salsa dancing, weight-lifting, Pinot-drinking, kick-boxing force of nature. There’s not a self-denying bone in her body; she does not share my censorious, neo-Calvinist outlook on the world. Her appetite for life and its pleasures is immense; it awes me and inspires me everyday. And though she was a carnivore for years and years, she joined me in a vegan commitment at the beginning of 2007. She’s loud and proud and unpretentious — and she’s living and eating cruelty-free. She’s the epitome of a healthy, happy, hedonistic vegan, and if there are two things she is most definitely not, it’s “vapid” and “uninteresting.”

Sigh.

Admiring Gordon Ramsay: a note on a fondness for mercurial mentors

I’m very much in “summer hiatus” mode, with somewhat less time for and interest in blogging than usual. Nothing wrong with that.

I confess today a strange fascination with Gordon Ramsay, the celebrity chef whose restaurants, books, and television shows have won him a huge following on both sides of the Atlantic. He’s just about my age, a fellow 40 year-old marathon runner. I’m a loyal watcher of his shows on both Fox and BBC America, and I admit I find him to be an extraordinarily compelling figure. I even bought his autobiography last week.

Ramsay has no love for vegans, is notoriously temperamental, and is consistently foul-mouthed. He played for Rangers, for Pete’s sake; and I’m a fairly strong supporter of Celtic when it comes to the Glasgow derby. But at least on television, his tirades are balanced with what seems to be genuine tenderness and compassion. (I’m well aware that TV personas are often very different from real-life ones.) On his “Hell’s Kitchen” show, he berates and demeans the various chefs competing for the top prizes, and yet he also manages — or so it seems — to give each of them the kind of thoughtful, insightful reassurance that they need in order to move to the next level of their craft.

My fondness for Ramsay is similar to my fondness for Bobby Knight, of which I have written before. Though my own dear, late father was an exceedingly gentle and loving man, the sort from whom I almost never heard a harsh word, in my own life I’ve always responded very well to coaches and mentors whose personalities are mercurial and volcanic. I am one of those people who sometimes only does his absolute best when he is shouted at; I was one of those boys whose desire to please an authority figure was directly related to how stinting that professor or coach was with his praise.

In my teaching style, I am no Gordon Ramsay or Bobby Knight. I do have more of a temper in person than it might appear from this blog, however. I know, too, that what makes some students blossom makes others wilt. The great trick of teaching and youth ministry is adapting one’s style to the particular needs of the young people with whom one is working. Some folks need to be pushed, and pushed hard or they’ll sit there like bumps on a log; others, if pushed too much, retreat into shells and become hopelessly passive.

I’ve had a lot of teachers, mentors, and coaches in my life. (I work with a writing coach now, though I don’t employ her services on this blog). I appreciate warmth and encouragement, but I also appreciate being pushed — and pushed hard. I’ve had a few mentors who could be brutally tough on me (my longest-serving Twelve Step sponsor was a delightful mix of Coach Knight, Chef Ramsay and Mike Ditka), and I thrived under that mix of brutal candor, judicious sarcasm, and subtle encouragement.

I have my own inner Bobby Knight/Gordon Ramsay, and, when provoked, it takes a tremendous exertion of self-control to not imitate their behavior with students, colleagues, and my fellow inhabitants of greater Los Angeles. But I do take vicarious delight in watching men like that at work, and am eagerly anticipating the season finale of “Hell’s Kitchen” next week.

A note on my first vegan marathon

The San Francisco Marathon I ran this past Sunday was the first marathon I had trained for as a strict vegan. I’ve been flirting with veganism for years, but it was only at the beginning of 2007 that my wife and I made the decision to remove all animal products (including dairy, eggs, honey) from our diet.

When I started “ramping up” my training in May in preparation for the marathon, I was curious to see how my body would respond to 50-60 miles a week of running while eating vegan. I was encouraged, of course, by the example of a variety of other vegan athletes — especially Brendan Brazier, the Canadian 50K champion. I began to use his product, Vega, and I was able to have a long chat with him as we jogged the Mall in Washington in April.

But Brendan, as amazing an athlete and animal rights activist as he is, is more than a couple of years younger than I am. He’s also a professional, and I’m little more than a middle-aged weekend warrior. I hit 40 just as I began this now-concluded training season, and worried that my ageing muscles wouldn’t get replenished on plant-based nutrition alone. Of course, there was no way to find out if an average guy like me could train and run on a vegan diet without trying… so try I did.

After this past Sunday, with another slow-but-steady 3:52 in the bag, I can now say definitively that eating and training vegan is possible. (I wish I could say that eliminating all animal products from my diet made me magically as fast as I was in the late ’90s!) Because I was eating lighter, I was able to sleep less and feel rested — as my body didn’t have to work so hard to digest animal fats. That meant I could get up at 4:30AM, do a middle-distance run, and then give seven hours worth of lecture without feeling utterly exhausted. In that sense, eating vegan did enhance my performance.

I drank my Vega and my hemp protein supplements, but didn’t live on bars and processed “vegan junk” food. I ate a lot of nuts, a lot of dried fruit, a lot of whole wheat pasta. I began to eat vegetables I had once scorned, developing a genuine passion for kale. (I still don’t love broccoli.) I dropped some body fat, but kept my weight at a healthy level. No one told me that I looked gaunt, and I didn’t feel as if I were in a constant state of self-denial. My cravings for meat grew fewer (though every once in a while, I would still feel a pang of longing as I drove by my favorite taco stand). Those cravings are almost gone now.

