Deep Roots: Animal Rights Blog

Welcome to the 9th Carnival of Empty Cages! It is amazing how many great posts were written in the past month (and to think of all the posts that weren’t submitted or I didn’t find). There are a lot of topics covered in this edition of the carnival. I hope you enjoy. Be sure to submit your post (or someone else’s post that you really enjoy) for the next edition. You can submit by emailing the link to chris (at) deeprootssanctuary.org or use the submission form.

Making Connections
Veganism and Prison Abolition [The Vegan Ideal]
When I first started the Carnival of Empty Cages (in 2006, I think), I named it that for a reason. I told be to “think creatively about what cages we need to empty.” I did this because I wanted people to include prison abolition in this discussion, but I hoped folks would come to this conclusion on their own. Nine carnivals later and I am ecstatic to announce the first such post… AND it connects veganism! Thanks, Dani! Now the veil is lifted… I (and Deep Roots) want to have sincere dialog about prison abolition and how it relates to the abolition of all oppression and exploitation (this is why we table with prison abolition literature next to our AR lit).

Now’s the Time (No Time Like Now) [SuperWeed]
Pattrice has a great post about the food-feed-fuel conflict that is driving the global food crisis. I particularly like her conclusion that vegan advocates should seize the day to tout the cost efficiency of a vegan diet (while not ignoring the ethics, of course). The Vegan Ideal has a post on food distribution arguing that veganism must create a shift in power.

Mutt, Mulatto, Mule? [Vegans of Color]
Amalgamated looks at the history of the word mutt and shows how people of color are referred to as non-human animals and how non-human animals are considered lower than humans.

Call for Proposals: Coming Out for Animals [Queering Animal Liberation]
Kim Stallwood, pattrice jones, and Olivia Lane are putting together a book looking at the links between Queer identity/activism and animal liberation. This is the call for submissions. The deadline is August 30th.

There have been some criticisms of this call (hopefully constructive criticisms) from The Vegan Ideal and us here at Deep Roots.

Stupid Things Herbivore’s Say: Worry About Human Rights, Not Animal Rights [Vegan Soapbox]
Eccentric Vegan responds to the notion that worrying about animal rights and being vegan are wastes of time until all humans live in an egalitarian society.

Torture: It’s A Dog’s Life [The Vegan Ideal]
Dani talks about how torture techniques used on prisoners in the so-called “War on Terror” were developed on dogs in the 1970s. The posts then goes on to examine how the original research into these techniques should also be considered torture. Its quite simple really.

Alliance Building and Militarism [The Vegan Ideal]
I know, a lot of posts from The Vegan Ideal. What can I say, Dani does good work. This is about how PETA, in its denouncement of the military’s use of pigs as targets, fails to make an important alliance between the peace and animal lib movements.

Animals and the Environment
Environmental Protection and Animal Rights [Happy Vegetable]
The Happy Vegetable talks about the need for vegans to recognize that veganism is a great step for the environment, but its not enough.

Living a vegan lifestyle is your personal protest against animal cruelty. So don’t let it stop with what you put in your mouth or what you wear.

Deb at Invinsible Voices also had a couple of related posts including one on transitioning to a bicycle and another visual post this month showing the connections between animal rights and the environment.

Random Animal Rights Stuff
Animal Rights 101, part four: Property Status [An Animal-Friendly Life]
Despite wearing a cast, Eric managed to put together the four part in his introductory series to animal rights.

Unlike bicycles and all other inanimate objects, sentient animals do have interests that merit consideration, and this presents us with our problem: Because they are legally classified as property that humans may use as a means to any recognized end, just like inanimate objects such as bicycles, they are prevented from possessing any legal rights that would protect their interests.

On Honest Meat and Absent Referents [Animal Person]
Mary talks about what isn’t being talked about when animal exploiters refer to “production.” Ok, I’m a sucker for discussions on absent referents.

Woman Sentenced to 2 Years for Rescuing Dog, “Terrorists” Rescue More Animals in Retaliation [Green Is The New Red]
Will writes about a UK activist who was just sentenced to two years in prison for rescuing a dog after animal agencies wouldn’t respond to calls of abuse.

