The Real "Fervor of the Vegan": A Response to The Atlantic, Part 1
Published May 12, 2009 @ 07:14AM PT
Edit: The Flickr page from which I retrieved this photo from Poplar Spring Animal Sanctuary didn't include a name, but Ryan of Veg Blog recognized this sweetie and clued me in: this is the lovely Ainsley.
Last Thursday, Max Fisher of The Atlantic sent me a quick, kind note about my blog here and about an article he himself had just written. From his message, I was initially optimistic about what I would find when I followed the link, but when the page loaded, my disappointment was immediate. From the title, the photo he featured at the top, and the very first line, I could tell this was a piece that was going to frustrate and even anger me. To Mr. Fisher's credit, I want to repeat that he contacted me kindly and that we exchanged a couple very brief but respectful messages. I told him that I was bothered by the post and that I would write a response when I had time, and he was welcoming about this. So. Here we go. And because this response is long, I'll be breaking it into two parts.
We might as well start at the beginning. The title of the article is "The Fervor of the Vegan." The photo immediately below the title is of "Meat Is Murder / Vegan Attack" spray-painted in black on a brick wall. The first line plainly states that "not eating meat" is a "religion" for vegans. Ugh times three.
First, "the vegan" in the title implies that all vegans fit one mold or all hold some very specific, universal set of characteristics. We don't. We aren't all different copies of the same forgotten Cylon model. Vegans have this in common: we don't eat, wear, exploit, or support the exploitation of animals; in our food choices, and in our other purchases and life choices, we do our best to minimize harm. But that's it. From there, we're as varied as omnivores--as varied as anyone else in personalities, jobs, lifestyles, backgrounds, politics, religious beliefs, socioeconomic status, involvement or non-involvement in activism, and so on.
Second, I'm irked that someone professing to understand and respect vegans would choose this image of all images to represent vegans' "fervor." The percentage of vegans who go around spray-painting buildings--least of all with the words "vegan attack"--is ridiculously small, so very tiny that it's absurd that images such as these are ever considered representative of how vegans express themselves. Far more vegans express their passion and compassion through amazing, flavorful cooking and food blogging; through one-on-one conversations with friends and family; through rescuing and caring for animals; through peaceful, accessible, and friendly writing, leafleting, conversations, and demonstrations. The "fervor" of vegans is not in paint on a wall. And I'm damn tired of vegans being portrayed by those in the media (or by those who feel guilty in response to vegans--more on that in part 2 of this post) in this way. (Because of our image among non-vegans, I don't even like it when fellow animal advocates use these images to represent us--when I wrote a piece on animal activists in December, and another animal-advocating site saw it and reposted it in full, they added such an image to the post without my permission, and although I was flattered by the inclusion of the post, I wasn't crazy about the image.)
On a related note, Max perpetuates the idea of vegans as the "angry vegetarians." But as I told Max last week, most vegans aren't angry vegans, but some get angry when they see articles such as this, when they're constantly portrayed and/or mocked as something they're not, when they constantly have to defend themselves or once again respond to self-justifying misrepresentations of veganism, and when they so frequently have to defend the animals themselves in other articles and posts (not like this one) that minimize or mock animals' suffering. Getting angry in response to things that warrant anger doesn't make someone (or a group) generally angry. There are perpetually angry, vocally hostile, verbally violent vegans. But they are few (this is the subject of another long-overdue post). And those few need to stop being cited as representative of who most of us are.
And the religion remark. Oh, Max, the religion remark. You even made it as if it were fact, as if vegans would agree with it! Veganism is not a religion. It's not about praising, pleasing, and earning the approval of some god or about arbitrary rules handed down over generations. It's not about belief or faith in something or someone intangible and unseen. It's not about trying to secure your place in a next life. And it's not even about some sense of purity. Veganism is about minimizing, as much as possible, the unnecessary suffering and killing of our fellow beings. It's about very real, breathing, thinking, feeling individuals right here beside us on this planet--and it's quite simply about not exploiting, torturing, and killing them. It has far more in common with other social justice and civil rights movements than it has with any religion.
---
See part 2 here.