And here’s the kicker: our household food budget went down. Yes, we bought a lot of organic veggies at Whole Foods (and when we could, at the local farmer’s market). But I also ate out less — instead of buying lunch, I packed it. A packed lunch made up of plant-based food bought at Whole Foods was still cheaper than a processed meal purchased on campus. When people tell me “I can’t afford to be vegan”, I note that my savings off being vegan this spring and summer were enough to (almost) pay for a very nice hotel room in San Francisco this past weekend.

Yes, I’m proselytizing. For reasons of human health and animal rights, I’m a passionate believer in veganism. It ties in to my feminism and my Christianity; long before I embraced a cruelty-free diet, my faith and my belief in women’s rights had convinced me that I am called to do justice and mercy in every action I take. Training for my fourteenth marathon as a first-time vegan was an opportunity to match my language and my life. And saving money in the process was a terrific bonus.

Friendship, weight, and the collective rejection of an unattainable ideal

I know everyone else in the ’sphere is writing about the major new study on obesity and friendship, but I can’t seem to resist weighing in (ouch) as well.

The opening sentence in the Times report yesterday left me wincing:

Obesity can spread from person to person, much like a virus, researchers are reporting today. When a person gains weight, close friends tend to gain weight, too.

My first reaction is fury. Fabulous, another excuse for the shunning and shaming of fat folk. I can almost hear it: “Bob, you know I love you. But the New York Times says that obesity is contagious, and I’ve noticed you’ve gained a lot of weight lately, so I’d rather not spend as much time with you because I’m afraid you’ll infect me.” The phrase “much like a virus” is infelicitous at best and genuinely misleading at worst, and to have it in the opening sentence is deeply unfortunate.

The study’s point, of course, is that other people’s behavior and appearance can impact our feelings about ourselves.

Dr. Nicholas Christakis, a physician and professor of medical sociology at Harvard Medical School and a principal investigator in the new study, says one explanation is that friends affect each others’ perception of fatness. When a close friend becomes obese, obesity may not look so bad.

“You change your idea of what is an acceptable body type by looking at the people around you,” Dr. Christakis said.

I’m not entirely sure that this is a bad thing. After all, we’re all well aware that the media (in its nearly infinite manifestations) has a huge impact on women’s self-image; the endless message that one must be thin and toned has done demonstrable damage. The struggle to emulate movie stars and supermodels, the struggle to achieve an unattainable ideal, breaks hearts and spirits and bodies year after year after year. For most women, that struggle is played out in two dimensions — in private acts of self-denial and in public, shared acts of self-loathing. Poor body image is reinforced by peers (or parents) who make self-deprecating remarks about their own bodies, and it’s reinforced by the common and unhappy practice of “bonding” over mutual self-hatred.

When a good friend or family member begins to gain weight, it’s as if he or she has “opted out” of the destructive pursuit of an eternally elusive ideal. This opting out provides an alternative model for friends and family. Seeing a good friend gain weight can be liberating, as it raises the prospect that if you yourself put on some pounds, you won’t be alone to face the judgment of a hostile and censorious culture. Most of us who teach and practice feminism, after all, are eager to create “feminist communities” in which women and men consciously reject the culturally prescribed ideals for our appearance and our behavior. We know that it’s hard to opt out alone, and much easier to do so when you have visible allies. This study reinforces the importance of those visible allies.

While extreme obesity may be unhealthy, it may well be that the negative effects of modest weight-gain are exaggerated. Certainly, the social and psychological costs to dieting are immense. The damage that pursuing the thinness ideal does to men and women (especially women) is colossal. In many ways, the physical and spiritual damage brought on by a lifetime of dieting and self-loathing may be far worse than the threat posed by twenty, thirty, or even fifty “extra pounds”.

I’m a recreational athlete who is married to a recreational athlete; we spend a lot of our social time with other recreational athletes. We belong to a subculture in which exercise and competition is normative, and where discussions of the latest “brick workout” or the benefits of heart-rate monitoring are common at picnics and luncheons and around the dinner table. We reinforce not self-loathing, but a sense that a physically active life is an important one. This doesn’t make us in the least bit more virtuous; we’re simply competitive people who love exercising outdoors. The point is, we’ve created a small subculture in which our lifestyle choices are supported and reinforced. There’s nothing wrong with that, just as there’s nothing wrong with a group of people who don’t enjoy exercise and hate dieting mutually supporting each other as they collectively reject a societal ideal of thinness.

So there’s much about this study that is, frankly, potentially encouraging. But my fear is that the way in which it is being reported, and the way it is being discussed, will morph into still another tool with which to shame and shun those whose bodies don’t meet our societal standards.

The Winsome Vegan: some long thoughts about judgment, ethics, family dinners and “Hell’s Kitchen”

I don’t watch a lot of television, but last night made a happy exception: the last few innings of the championship match of the world cup of softball and back-to-back episodes of “Hell’s Kitchen.” I’m still unhappy about the decision of the Olympic Committee to take softball out of the Games starting in 2012. (Sure, the USA’s women are absolutely dominant. But Manchester United is pretty darned dominant in the Premiership too, and that doesn’t mean that the likes of Sunderland don’t get excited about playing them. Softball ranks just behind American college football and soccer as my favorite team sport to watch, so I’m biased.)

Even when I ate meat, I was never what you’d consider to be a “foodie.” As I’ve written before, in my pre-vegan bachelor days, I could consist for days, even weeks, on food-related products purchased at the local 7-11. Being vegan does force me to be more thoughtful about what I’m eating, but it’s a thoughtfulness born more of necessity rather than pleasure. That doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy my food, I do. But I’ve never had much interest in contemplating exciting new meals. Cooking shows — at least the sort where you are shown how to make something — are stunningly dull.