H Partners Dumps All HLS (LSR) Shares [Food Fight!]
Food Fight shares the good news that the second largest institutional investor in HLS (LSR), the largest contract animal testing company, has dropped their entire $22,452,000 HLS portfolio. It took less than a month and all SHAC had to do was basically ask. Maybe H Partners care about animal rights, maybe they were just scared to be a SHAC target. Who cares.

Hog Wrestling in Wisconsin [Veg Blog]
Ryan talks about an annual hog wrestling event in Wisconsin (complete with disturbing picture) and why no amount of claims cannot make such events humane. Kelly at Smite Me! also wrote a little more in depth about the hog wrestling event.

William Saletan: The new hierarchy of GAP [An Animal-Friendly Life]
Eric responds to the Spanish parliament’s decision to extend the right to life and freedom to great apes. His conclusion is beautiful:

Animal activists often take approaches like GAP to be tactical means to the end of extending rights to all animals some day (as points of spears and such), but this kind of thinking misses the mark. We don’t need to extend the hierarchy, we need to erase that hierarchy entirely

Shouldn’t we simply avoid cruelty? [That Vegan Girl]
Alex writes about how we do not avoid certain actions because those actions are considered cruel (or because laws tell us not to), but rather because ethical imperatives stop us.

It’s not euthanasia! [That Vegan Girl]
Alex explains that using “euthanasia” to describe the process of killing animals in shelters is a misnomer. Thanks, Alex! The misuse of the term euthanasia is a pet peeve of mine.

The motive of the person who commits an act of euthanasia is to benefit the one whose death is brought about. The individual who is suffering has an exceedingly poor quality of life, for example, and is, therefore, the direct object of concern.

Last week I posted the call for submissions for Coming Out for Animals: Queering Animal Liberation. Before even posting that call, it had already generated some discussion here at Deep Roots.Let me start by saying that I am Queer. And I love the idea of an anthology that looks at the connections of any liberation struggles. But the wording of the call does pose some questions.

A Problem with Words

Dani, at The Vegan Ideal, has already stated outrage over the notion that animal rights activists are the most targeted segment of the U.S. population. Or as the call asks:

Why do queer activists in Uganda but animal activists in the USA bear the brunt of police suppression in their respective countries? Are they similarly subversive of “cultural” practices that turn out to be critical to the maintenance of state power?

I whole-heartedly agree with Dani’s outrage. I’ve had the privilege of reading Pattrice’s writing before and my guess is that this is perhaps a misunderstanding in context. Perhaps it was meant the as far as activist groups go, animal rights activists “bear the brunt” in the U.S., whereas Queer activists are the most targeted in Uganda. If that is the intended statement, I may be more inclined to agree or at least less inclined to outrage.

There is perhaps a problem with comparison in this example. Animal rights activists in the U.S. are targeted for our activities and successes against large corporations. Queer activists in Uganda are not targeted because they are activists, or not solely because they are activists. They are targeted for being Queer, thus the situation requires the transition into activism.

What makes the claim of animal rights activists being the most targeted somewhat legitimate? The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act is the first thing that comes to mind. Animal rights activists can now be sent to prison as terrorists for doing nothing but hindering the profits of animal exploitation businesses. That is what happened with the SHAC 7. They were not charged with any physical crime or even the conspiracy to commit a physical crime. Instead, they were targeted as terrorists because they ran a website that helped other activists effectively shut down the largest animal testing company. They are now serving federal prison sentences. But immigrants who participate in immigrant rights work (or any activist work for that matter) can be detained for an indefinite amount of time and deported without having committed any crime other than crossing an imaginary border to provide for themselves and their family.

It is also known that FBI agents commonly try to infiltrate animal rights groups (and vegan potlucks). However, it is also known that they are doing that with peace and environmental groups. I would also be surprised if they were not at least attempting to infiltrate immigrant rights groups. So to that extent, animal rights groups are, indeed, targeted. But perhaps not as disproportionately so as we would like to believe. After all, I believe the six SHAC activists are the only ones that have been imprisoned who didn’t actually commit any crimes (even if the other crimes were non-violent, they are still generally accepted as punishable crimes). And environmental activists such as Jeffrey Luers, who did commit the crime of burning SUVs, are serving far more disproportionate sentences (23 years for Luers).

