pElAgUS' 

Interview With Richard Blackman, A Fruitarian

http://www.realgainz.com/Fruitarian


(RG): I understand that you are a Fruitarian. I've never heard of that before. Can you explain to me what it is?

(R: Sure, no problem. A Fruitarian is a person whose diet consists exclusively of seeded fresh fruits of all kinds. There's no secrets, rules or special methods to living a Fruitarian lifestyle, as complicated as the guru's would like to make out. It's as simple as picking up a fruit and eating it. The hard part is dealing with what we call the detoxification period. This is the time where cooked food is eliminated from the diet and the body begins to cleanse itself.

It's the bodies natural instinct to always cleanse itself so when you go strict Fruitarian you will eventually get rid of the bodies bulky waste and debris from cooked food and kick start your bodies natural cleansing process and given the right conditions, it will start to clean out all the waste and debris left in the bodies organs from the cooked foods you ate in the past at a deeper level and this is what makes the detoxification period so hard because after eliminating cooked foods from your diet, you will then crave cooked foods in the same way as a drug addict or alcoholic will crave drugs or alcohol, as well as suffer from detoxification symptoms.

The length of time it takes for people to get over their detoxification period varies from person to person. It can last weeks to years but, only once the body has cleansed itself fully, can we truly feel and experience all of what Fruitarianism has to offer. Unfortunatly very few people ever get to that point due to fear, uncertainty and severe detoxification symptoms, which many mistake for illness.

My advice to anyone considering Fruitarianism is to ease into it over a period of years. First, master being a Raw Vegan, eating heavier foods then master being a strict 100% Raw Vegan then see if your ready for Fruitarianism.

Fruitarianism ain't nothing to jump into unprepared, so unless your super hardcore and can handle some severe detoxification symptoms, I'd ease into it!


(RG): I love the way you went into depth with that. You explained it very well. So, you just eat nothing but fruits? How do you keep and maintain your sugar and protien level eating nothing but fruits?

(R: Yes, I eat nothing but fruits...no veggies, greens, nuts, seeds, supplements and I don't drink any water. I get all my fluids from fruits. When I first went fruitarian, I was drawn to a wide variety of fruits, it felt so liberating to be eating fruits of all kinds without the after effects I got from cooked food.


I was perfectly happy just eating fruits, but the more I researched into fruitarianism, the more I came across conflicting and negative information. All of it going against my own instincts. I got so confused that I decided that my own instincts must be wrong and reluctantly introduced water, nuts, seeds and green juices/supplements into my lifestyle but, I stopped those shortly afterwards because it just didn't feel right with my body and spirit.

 I've stayed on just fruits ever since. On fruits, I feel fantastic and actually motivated to get out and be active and as far as such things as B12, protein, calories, etc., I just ignore all of that. I wasn't worried about them when I was on cooked food so why worry now.

Fruits are full of natural fruit sugar called fructose and each individual fruit contains just the right amount of protein. Having said that, I don't pay too much attention to nutritional content of the fruits I eat. Instead, I listen to my body and how it feels. Also, I don't bother with protein, calories, nutrition, RDA's etc. anymore. My experiences just didn't match up to what modern nutrition teaches, so I threw all the modern nutritional info I thought I knew out of the window a long time ago and started learning for myself, from scratch, how my body reacts to different fruits, through learning the way to live the Fruitarian lifestyle for myself and not being dependant on others. I have complete faith in knowing that if I'm lacking in any nutrients, it will be made up for at a later date, so I have no concerns or worries regarding the nutritional aspect of my diet.


(RG): How long have you been a fruitarian?

(R: 12 long, weird and wonderful years and I'm enjoying great health now. Due to my severe detoxification symptoms, dramatic weight loss and many failed attempts at trying to get off cooked foods, my detoxification period was a nightmare experience, which was made worse by the fact that I was doing it all unsupported and with no guidance. For that reason, I quit fruitarianism more times than I can remember, but in my heart I always knew that if I could just weather the storm, I'd be ok. At that time, there were no Fruitarian mentors willing to inspire or show the way forward. I received no support from the raw food forums either. Being a Fruitarian at that time was not good because you were seen as an extremist so I was just ridiculed, verbally attacked and told that I couldn't possibly last any more than 2-3 months on an all fruit diet. So, in the end, I just got sick and tired of seeking support and trying to find like minded people and I soon realised that if I wanted to do this Fruitarian thing, I would have to go it alone.


(RG): What made you decide you wanted to become a fruitarian in the first place?

(R: My health was getting worse as I got older and by the time I was in my early twenties, I could see the same pattern occuring in others too in exactly the same way. So, I knew that at some level, something was going wrong with our societies eating habits.