I do like fashion, and care much more about clothing than food. Hence, I do enjoy “Project Runway.” But I can’t explain why I’m so fond of “Top Chef” and the positively sadistic “Hell’s Kitchen”. Perhaps I just like watching people who are passionate about what they do struggling to perform under intense pressure. I know I’m at my best under pressure, and perhaps it’s empathy born of experience in other areas of life that makes the competitors on these shows so interesting to me. Lord knows, it’s not the food that they’re actually making.

And this brings me back to veganism. In the last four or five months that I have been much more strictly and actively vegan, I’ve been acutely conscious of my own dangerous tendency towards self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is the pit into which many adult converts tend to fall, and those of us who have “prodigal son” narratives (in my case involving a decade and a half worth of drugs, alcohol, multiple divorces and a lot of very unhealthy sexual acting-out) are all the more likely to become tiresomely prudish as we move to amend our way of life. Of course, in our zeal to promote the new “clean livin’” we’ve just discovered, we end up alienating everyone around us. I know I’ve slipped into the role of the prig many times, and as I grow in Christ, I’m all the more determined to not let that censoriousness characterize my thinking or my words about other people’s behavior.

At the same time, when it comes to veganism and animal rights, it’s hard. As someone who does believe that all sentient beings — not just humans — do have inalienable rights to life and dignity, it’s often difficult to find a way to live in loving community with those who find that view preposterous and silly. Watching “Hell’s Kitchen” last night, I saw one group of chefs preparing “bacon-wrapped rabbit” as a special dish. Looking at the strips of bacon wrapped around the little chunks of rabbit, I thought about the animals from which those morsels came. I thought about the hogs I’ve been around and the rabbits I’ve played with. (Lest you think I’m a purely urban vegan, I’ve spent a lot of time in my life on ranches and farms. I grew up around 4-H and FFA and have been to countless livestock shows and auctions. I’m not an urban sentimentalist totally ignorant of the realities of farm life.) I thought about the capacity of pigs to nurture and to protect, and the clear and obvious ability of rabbits to experience fear and pain and pleasure. And in order to continue watching the show, I had to shut down that part of me that wanted to scream “How dare you!” at the aspiring chefs.

I have vegan acquaintances who won’t go to family holidays where meat is served. I know some vegans who have severed all of their close ties with those who continue to eat animal products. They find it too painful to sit at family meals while those whom they love consume the flesh of creatures equally deserving of protection and care. I’m far too committed to my friends and family, far too interested in far too many different types of people to ever cut myself off from someone over their dietary choices.

With my family, we’ve reached a clear understanding. When we come home for family holidays (such as at Easter this year), we’ll bring our own food. No one will beg us to try “just one little bite” of ham or omelette. In turn, we won’t begin to hector our loved ones with the usual lines: “Do you have any idea how that was made? Would you be willing to eat it if you saw how that animal was slaughtered?” My wife and I not only sit next to meat-eaters, we even help in preparing dishes filled with animal product (as at the Fourth of July, where I spent over an hour cranking out ice cream I would never taste). We’ve made a conscious decision to strike a balance between our desire for loving, harmonious relationship with our families and our own commitment to no longer consume animals in any form.

It’s not as easy as it sounds. Sometimes, the meat eaters around me feel as if they’re being silently rebuked. As they slice their steaks and I spoon in my quinoa and broccoli, they look uncomfortable. I make a conscious effort not to stare at their food, I don’t make disgusted expressions, I don’t use passive-aggressive tactics to communicate disapproval. Nevertheless, I see some folks getting antsy. Often, they’ll ask if I’m “okay” with what they’re eating; I’m always careful to be reassuring.

At the same time, my veganism is not a value-neutral lifestyle choice. Being a feminist and being anti-racist isn’t morally equivalent with being a misogynist bigot. Those of us who fight for justice for women and ethnic minorities want to change hearts and minds and behaviors; we want men to stop abusing women, we want full inclusion for people of color in every aspect of public life. Most of us draw a distinction between someone who says “having toast with peanut butter in the morning is better than having cornflakes, and you can’t judge me for that view” and someone who says “raping women is something I prefer to not raping them, and you can’t judge me.” The latter involves tremendous harm to living beings whose lives have innate value, and so we feel comfortable and right in judging it. So if I believe that pigs and rabbits and cows have a similar innate value to that of a human being, am I not contradicting myself if I reassure my meat-eating friends that they’re “okay with me” when I would never offer that same reassurance to a rapist or a racist?

Yes, I do want a world where we’ve minimized the suffering of sentient creatures. I do want a world where we are all surviving and thriving on a plant-based diet, and I am eager to play a role in helping to create the economic systems and the policies that can make veganism as affordable and pleasurable and easy as carniverousness. The cost to the earth (in terms of water and protein, for example) to “factory farm” cows, pigs, sheep, and poultry is colossal and likely unsustainable. The cost in physical suffering is unspeakable, and I do wish those who eat meat would, at the least, imagine the face of the creature whose thighs or hindquarters they are eating. There can be no virtue in deliberate, willfull denial.

At the same time, I’m aware we live in a world trapped in the famous tension between the Already and the Not Yet. I am Already aware, at least I trust I am, of what it is God is calling me to be. I am Already convinced that I am called, and indeed, we all are called, to eat and drink and drive and make love and buy morally. I am Already convinced that to follow Christ is to live a life of courage and radical compassion; I am Already convinced that to live as an authentic feminist is to see that the exploitation of other living creatures for my pleasure is fundamentally unethical. I am Not Yet at the place where I can live this life perfectly, without the occasional small compromises that expose me and others to the charge of hypocrisy. I am Not Yet at the place where I can make the case for Christian feminist veganism without coming across, at least to many, as a charlatan or a fraud or a deluded prude swept up in religious enthusiasm.