So far, I’ve been arrested or detained for anti-war activities, anti-sweatshop activities, and counter-globalization activities, but not yet animal rights work. Not that one person’s experience can serve as the standard for an entire population, but that is my experience so far. The argument could be made that I haven’t been effective enough yet in my animal rights activism:)

Dani also makes a great point about something that I have been hoping to address here on this blog for several months now:

this call for papers ignore how activists are manufacturing increased police suppression that targets oppressed groups by actively promoting stiffer sentencing for anti-cruelty laws, and specifically criminalizing “animal cruelty” identified with poor people and people of color (i.e., dog fighting and cock fighting)

Sexualizing Things That Are Not Sexual

All of the above discussion was not, however, a part of the original dialogue sparked here at Deep Roots. The original concern, brought up by Jerico, was “are we continuing the trend of sexualizing something that isn’t sexual?” There is context to this question that I will get to in a moment, but let me first point out that this line of discussion was perhaps sparked by another problem with wording.

The subtitle of the book, Queering Animal Liberation, is kind of problematic. As Jerico pointed out, this title chose the language of “animal liberation” as opposed to animal rights or animal welfare. As longtime animal liberation activists, Jerico and I both agree that this is one of the Queerest and most Queer-friendly movements we have been a part of. Hell, there was an uprising at the Grassroots Animal Rights Conference because the keynote speaker is an outspoken homophobe. All of this is not to say that there isn’t work to be done within the animal lib movement.

Another question was why do we need to “Queer” animal liberation? Shouldn’t animal liberation as a concept be strong enough that it doesn’t need to be attached to some other liberation struggle in order to be justified? I hope the book will be used as a tool to show how liberation struggles are connected, but that in those connections they stand up in their own right as liberation struggles that must be taken seriously by those concerned with compassion and justice.

Jerico also pointed out that perhaps it could be called “The Queering of Animal Liberation.” This is where I’ll get into the context I mentioned above. Over the past year or two, we have seen a rapid increase in the attempt to connect veganism and animal lib work to some sort of deprived sexuality. The New York Times went so far as to claim a new breed of sexuality: vegansexuality. The idea that vegans will only sleep with other vegans because everyone else disgusts us. While vegans may be more apt to sleep with other vegans, you could say the same thing of liberals sleeping with liberals, conservatives with conservatives, Christians with Christians, Muslims with Muslims, Jews with Jews, you get the point. The reason is not that all of these people have some sort of sexually deprived minds, but that we like to be intimate with people who have common interests and ethics.

But it didn’t start or stop with vegansexuality. For a long time, it has been tried to attach animal liberationists to bestiality. Even Mother Jones sorta played into this notion by introducing the term “petophilia,” which I guess is supposed to refer to people who seem to care more about their non-human companions than the humans around them.

There were a series of articles recently published that tried to prove that herbivorous diets, especially those containing soy, will turn your children into Queers. And still to this day, there are very enlightened people who shout “fag” or “dyke” as they pass a crowd of animal lib activists. Obviously I don’t take these to be the insults they are meant to be, but it begs the question, “why is animal liberation and veganism seen as an activity for Queer people?”

The Remaining Straight-Edge Vegans

One last thing that was brought up that I repeat solely because I think it is funny, is Jerico’s response the the question, “What are we going to do about homophobia among straight-edge vegans?” His response: “Um, I don’t know. Go back to the 90s when it was still a problem?”

Mind you, we are both substance-free. We have both been around long enough to watch the rise and fall of the straight-edge scene. While there are still a lot of straight-edge people, the scene (if it is still a scene) is a lot different. In fact, the strongest proponent of straight-edge life that I know is Queer. Straight-edge seems to no longer be entrenched in the hardcore dudeliness that it once was.

None of this is to say that I think the book is a bad idea. I don’t. I am really interested in this discussion and hope that it succeeds. I merely hope that the critiques will encourage people to write thoughtful essays that truly challenge movements to become the liberation struggles we purport them to be. I think this is what the editors want to get out of this project as well and it is going to take all of us to accomplish that.

