Protest Against Animal Cruelty: Jennifer Peterson vs. Barkworks: THE FRONT PAGE ONLINE

Two-part interview with Jennifer Peterson about her efforts to shut down Barkworks, a Westside Pavilion pet stores that supports puppy mills, sells sick dogs, and is otherwise symptomatic of cruelty for profit.

Part 1

Part 2

...and Compassion for All : THE FRONT PAGE ONLINE

Apologies, again, for the delay in updating the blog. Usual reason: stuff hitting fans and all that. Here's last week's musings on the Cove, compassion, and the human ability to feel - or not to feel - empathy for other living creatures.

...and Compassion for All : THE FRONT PAGE ONLINE

TFPO column: the fur may now be faux, but so is johnny weir’s conscience

This week's column at TFPO is all about figure skater Johnny Weir's outrageous love of real fur and a kerfuffle you may have read about.

Also, more commentary on the topic over at The Fashionoclast.

TFPO column: CAPS' peaceful protest at Bark Works reminds us to adopt from shelters

I enjoy the colourful lights and sparkling decorations, even the Christmas carols when they’re not looped on the stereo system while the tofurky is still warm on the table. But to be honest, I don’t care for Christmas. To some extent, it’s because I have no personal interest in the birth of Jesus. Mostly, Christmas always strikes me as the most inauthentic time of the year, stirring my idealism but ultimately reinforcing my cynicism. Instead of invoking the ghost of columns past, however, I’d rather focus on those elements of the Christmas spirit that we can and should all come together for regardless of our religious persuasion: compassion, peace, goodwill. And as I contemplate these most universal of values in light of the day’s mostly grim news, I also have to think about other areas in which we can take the opportunity to exercise compassion. Hence, this week's column about extending compassion towards animals...

CAPS' Peaceful Protest at Bark Works Reminds Us to Adopt From Shelters

TFPO column: what puppy mills and waterboarding say about us

Two brief comments about this week's column. First, I am aware that Obama didn't exactly follow through on his promise to get a shelter dog - his Portuguese water dog was a gift from Ted Kennedy (the American aristocracy, as Jessica G. put it). I didn't discuss it, not because I want to exempt the President from criticism, but because I'm keeping this sort of factoid for a future "State of the Presidency" column.

Second, the argument I set forth is not a new one. However, in light of recent news stories,it's well worth making the point again. It may even be worth repeating the point in the hopes that someday, somehow, it will actually sink in. Naturally, the larger point is that nothing is really changing from a cultural standpoint - and it has nothing to do with Obama. One can point to the failure of religion to foster progressive good in the world. One can also point to the failure of government and corporation. Whatever it is, the failure ultimately lies in us.

What Puppy Mills and Waterboarding Say About Us

TFPO column: abolish pet ownership. replace it with...

One of the challenges in going vegetarian or vegan is going beyond nutrition to other elements of living, like clothing, or household items, or any number of thingsthat, counter-intuitively involve animal products. For example, did you know that animal products are often used in the wine-making process? Gelatin (made from the collagen found in animal skin and bones), egg albumen, chitosan (made from chitin, the structural element of crustacean shells), and others are used as finings - agents that help remove organic compounds such as protein and yeasts to improve a wine's clarity, flavour, and aroma. Although these finings may not end up in the wine bottle you buy at the store, the use of animal products has prompted the manufacture of vegan wines.

But this week's topic at TFPO is a bit broader in scope, namely, the notion of pet ownership. It came about from a discussion on Ron Reagan's show on Air America as to whether or not people should be allowed to own wild animals like chimpanzees.

Abolish Pet Ownership. Replace It With...

what is baseline veganism? part 2

However, a few qualifications are in order. First is that humans are, indeed, omnivores. Our body has evolved to eat a variety of food. However, just because we CAN eat a variety of food types doesn’t mean that we SHOULD. Based on what I’ve read, I’ve come to see nutrition like this: as with sweets and alcohol, we can eat meat in small quantities, but for long term-health it’s best to follow a vegan diet. This brings me to a second point, namely, that in terms of ethics an absolute injunction against eating meat doesn’t really make sense. For one thing, all life is predicated on the consumption of other life, whether we like it or not. Carnivores eat meat, and unless we’re prepared to slaughter lions and wolves and the like because they are fundamentally immoral, then we have to admit that survival is a mitigating factor. Carnivores kill other animals because that’s how they evolved, and meat is what they need to survive. In human, omnivorous terms, this translates to: if the choice comes down to killing and eating an animal or starving to death, I certainly wouldn’t choose to starve to death. Veganism doesn’t work as an absolute.