So I’ll keep on keepin’ on; that means being cheerful about an undressed salad at an elegant restaurant while those around me nosh on chateaubriand. That means being unapologetic about animal rights while being warm, engaging, and non-judgmental with those who are unwilling to consider my position to be practical or desirable.

And it means I’m gonna work on another book proposal one of these days. Working title: “The Winsome Vegan: How to Live Cruelty-Free and Love those Who Don’t”.

“Death by Veganism”: cheap alarmism at its most repugnant

Two weeks after people first started sending it to me, let me respond to the infamous Nina Plancke op-ed in the New York Times, Death by Veganism. Commenting on the report of vegan parents in Georgia arrested after the death of their infant son, Plancke opines:

I was once a vegan. But well before I became pregnant, I concluded that a vegan pregnancy was irresponsible. You cannot create and nourish a robust baby merely on foods from plants.

Indigenous cuisines offer clues about what humans, naturally omnivorous, need to survive, reproduce and grow: traditional vegetarian diets, as in India, invariably include dairy and eggs for complete protein, essential fats and vitamins. There are no vegan societies for a simple reason: a vegan diet is not adequate in the long run.

The breathtaking lack of logic in the last sentence reminds me of classic anti-feminist arguments: there are no truly egalitarian societies (and never will be) because women are, in the long run, inferior to men.

Who is this Nina Planck person with her sweeping arguments about nutrition? Well, she has no medical degree or nutrition degree. Here’s her website, and there’s no mention of any professional certification in any health field. She writes cookbooks and advocates for farmer’s markets, both worthy activities — but she writes with the authority of someone who ought to have initials after her name. She doesn’t.

Who does say you can have a healthy vegan pregnancy? The medical advisory team at Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, which includes pediatricians, nutritionists, and gynecologists on its board. Here’s a letter to the Times from vegan nutritionist Dr. Amy Joy Lanou. An excerpt:

I am a nutritionist who testified as an expert witness for the prosecution in the criminal trial of the parents of Crown Shakur. As the lead prosecutor in this case told the jury, this poor infant was not killed by a vegan diet. He was starved to death by parents who did not give him breast milk, soy-based infant formula or enough food of any kind.

Well-planned vegan diets are healthful for pregnant mothers and their infants, as well as for older children, according to a large body of scientific research. Contrary to Ms. Planck’s assertions, there are healthy plant-based sources of docosahexaenoic acid, or DHA; calcium can be absorbed about as readily from soy milk as from cow’s milk; and soy does not inhibit growth.

Studies have found that vegan children are within the normal ranges for weight and height, and I personally know vegan mothers and vegan children who are healthier than many of their omnivorous peers.

When my wife and I attended PCRM’s gala fundraiser in D.C. in April, we met several couples with young children who are being raised vegan. The children laughed and played and ran around, looking slender and healthy and cheerful. One woman we talked to had been vegan throughout her two pregnancies, with smashing success. Though I may not know as many folks as Dr. Lanou, I can certainly — anecdotally — think of many kids who are growing up vegan and healthy and happy and fine.

I assume Nina Planck is not a shill for Big Ag. But her misrepresentations of the vegan lifestyle (which she suggests is fine for adults but irresponsible for children) has already done serious harm. Those who are committed to veganism as a multi-generational way of living, those who are committed to raising children from conception without food sourced from any animal other than a human mother, deserve to have the full story told.

My wife is committed to a vegan pregnancy. We are committed to raising vegan kids, with careful medical supervision from doctors and nutritionists who are committed to the welfare of children and the well-being of the earth they will inherit.

For more on vegan pregnancy and children, go here.

Veganism, feminism, eating disorders and guilt

So the posts about veganism (and eating disorders) that dominated this blog last week are getting lots of hits, which is nice, and some fairly strong criticism. Maia at Alas, A Blog took issue today with what she sees as my obsession with self-control in this post of mine from one week ago.

Maia writes:

Eating disorders are not just about reasons, they’re not just about appearances, they’re often also about morality and control. Hugo doesn’t acknowledge that veganism can feed the food/control/morality connection, which is central to an eating disordered mindset. For someone with a tendency to trying to exert control through self-denial of food (which is rarely a small percentage of a female population), any language around veganism which emphasises self-control and morality is going to make things worse. I guess I’ve more experience of this than most; I’ve spent a lot of time in a scene where there are quite a few vegans and lots of young women. I’ve despaired every which way at the policing and limiting which young women do to each other can happen take on a radical hue, and still be just as damaging.

And in the comments, “batgirl” says:

Actually, a lot of people with EDs become vegan because it’s another way to control eating and because it’s more socially acceptable to be vegan than to be anorexic. If a person eats only salad during a social dinner, someone will nearly always ask, “Why are you eating only salad? Aren’t you still HUNGRY?” If the person says, “I’m vegan,” then questions usually relate only to veganism, but if the person gives any other answer, some rude asshole will accuse them of having an eating disorder and then everyone at the table will jump on the “omg you’re skinny you should eat blah blah!” bandwagon.

I see the problem. In my women’s history class, we talk about when “moral language” first became part of our food discourse. Though there are a few flashes of it in the nineteenth century (see the literature of the Seventh Day Adventists, Sylvester Graham, etcetera), it really only takes firm root in mainstream culture with the coming of the 1920s, when the first wave of the dieting craze hit American women. The 1920s is when we first see girls’ diary entries talking about “being good’ and “being bad” because of eating decisions. And of course, the goodness or the badness to which these women refer has nothing to do with the justice issues around how the food came to their table, but whether or not the food was fattening.