It is not exactly the victory we would hope for, a year-round ban on live-caught coyotes, but earlier this month, the Indiana Natural Resources Commission (NRC) adopted a new rule change prohibiting the sale of live coyotes caught outside the hunting and trapping season, which runs from October 15 to March 15. Although not a total victory, this is a huge blow against the live-export industry and thus the hunting and trapping industry.

Indiana is the largest exporter of live-caught coyotes. These coyotes are often used in dog “training” sessions where multiple dogs are released upon a single coyote trapped in an enclosed area. The dogs are scored on how quickly they find and kill the coyote. This “training” is nothing more than legalized dog fighting, but its multiple dogs against one coyote.

The rule change does nothing to stop coyotes from being live-caught during the off-season, but rather states that they must be released or killed within 24 hours. However, during the public hearing period, many trappers stated that they would not be able to continue “removing the nuisance species” if they were unable to use the live coyotes because it would no longer be economically viable for them. This was there way of threatening the DNR and NRC; “if you don’t let us do what we want, you’ll have coyotes everywhere.” Thankfully the NRC saw through this baseless threat.

Even though the rule only applies to a six-month period, it sets a new precedent that legally states that such practices are morally questionable. Our next step is to prove this practice is not only questionable, but morally bankrupt. While we will continue working with other groups to stop this practice year-round, we encourage everyone to thank the NRC for their action. Here is their contact info:

Indiana Government Center North
100 North Senate Avenue, Room N501
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
(317) 232-4699
(317) 233-2977 Fax

Or send them an email through their online contact form.

via Queering Animal Liberation:

Coming Out for Animals: Queering Animal Liberation

What do queer liberation and animal liberation have to do with each other? How does the construction of homosexuality as both “unnatural” and “bestial” hurt both people and animals? How are speciesism and heterosexism interrelated and how do they fit into the matrix of race-sex-class oppression? Why have both homosexuality and veganism been dismissed as “white things” beside the point of real liberation struggles? What are we going to do about homophobia among straight-edge vegans? About those dreadful gay rodeos? Should we be arguing for pleather or against sexual practices that mimic the subjugation of animals? What’s so sexy about whips, chains, and choke collars anyway? What do hip hop “video vixens” and activist “vegan vixens” have in common beyond the performance of animality for the heterosexual male gaze? How does vivisection hurt people with AIDS? Why, within the USA, are both the queer and animal liberation movements less diverse than they should be but portrayed as more white than they are? Why do queer activists in Uganda but animal activists in the USA bear the brunt of police suppression in their respective countries? Are they similarly subversive of “cultural” practices that turn out to be critical to the maintenance of state power? What keeps many gay men in the animal liberation movement from coming out? Why are so many lesbian potlucks vegetarian and what does this mean in the era of FBI infiltration of the vegan potluck?

In the hopes of answering these and similar questions, we are seeking proposals for a new anthology to be entitled Coming Out for Animals: Queering Animal Liberation. (”We” are Kim Stallwood, pattrice jones, and Olivia Lane. Our bios are here.) The anthology will include thought-provoking essays on theoretical and practical topics as well as personal narratives by queer animal advocates , vegan queer activists, and queer vegans who are active in other struggles.

Proposals should include a summary or abstract of the proposed chapter along with information about the author. If you have previous publications, please list at least some of them. If you don’t have previous publications, don’t despair but please do include a writing sample — perhaps a page or two of the piece you want to write for us. All of the editors are skilled at working with first-time writers and we are particularly committed to publishing activists who have not yet had a voice in their respective movements.

We do have a number of chapters and promises in hand as well as a list of topics we really hope somebody will cover (some of which are suggested by the questions above). If you fear that your proposed topic might be already covered or if you might like to help us out by covering one of the topics on our wish list, please write to us before preparing your proposal. If you have any questions at all, please feel free to write to us before putting any time into a proposal.

Address all proposals and inquiries to: pattrice (at) pattricejones.info or pattrice jones c/o Eastern Shore Sanctuary; 13981 Reading Ferry; Princess Anne, MD 21853; USA.