There are more aesthetic reasons not to be so absolutist: not everything animal-related is harmful to animals. Milk, for example. Even though it’s not especially healthy in large quantities, it doesn’t hurt the cow to drink it. Same thing with eggs, or honey. The point isn’t to argue for vegetarianism, but to say that flexibility in a vegan diet means that we can be sure that the occasional treat of milk and eggs can from well-treated, free-range, organic animals that have not been made to suffer. Even eating meat, on occasion, may be acceptable if we take Michael Pollan’s point that there’s more to food than nutrition. Food is intrinsically tied to culture, to socializing, to enjoying the good life. I happen to enjoy sushi – forget beef and chicken – and like indulging in a good Japanese meal on special occasions. I don't necessarily see a problem when this is the exception and not the rule, although this does play fast and loose with the actual rule.

So this brings me to the rationale behind “baseline” veganism. Baseline, because the vegan diet serves as the, well, baseline for eating on a day to day basis (as opposed to vegetarianism, which allows animal-derived food as part of the diet). But a baseline is just that; a starting point. A guideline from which it is okay to deviate on occasion. A baseline vegan, or bVegan, is someone who adheres to veganism while allowing for limited compromises and deviations.

Or, a bVegan is a vegan who isn’t propped upright by a stick up the ass.

what is baseline veganism? part 1

When it comes to food, whether eating out with friends or partaking in the product lunch presentation at work, the fact that I am vegan inevitably creates a bit of a problem. Not so much in a logistical sense, although of course there’s an issue there, but more in terms of labels. While I consider myself essentially vegan, I don’t think the word “vegan” as commonly understood is an accurate label. Reason the first; too many vegans have an insufferable self-righteous attitude, and I’m insufferably self-righteous as it is that I don’t need any more encouragement. I’m talking about folks who refer to people who eat meat as corpse-eaters, for example. I’m talking about PETA, who are otherwise commendable in their efforts for securing humane treatment for animals. Reason the second: the word “vegan” does connote an absolute stance – absolutely no meat, no animal products, never-ever – and I don’t think this is either philosophically justified or realistic in terms of living life.

I’ve resorted to using pragmatic vegan or non-absolute vegan as alternatives, but these are just weasel words, as Wikipedia might put it. After working the ol’ neurons for a long time, I’ve settled on the term “baseline vegan” to label my nutritional stance. Before explaining it, though, I’d like to get on the soapbox and answer the question, “why vegan?” The short answer is predicated on the principle of avoiding or minimizing death and suffering:

1. It’s healthier for us.
2. It’s good for animals.
3. It’s good for the planet.
   

Nutritionally, it’s Dr. McDougall’s books that persuaded me of the science behind nutrition, along with stuff I’ve read by Michael Pollan (In Defense of Food) and others. Basically, to be healthy and reduce incidence of diseases like cancer, diabetes, what have you, it’s best to avoid processed food and “edible food-like products” and just eat food. Good ol’ natural food, straight from the planet – veggies, fruits, and grains – chock-full of vitamins and nutrients. But it’s also that excess meat and dairy, with high fat, underlies many diseases associated with the Western diet.

Beyond nutrition, the huge planetary population entails a large-scale meat industry, which comes with barbaric practices like debeaking, close confinement, electrocution deaths, and other abuses. I once rationalized these industrial processes as necessary for feeding a large population, but I can’t accept that anymore. Animals are sentient - to varying degrees, of course, but sentient nonetheless. They may not be “human,” but they feel pain; there’s more to animals than we think. To be consistent with acting with compassion, it’s necessary to treat animals humanely, with empathy - not just humans. Not eating meat means not treating animals with cruelty.

Then there’s the planet. The meat industry is one of the biggest producers of greenhouse gas that contribute to global warming. Yes, you can say cow farts – the methane of livestock is a greenhouse gas. Between that and the fertilizers, land use, transportation, and so on, the meat industry as it is now is bad for the environment. Other points of contention is how much grain goes to feed cattle (seven pounds of corn to one pound of beef, for example) when it could instead to feeling people directly. The excess consumption of meat, fast-food and otherwise, impacts not only the environment, but the quality of our human civilization.

To be continued...