As a feminist deeply concerned with the self-image of the young women with whom I work, as a man who has battled his own eating disorder and exercise addiction, I am intensely aware of how destructive guilt over food choices can be. But as a vegan committed to animal rights, committed to saving animals from being slaughtered and eaten, I do think how we eat is sometimes a fundamentally moral decision. Most of my feminist colleagues agree that buying clothes made by women and children who are exploited in sweatshops has moral implications; why don’t we also concede that eating meat or poultry produced on factory farms raises similar moral questions?

The problem, of course, is that eating disorders and body dysmorphia are doing devastating damage to millions of women. There is a way in which what we eat — and what our bodies look like — is infinitely more personal than what we wear. Introducing a moral dimension to food or sex is different than injecting it into a discussion about what sort of cars we ought to drive or whether air travel is justifiable. Because feminists work so damned hard (as I blogged in my laudatory review last week of Courtney Martin’s book) to help women overcome their own self-loathing, it’s understandable that there’s huge resistance to the claims of veganism.

Even when vegans don’t explicitly challenge the eating habits of others, our very explanations of why we do what we do (or don’t eat what we don’t eat) often make other folks defensive. I’ve learned that no matter how polite my tone, when I tell some folks “No thanks, I’m vegan” they hear it as judgment directed at them. I don’t point accusingly at their burger, mind you, but when I am asked to explain why I became a vegan, I do mention a belief in preventing as much cruelty as possible undergirds the decision. And some folks argue with me, and others shrug, and some folks seem hurt. I don’t know how to set boundaries any more gently. I will not eat meat or dairy or eggs for the sake of people-pleasing, any more than I would accept an invitation to a bachelor party at a strip club for the sake of bonding with other men. And when I decline invitations to the latter (I’ve had a few in my day) and when I tell folks “I don’t eat anything that has a face or came from a creature that has a face”, they sometimes feel judged. And more often than not, I’m not trying to make them miserable — just trying to explain why it is I won’t join them in what they’re doing.

So Maia’s post has me convinced that there has to be a way for those of us who value both animal rights and feminism to advocate veganism without triggering those folks who have eating disorders. My pro-feminism wants a world where women live happily incarnate in their bodies, feeling healthy and happy at any size. My pro-feminism wants them to eat in response to the perceived needs and desires of the body, not to deny themselves because they believe that self-denial is, in and of itself, a fundamental virtue. I’ll say it again: self-control and self-denial are not prima facie goods. Where they become goods is when they help us not hurt other living things. My veganism does advocate self-restraint as a virtue when it comes to making food choices, not because I want women to be thin but because I want them to stop eating slaughtered flesh. (Yes, I would rather them eat free-range eggs than eggs from caged chickens; any step towards justice is in the right direction.)

I’ve called out the animal rights movement for its sexism before. Though I support the overall agenda of PETA, I called them out more than two years ago for their sexually exploitative advertising:


The problem with using sexuality to make a political point is that it reinforces the notion that the body is a commodity designed not for our own delight and for sharing pleasure with another, but for selling a product or an idea. When we commodify the bodies of living things — young women or animals — we see them as existing for our own use and we lose sight of their immense value as part of God’s complex and unique creation. Though the animal world is indeed violent, we humans do have the free will and the means to change our diet, change our habits, and change the way in which we interact with our fellow creatures. This means moving towards a cruelty-free life, and also, I think, towards a life where human and animal bodies are seen as precious and worthy of protection, not exploitation and commercialization.

My veganism and my feminism are both rooted in my understanding of Christ’s call to follow Him. They are both rooted in the prophet’s cry to “do justice and love mercy”. At times, the consistency between a commitment to women’s rights and animal rights is obvious; at other times, there is apparent dissonance. But with time and effort and a willingness to listen and explain, I am confident that the inconsistencies between the messages can be resolved.

Outsourcing justice

I can usually count on my blog-crush, Chris Clarke, to get me thinkin.’ And he does that today with a great post up at Pandagon: Quality of whose life, again? Citing naturist, philosopher, novelist and poet Wendell Berry’s fondness for having all of his work typed by his wife, Chris points out that too frequently, the burden of living “slow”, of living “off the grid”, of living a life of “environmental purity” often places a disproportionate burden on to women:

What decisions are environmentalist citizens asked to make? Choosing the green laundry detergent and toilet paper and buying organic groceries. Carrying cloth bags to the supermarket. Using non-toxic cleansers. Adding corporate citizenship to one’s list of brand loyalty factors and schlepping the Seafood Buying Guide around. Sorting trash into the proper containers for recyclables, compost, and landfilling.

Of course, we men carry all those containers to the curb, which perfectly balances the division of labor. But then you add Environmentalism 2.0 to the mix, and you have the Slow Food (read: hours spent in the kitchen) and Local Food (read: hours spent shopping) movements, and with that kind of scheduling pressure a woman likely wouldn’t even have enough time left in the day to type up her husband’s poetry.

Yikes.

Since my wife joined me in strict veganism (and she jumped in “cold tofu”, skipping from eating red meat one week to full-on vegan the next without any of the traditional stages in between) we eat out a lot less. The number of restaurants to which we can go has been cut, even in greater Los Angeles, by 90%. With one or two exceptions, the local fast food options are all off the table now. We spend much more money at the supermarket than we used to; we are using the pots and pans more; we are eating out less. All of this is great for the health of the household. But it does do exactly what Chris worries it will — put extra pressure on both my wife and me to avoid falling into traditional gender roles.