Proposal Deadline: 30 August, 2008

Deadline for Accepted Chapters: 31 December, 2008

Please forward or re-post freely!

hat tip to Vegan Soapbox

No excuses, the Carnival is simply late. Despite the fact that I’ve been collecting blog post links for the past few months, I’m only going to include items from June. Enjoy! And remember to send your submissions for the 9th edition to chris [at] deeprootssanctuary.org or at blogcarnival.com.

I decided not to break the posts into categories this edition because there were a lot of posts that didn’t easily fit into a box. I guess that’s a downside to seeing the interconnectedness of everything:)

Animal Rights 101 [An Animal-Friendly Life]
Eric Prescott has started a series of posts to introduce people to the fundamentals of the abolitionist approach to animal rights. The series now consists of three parts. Part One: The Need talks about why we need to clearly define animal rights. The second part, Rights, breaks down the differences and connections between legal and moral rights. And part three, Animal Rights, delves into the notion of sentience and the basis of equal consideration.

With greater clarity, precision, and stronger claims-making, our movement will be more coherent as it strikes at the roots of animal exploitation, rather than spending vast resources on efforts for nonhuman beings that on the surface seem good, but which ultimately do very little for them individually and may well further entrench their status as property for humans to use for the foreseeable future.

Veganism, Privilege and Liberation [The Vegan Ideal]
Dani, at The Vegan Ideal, writes about veganism as an ideology of liberation that renounces human privilege.

Theory and practice are one; you can’t “renounce absolutely … the right to use” without, at the same time, renouncing the actual use and the benefits of that use.

Full Frontal Factory Farming [Elaine Vigneault]
Many of us radicals and progressives have challenged PETA’s use of women in their campaigns. This is an excellent post from Elaine that challenges us to take a closer look at what is going on with these demonstrations and to open our minds to the idea that perhaps PETA may have a feminist perspective after all.

Speciesism: It’s Only Human [The Vegan Ideal]
The thing I like most about this post is that you could easily substitute some words and be talking about ableism, classism, racism, sexism, sizism or any other systematic oppression. Dani wrote a good follow-up, too, called Challenging the Structure of Nonhuman Oppression.

PPS Calls for Change in Direction of Vegan Advocacy [Animal Person]
Mary Martin, of Animal Person, toots the horn of the Peaceful Prairie Sanctuary and breaks down why the change in vegan advocacy is essential. Be sure to check out the original article from PPS, too.

if you believe there’s no such thing as humane farming, you do your own message a disservice by using “factory farming” as your descriptor because that creates an opening for the acceptance of an alternative.

On Speciesism, the ALF and the Media [Animal Person]
Mary sets a great example with this post. She opens her mind to the possibility of expanding definitions and encouraging new tactics in the name of strengthening strategies for an end goal: animal liberation. She also does a great job at address the concern of “negative media image” of ALF actions hurting the animal rights cause. And if that post wasn’t enough, she has a great follow-up responding to the backlash.

When one claims to be against speciesism, but would use certain tactics in the service of humans but not nonhumans, I have no choice but to say that’s a profound contradiction (a.k.a., hypocrisy).

Robot Monkeys [The PETA Files]
Grace gives us a perfect example of unnecessary animal testing. While the implications of a prosthetic limb can prove to be helpful to amputees, the argument for using monkeys in the experiment becomes morally bankrupt when it is leaked that the study has already been conducted… with humans.

The electrodes in the monkeys’ brains were attached to a computer, and the computer was attached to a robotic arm. The vivisectors restrained the monkeys’ arms and had the animals use their thoughts to move the robotic arm to their mouths so that they could get the food.

Earth Balance, palm oil, rainforests and RAN [Invisible Voices]
Deb over at Invisible Voices openly shares her struggle with coming to terms about the fact that the beloved vegan butter, Earth Balance, kills animals by destroying habitat, not to mention displacing communities, exploiting workers, and killing other species. Not that palm oil is particularly insidious (as Deb admits in the comments), environmental destruction is a part of industrial farming, but there is an active campaign to stop the deforestation caused by palm oil.

Every time I turn around, I’m reminded about how intertwined these issues are. Social justice, environmental protection, animal rights. Palm oil is a hat trick of issues, and it is something we all need to pay attention to.