(Flickr photo by angela n. of a cow with visitors at Poplar Spring Animal Sanctuary)
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
EmailRelated Posts
Author
-
Stephanie Ernst is an independent animal rights advocate, a vegan, a tree-hugging environmentalist, and a freelance editor and writer. She lives in St. Louis with an aging corgi-lab and an adolescent rescued pit bull. In her advocacy, she works to challenge prevailing perceptions of animals, to show the connections between animal exploitation and other injustices, to help people see that animals are more like us than different, and to encourage compassionate, nonviolent living and eating.
And here I thought I was an atheist. Silly me!
Posted by Kelly Garbato on 05/12/2009 @ 10:24AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The most profound "fervor" is the animals going crazy in tiny gestation crates and battery cages, bellowing in distress on dairy farms as their newborns are pulled from them, becoming desperate for water during long trips in transport trucks, and writhing in pain while bleeding to death in slaughterhouses.
Posted by Gary Loewenthal on 05/12/2009 @ 02:14PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
You go, Gary! Well put.
Nice to see you're still out there spreading the mercy and compassion.
Posted by Karmah Lawson Bourne on 05/21/2009 @ 07:52PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
An excellent antidote to Fisher's piece can be found here: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200709/omnivore
Posted by Christopher Barden on 05/13/2009 @ 12:49AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I sometimes wish that the diverse range of humans who choose to stop eating/wearing/consuming sentient beings (aka, vegans) could launch a campaign to reclaim the word "vegetarian."
Everytime a writer self-identifies as a "vegetarian," I know the other bloody shoe will soon drop.
The gist of these "vegetarian writer explaining veganism to the masses" articles is always in the syntax of "I am vegetarian, but I love [insert animal product] and could never give it up."
It seems, in the now dominant definition of that word, "vegetarian" means: "One who exploits cows and chickens as a personal choice because it is a pleasure they are not willing to give up for any reason, including some compelling moral arguments."
I'm grateful that Fisher define's his version of "vegetarian" as so many do: one who values the taste of dairy cheese pizza even at the expense of supporting a system that creates vast amounts of emotional and physical misery for billions of animals.
Nifty.
So, why even call oneself a vegetarian? Why not just come up with another word for it?
Some suggestions:
Dairyist
Eggist
Cow Milk Enthusiast
Egg-Eater
Pizza-ist
Omelettisto
Cowboy
Cowgirl
Cattle-Ist
Ovo-lactophage
Lacto-ovo-ist
Eater of Animal Products Only Meant for Infant Animals
Etc...
Any of these words would suffice, and are arguably just as accurate, if not more so, than "vegetarian."
I don't see why a person who eats eggs and milk should deserve to be called a vegetarian anymore than one who eats steaks.
So why even bother saying one is "vegetarian"?
My suspicion is this: Many -- not all -- self-identified vegetarians like the tiny bit of moral superiority or trendiness it lends, but don't want to deny themselves their pleasures and don't want to be viewed as too far ahead of the curve.
Nor do they wish risking the discrimination many vegans face.
I wish there could be a movement to reclaim the word "vegetarian" so that it meant exactly the same thing as vegan.
Posted by Christopher Barden on 05/13/2009 @ 01:40AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Sorry, Christopher, I have to disagree.
It is not about labels or wanting to sound trendy. It is a choice of lifestyle. It doesn't matter the name. It doesn't matter if you are talking about a race, political party, religion, sexual orientation, vegetarian or vegan. A label is a label. We are not walking packages of food that need a description. I do not call myself a vegetarian or a vegan. Instead, my choices and lifestyle are enough for me to feel confident that I am working to being the most compassionate person that I can be. The EXAMPLE you set in what you DO, not what you call yourself is the most important thing. Actions, not words.
Raise awareness. Empower others. Choose compassion and kindness. Take action.
Labels help no one. They promote discrimination and segregate people. A movement towards change does not include more separation or a "play" on words. It it the acceptance of all, with the least amount of suffering and cruelty. We are all in this together, no matter the title you choose.
Posted by Michele McCowan on 06/19/2009 @ 10:50AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Christopher,
I agree with you reclaiming the word "vegetarian." This word should be mean someone who eats only plant foods, rather than someone who merely gives up flesh while still consuming other animal-derived products like cow milk and bird eggs.