The nice thing about eating out all the time was that, well, my wife and I contributed exactly the same amount of labor to the process. Pulling out the Amex and signing the bill is not a labor-intensive activity. The people who made our food and cleaned up our dishes were invariably invisible to us, and we assuaged any small sense of guilt about being waited on by giving good tips. But we eat out less these days, and that means more work for both of us.

My wife made a wonderful stew on Tuesday night, loaded with sauerkraut and potatoes (among other goodies). I packed it into tupperware after we had eaten, and I had one portion for lunch yesterday, another today, and another tomorrow. Yes, I washed dishes and packed leftovers away. But my wife still ended up doing a bit more work than I did that particular evening.

I know well enough that “real feminism begins at home”. If my commitment to egalitarianism isn’t matched in what I do around the house, then all of my public pronouncements are built on a foundation of fraud and hypocrisy. And as Chris cheekily points out, men who think they’re “doing their share” by dealing only with the outside things (like washing the car, mowing the lawn, taking out the trash) often have no sense of just how much less time these traditionally male activities require than the “inside” chores (cooking, cleaning, laundry) that we think of as largely female.

I’m going through a particularly ascetic period these days. I’m drinking a lot of vegan shakes (which come prepacked), I’m eating a lot of raw spinach, lots of trail mix, lots of soy yogurt (with some nice live cultures), lots of vegan organic food bars. Only once in a while am I eating anything that takes much time to prepare. This limited diet has the benefit of being quick and easy, but I’m aware that it’s hardly to everyone’s taste. More importantly, as my wife and I consider having children, we have no intention of raising our kids on little baggies of almonds, pumpkin seeds, and spinach leaves. At some point, our environmentalist and animal-rights commitments will demand that we take even more time than many other parents do to meet our children’s needs for variety and pleasure as well as ethical nutrition. And I’m going to have to work doubly hard not to fall prey to the Wendell Berry phenomenon, where my commitment to the most humane lifestyle possible ends up creating much more work for other people!

So this summer, it’s vegan cooking classes for me. Maybe with my wife, maybe not. But I’ll be danged if I’m going to outsource my justice.

A long and confessional post about veganism, transformation, smugness and judgment

I’m still thinking a lot about the post immediately below this one, and the problematic relationship between veganism and feminism.

Let me reframe the dilemma, as I see it. Feminists are rightly concerned that too many women are too worried about their bodies, too anxious about fat. We are saddened by the huge amount of time and energy our sisters put into the pursuit of an unrealistic, cruel, unattainable ideal. (Let me say again how well Courtney Martin summarizes the problem). Part of the solution, of course, is helping women to see their appetite for food as fundamentally good. Feminism, at its core, rejects the notion that our longings to be full, to be satisfied, to have pleasure, are sinful and need to always be repressed.

But veganism demands intense scrutiny of labels. While it demands that scrutiny and mindfulness in the name of avoiding cruelty rather than in the pursuit of thinness, the end result is that the compulsive dieter and the vegan may both end up spending a great deal more time than the average person thinking about what they “should” or shouldn’t eat. Both the vegan and the compulsive dieter will have a hard time at restaurants, as they study the menus in hopes of finding something that in the first case has no animal product and in the second case contains the least amount of fat.

There’s another problem, one I’m fighting against in my own life right now. Mythago, who bluntly tells me where I’m right and where I’m not, periodically calls me on both my myopia and my condescension. Though it stings when she does it, I’m old enough to know that we learn more from honest critics than we do from our enthusiastic supporters. As someone who has set himself up to be a role model, who teaches and mentors, I am in regular need of having folks who point out the myriad ways in which I continue to fall short. And one big way in which I continue to fall short is around my continued tendency to quietly judge.

When I first became serious about being a male feminist, I quickly grasped that one of my chief “jobs” would be working to hold other men accountable. I understood I could no longer laugh along at the degrading humor, no longer (ever) darken the door of a strip club, no longer enable another man’s casual mistreatment of the women in his life. I lost more than a couple of guys from my life as a result. And today, one of the hardest things I have to work on is my tendency to judge those men in my peer group (I am easier on teen boys) who continue to lead lives that I view as secretive, irresponsible, chauvinistic. I often find myself quietly — and not so quietly — seething at these guys. Why haven’t they seen the light? How can they still do what they do?

Last Thursday, I stopped at a magazine stand to pick up the May issue of Track and Field News, my subscription having expired. I stood in line to buy my beloved collection of statistics and meet reports; two men (a bit older than me) were in front of me, one with a porn magazine. Perhaps to offset the “shame” of what they were doing, the pair were engaged in that boisterous bonhomie that so many guys use to cover guilt or insecurity, joking about the bodies of the models in the magazine. And while on some days I might have said something, last Thursday my stomach was upset and I was underslept. I just had no energy for an argument. So I stood there and I judged these two, feeling ever more smugly superior as I did so. And while it briefly felt good to judge, I walked away from the newsstand feeling even more nauseated than before, upset at my own temporary inability to love these men. I committed murder in my heart, if only for a moment, on Robertson Boulevard last week. And though it doesn’t happen often, it does occur often enough that I realize I need to be honest and open about this quiet, viciously judgmental streak.

It shows up around food these days too. It’s hard not to judge what other people put in their mouths. It’s not the “don’t they know that will make them fat” judgment, it’s the “don’t they know how that sausage was made” judgment. It’s the “don’t they understand how much pleasure they’re getting from another creature’s suffering” judgment. Sometimes, particularly when I myself am tempted by meat, I find myself flooded with a temporary but intense hostility to those who “don’t get it.” That hostility, alas, is accompanied by a feeling of superiority. Like most repentant libertines who turn to Puritanism of one form or another, I am unpleasantly prone to periodic bouts of holier-than-thou smugness!

But I know to my core that it is possible to live a life of radical justice without consistently condemning (in word or thought) those who fall short of that mark. I write this confession today because I see this tendency to judge, this periodic smugness, as another serious character defect to overcome. Living a spiritual life isn’t about achieving perfection, it’s about peeling another layer off the onion. A better image would be to say that our character defects are like layers of blankets thrown over a lamp. In order to reveal the maximum amount of light, we have to peel off one blanket after another. The light gets progressively brigher the more layers we lift, but there’s always still another one to remove. I’ve removed the blankets of reckless womanizing, drug and alcohol abuse, chronic disregard for my impact on those around me. The current layers that need to be lifted involve the bigger sins of pride and judgment and condescension. I’m making progress, but somedays, especially when I’m hungry or tired, it’s really hard.

So I want to apologize to those whom I have offended. I have worked so hard to create a very different kind of life for myself. I’ve worked hard to match my commitment to justice for women, justice for children, justice for animals, justice for the earth, with my own behavior. I’m by nature drawn to extremes, of course. To paraphrase Goldwater, extremism in the defense of the defenseless is no vice. But that extremism for me is about making a maximum effort to bring about change. It’s not about violence of any kind, and violence can be physical, it can be verbal, and yes, it can even be psychic. I don’t hit people and I don’t call them names, but sometimes in my head, I call down curses on my enemies that would have the psalmist gasping. (I do like the psalms so much, for just this reason.) And though King David himself called on God to break the teeth of his enemies, I’m convinced that God wants better than that from us.

Jesus calls us to live lives of love and justice. I’ve come so far in terms of working to embody that justice in my day-to-day life, in how I eat and make love and spend money. Now I need to redouble my effort to love, delight in, and enjoy the company of those who do not share my values or commitments. I need to work harder on overcoming my judgment of my brothers with their porn magazines or my sisters with their hamburgers (or vice versa). I have been where they are, and God’s grace was poured out on me. I am no better than they, and though I can try and model a different way to think about sex and food, in the end, all of this transformation is meaningless if I don’t genuinely love them.

Meat, Dairy, Porn: some preliminary thoughts on women, dieting, veganism, guilt, pleasure and exploitation

I mentioned this morning that I am reading Courtney Martin’s Perfect Girls, Starving Daughters. I’ll try and say more about it once I’m finished, as I’m only through the first couple of chapters. It’s a grim go, early on — story after story of the bright, the beautiful, the dazzling consumed with self-loathing and tortured by body dysmorphia. It’s not a new story, but for those of us who have been dealing with this sort of thing for a while, it’s always a bit disheartening to realize that things aren’t getting any better. Still, a fuller review coming next week.

I was thinking about Courtney’s book a few minutes ago. Mondays are my long days here at the college; I teach four classes, and in order to fit those in as well as office hours, I get here around 8:00AM and won’t leave until close to 9:00PM tonight. Mondays, it goes without saying, are hard days to be a vegan. When I run in the mornings I rev up my appetite for the entire day, and though I try and pack a lot of food (nuts, fruits, veggies, tofu, juice) it only gets me so far sometimes. In the old days, I would go and grab a burrito or a chicken bowl at the “El Pollo Loco” franchise across the street. It filled me up if nothing else.

Half an hour ago, feeling peckish, I wandered into the little student cafe by my building. Tons of things to eat, but so few completely vegan choices. I settled for a little pre-packed bowl of melon and papaya (I’ll try and recycle the plastic container) and another banana. I thought about the slice of greasy, cheesy sausage pizza, and for a moment, I really wanted it.

There’s a trick to living a strictly vegan life. First off, as reading a book about eating disorders reminds me, I have to draw a bright and clear line between self-denial for the sake of self and self-denial for the sake of justice for my fellow creatures. I tell myself — and everyone else who will listen — I am NOT on a diet. This is not a temporary plan to lose weight, or something I’ll give up once marathon season comes to an end. This is a lifestyle choice — not to take into my body any animal products at all, to eat “raw” as much as possible, to avoid preservatives and high fructose corn syrup and all the rest of it. Whether it makes me thinner or fatter, makes me more pudgy or more defined, it can’t be about me anymore.

The funny thing is that being strictly vegan (off honey entirely) means that I am more attentive to what I eat than at any time in my life since I was crash dieting fifteen years ago. Back in 1992, I dropped from 175-145 the summer and fall after a divorce; on my 6′1″ frame, the 145 looked awful. I lived on small portions of junk food, and had no consciousness at all about whether or not animals were involved in producing what I was eating. I just wanted to have a body devoid of fat. Back then, I counted calories and fat grams obsessively. Today, I largely ignore fat and calorie information and read to make sure that what I’m eating is entirely plant-based and devoid of hidden dairy or egg traces. (Damn that sneaky caseinate!) I’m once again radically concerned with everything that goes into my mouth — but for a radically different reason.

But it’s hard not to focus on diet so much and not also think about how eating vegan (and doing a whole mess of runnin’) affects my physique and my overall appearance. The “is this about my ego, or is it really about the animals” question pops into my head almost every day, reminding me, as they told me in AA, to always “check my motives.” For anyone who has had an eating disorder, which I have certainly had, to move from casual vegetarianism to strict veganism is an experience that requires some regular self-examination.