Posted by Brandon Becker on 05/13/2009 @ 11:05AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I know it's an impractical goal, but in terms of framing the discourse, if there were some way to redefine vegetarian to mean vegan, it could, I believe, boost the number of people who actually DO give up eating animals entirely, because there would be some clarity about what the word means.
Right now, vegetarian really doesn't mean anything.
I've met many people who even consider fish a "vegetarian" option.
Posted by Christopher Barden on 05/13/2009 @ 11:44AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I think Chrisopher is correct. People like Mr. Fisher exist within a palpable contradiction, which they acknowledge and yet refuse to correct.
They recognize the error in their own reasoning and thus conclude that not consuming nonhuman animals is the correct ethical choice, while they simultaneously abdicate their ethical responsibility under the pressure of self-interest, which they previously acknowledged to be an ethical error. Their solution is simple and juvenile: minimize veganism as a means to veil the obvious conclusions of their own reasoning to make this conclusion seem beyond their reach -- make veganism almost an absurd conclusion. If Mr. Fisher (and others) weren't so intelligent this would be expected and defensible, but in this case, unfortunately, it is rather pathetic. The comment section that followed his article displayed the pathetic nature of the dialogue his hypocrisy engendered.
Posted by Alex Melonas on 05/13/2009 @ 02:25PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Angry? That's the last word anyone would use to describe me.
Passionate & compassionate are the characteristics I strive for.
Posted by Lisa Smolen on 05/13/2009 @ 11:33PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I don't like it when veganism is called a religion, however, one definition given for "religion" at dictionary.com is:
"something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice."
Well, if fighting prejudice can be a religion, then so can veganism. And ultimately, it doesn't bother me so much.
Posted by Elaine Vigneault on 05/21/2009 @ 08:28AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I have been on several vegan/non-vegan forums and I must say that I have come across the same thing time and time again. People who eat meat automatically think that all vegans are being judgmental and preachy, that they do not "live and let live". There is a prejudice (as you pointed out) and people don't seem to care. If we were categorizing Blacks or Jews, it would be unacceptable, but because we are doing it to vegans, it's no big deal. NOT all vegans are this way. I am asked by people WHY I am a vegan and when I tell them why, they respond in a defensive manner when I never expressed judgment on them, I simply explained what drove me to change my habits... it's a strange thing indeed.
I started a blog
Awesome Vegan Girl containing vegan recipes and hopefully you'll check it out!
Posted by Tatiana Cochran on 06/02/2009 @ 07:37AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I've been vegan for coming up to 20 years now and I am sick and tired of this sort of prejudice against us. When asked about my veganism i just tell it as it is and people always get haughty and defensive, for gods sake why on earth do they ask if they cant handle the answer? And why should i defend what I do when my choice was a (well researched) decision based on ethics where as their lifestyle is based on self gratification and ignorance? They should be explaining themselves! They are so self rightous yet accuse vegans of being so. And they refuse to be open to the facts about the meat and dairy industry. It is quite literally is hands on ears "lalalalalala" childish behavior. I chose to be vegan because it is the path of the least environmental destruction and I refuse to support the violence of the meat and dairy industries. It is difficult at times so I certainly don't do it for the hell of it. And its certainly no fun being aggressively targeted by non vegans. I certainly don't do it to appear "better" than anyone else. Being vegan saves lives and prevents suffering and that is all that is important to me. I refuse to tip toe around the flacid egos of those who cant come to terms with the suffering caused by what they do. If people feel threatened by vegans its their problem not mine! I'm sick and tired of the prejudice against vegans and i 'm sick and tired of the same old immature accusations used to defend the non vegan stance.
I cannot see how vegetarianism can be defended as a better option than veganism, it should instead be seen and encouraged as a stepladder to becoming vegan. The poultry and milk industries are a part of the meat industry and if you buy dairy or eggs the money funds the meat industry, they are inseparable. Also milk and egg production expend massive amounts of resources for an end product which is very small compared to the resources (water, plants fed to the animals, energy, etc) consumed to produce it. This complicity can only be avoided by cutting out all animal products.
Posted by Red N. on 06/21/2009 @ 01:52AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.