It’s also hard to fight the urge to judge what other people put in their mouths. When I was exhibiting anorectic behavior, I got high as a kite on the bittersweet drug of self-denial. I did judge folks who ate a lot and didn’t work out. I spent years unlearning all that judgment, especially for my role as a feminist professor and youth mentor. I didn’t want the young people I worked with to torture themselves, to feel that overwhelming guilt over what they put in their mouths. I’ve wanted them to understand that they have a God-given right to joy, to delight in their own flesh. I’ve been adamant that feminism, food, and pleasure are all linked.

My feminism and my veganism, therefore, are in an uneasy alliance. On the one hand, they are natural allies. As many others have pointed out, there’s a link between patriarchal exploitation of women and human exploitation of animals. Men have used women to do unpaid work for millenia, and humans have used animals in the same fashion. The bodies of women are seen as “fair game” (a hunting reference) for predatory men, and pornography celebrates the idea that men are entitled to take delight (visual or otherwise) in the flesh of women who have little or no say in the matter. The meat industry teaches us that cows and pigs and fish exist solely to bring delight to our taste buds and satisfaction to our bellies. In patriarchal culture, the bodies of women and the bodies of animals exist to be consumed. Feminist veganism rejects the exploitation and abuse of living things; it counsels radical self-denial on the part of the consumer as a tool for liberating the consumed.

But women, particularly first-world women, eat plenty of meat. They also feel guilty about it, as Courtney Martin reminds us. The feminist in me wants the young women in my life to enjoy food, to reject the destructive cult of thinness. The vegan in me wants to curb and redirect the appetites of these very same young women. I don’t want them to have the pizza, the burger, the Milky Way bar, the mahi-mahi — not because I don’t want them to have pleasure but because that pleasure comes at the expense of a confined and tortured dairy cow, or a fish who died a slow, gasping death.

While historically meat and fish consumption might have been essential for survival, few Americans today would drop dead if they were forced to go vegan. They’d find life rigorously hard, at least many of them would. Hard, perhaps, in a way not dissimilar from the way a compulsive dieter finds her life hard. But the difference would be in the purpose of the self-denial.

So many feminist voices want our daughters and our little sisters to be less obsessed with calories and fat grams. We want our daughters to love their bodies, to delight in their flesh. We want them to stop readiing labels, and just eat what they want to satiety. But for me — and for other vegan feminist voices — that delight in guilt-free eating is highly problematic when it involves the exploitation of the victims of factory farming. Pleasure is a good. Overcoming crushing, unnecessary guilt is a good. But living, eating, and buying cruelty-free is also a powerful good.

There’s a book to be written here, or at least a longer article. I’ll muse on it some more. But I’m thinking that the phrase radical self-denial on the part of the consumer as a tool for liberating the consumed pretty much sums up my position on meat, dairy, and porn.

UPDATE: Stentor, who shares many of my concerns, has an interesting take here.

A note about leather, veganism, and the slow pace of transformation

I’ve been promising more posts on the vegan life, and here’s another one. Today’s topic: what to do about leather. First, a general update:

I’m as close to being fully vegan as I’ve ever been. No eggs, no dairy, no meat, no fish. More fruit, more vegetables, more nuts, more seeds. I’m wary of how easy it is to turn into a “junk-food vegan”; I take it easy on the wheat products and the textured soy protein. There’s a limit to how much soy I want to pump into my body.

I pack a lot of snacks wherever I go. When I was simply vegetarian, I could always count on being able to find a protein bar or a prepacked salad somewhere. Being vegan means being very intentional about what I have with me; I don’t like being caught with no vegan options in the midst of an afternoon snack attack. Careful planning — careful shopping, careful filling of tupperware with nuts, fruit, and other fun things — helps prevent the tempttion to fall.

As for leather: I own a lot of it. I have a dozen pairs of nice leather shoes, leather belts, a leather wallet, a suede jacket. I don’t have the resources to immediately replace them all. I am committed to not buying any more leather items, and to asking my loved ones not to give me anything leather. As these items wear out, I can replace them one by one with vegan alternatives. But it seems wasteful to throw them all away, and I can’t afford to instantly replace them all even if I were to give them to charity. I’m aware that as a teacher and youth leader and “public vegan”, wearing leather sends a mixed message. My goal is to get to the point where I’m not wearing any animal product (and that will mean, I suppose, foregoing the pleasures of a silk shirt or boxers). It will mean not only buying vegan clothing, but doing my best to ensure that the human producers of that clothing were well-paid. It narrows my shopping options, but I’ve found some excellent sources for good things. In the meantime, I’ll have some leather on me more often than not.

I am a great believer in incremental change. I ran a 5K before I ran a marathon. I gave up alcohol and drugs before I gave up cigarettes, and I still haven’t given up caffeine (and may never do so.) I gave up reckless promiscuity before I gave up “flirting”. I worked on meditating for five minutes before I tried going for ten. And I gave up red meat before I gave up chicken, and I gave up chicken before I gave up cheese. I’ve given up buying leather before I’ve given up wearing it. Progressing in slow stages works for me.

Those who don’t want to see us change will be eager to point out where we’re not yet perfectly consistent. They try and convince us that we must do everything perfectly, or not at all. They try and discourage folks from making positive changes by emphasizing that it will be hypocritical not to change everything all at once. Their goal is to keep us stuck, to keep us believing that transformation is too difficult, too painful. They scare off the aspiring vegan by saying, “If you still wear leather, you’re a fraud.” Well, no. If you still buy leather, you might want to think about your values — but continuing to wear a useable item until it is no longer so is hardly proof of weak principles, only of financial limitations.

My veganism, like my feminism, like my faith, is rooted in the cry of Aslan at the end of the Narnia books: “Further up, further in.” There’s always more growing to do, and it won’t be finished for a long, long time.