I came from south east London, England. My family weren't exactly rich so, cheap junk food and cheap meat was a way of life. I was brought up a meat/junk food eater until my mid twenties.

Up until then, I had lived to eat and didn't know any different. In fact, food was a great comfort to me and it was how I used it to deal with the stresses in my life! I ate anything and everything I could, no matter what the ingredients. The only thing I didn't like was seafood and, as I said before, I simply didn't know any better and absolutely no thought of health went into my eating habits. It simply felt so good to eat cooked food that I just assumed that if it wasn't safe It wouldn't be sold in the stores.

As the years went by, getting the regular colds and flu's that everyone else was getting seemed to make less and less sense and I began asking myself why I felt it was normal to get sick on a regular basis. I also started to notice that I felt bloated, blocked up, full of mucus and constipated but the problem was that I'd always felt like that but for some reason I was starting to become more sensitive to it.

Eventually, it reached the point where I couldn't stand to eat anymore cooked food, the more I ate, the more bloated I felt and I could hardly breath because of the mucus build up. So that summer, I stopped eating cooked food altogether and for some reason, I started eating fruit. The strange thing was that I had never touched fruit before that.

I just went out and went with my instincts. I started with mangos, melons and grapes. I was in HEAVEN! It felt so good. The quality of my health got better, my skin became bright and clear, my body odors disappeared, I felt much more energetic, I could breath clearly and my stomach was no longer bloated.

 All the changes felt so right that I wanted to commit myself to just eating fruits all the time. I did some research and I later learned that cooked food is refined, processed, manipulated, manufactured and for the most part is unnatural and often has additives, preservatives, addictive ingrediants such as MSG's, etc put in it.

After learning all this information, in my heart, I knew I just wanted to eat fruits and, again, while researching on the internet, I found out that, low and behold, there was such a thing as Fruitarianism. I proceeded to do more research and take the first steps towards making it happen. Now, as a longtime Fruitarian, I personaly believe that back at the dawn of time, we were foragers and we ate whatever we were attracted to, things such as fruits, nuts, etc. in their fresh natural state. I don't believe for one minute that we were naturally attracted to eating living animals complete with hair, scales, claws and all. That would be like looking at your pet dog and thinking how tasty it would be between two burger buns.


(RG): I get bloated and feel terrible when I eat animal. I don't each much of it at all. I've never been a big meat eater. But I understand what you are saying because it makes since and humans do live like you described. I get my protein mainly from protein drinks and bars. Do most fruitarians get protien from other sources?

(R: For the most part, experienced Fruitarians will avoid sources of high protein because we believe that we get what we need in the correct amounts from fresh fruits. But, as I said before, going Fruitarian is such a personal journey and it's really up to the individual and their level of experience, for instants a lot of people new to Fruitarianism will overeat on nuts, dried fruits and fats simply because they miss the heavy blocked up feeling that cooked food gave them. The problem is that all nuts, unless stated as raw, are heat treated in some way, which is another reason why most experienced Fruitarians will avoid them. There's a lot of pressure put on people to comply with modern nutritional recommendations but generally the more experienced Fruitarians don't live by the modern nutritional recommendations. Instead, they listen to the day- to- day needs of their body.


(RG): I heard that you have opened up a Dallas Fitness Club. Can you tell me more about that?

(R: Yes. It's actually a Club I set up to get people from all walks of life together and getting active and to show the benefits of choosing better eating habits. We focus on exercises that come natural to our bodies such as running, walking and calithenics. I did this partly because getting active is a great way to get people thinking about better performance through better eating habits. I found that Raw Vegans were often pretty sluggish due to all their energy being used in the clean up process and were struggling and paying the price for not getting active.

I myself was caught up in the typical Raw Vegan mentality of being lazy and complaining about every single ache and pain but, I soon realized that I was feeling that way because I wasn't helping my body with eliminating the waste that the fruits were stirring up, by getting active and by not getting active. I was just holding in all the waste that I needed to get out. I soon realized that getting active was the key element to success as a Fruitarian. I put this down to a lack of education and genuine leadership as there are very few people that actually make the transition to Fruitarianism/Raw Veganism, let alone getting fit too. So, I guess with this club, I'm kind of leading by example and showing people that getting Raw and active can of great benefit during the detoxification process and beyond.

I don't charge a membership fee, monthly subscription or get anyone to sign a contract. I believe that if you really want to help people you will do it for free. It's also my vision to build a stronger community and support network for individuals that want to pursue a better quality of life and well being with other like minded people.

Young or old, fit or not it - doesn't matter. I'm trying to encourage people to take that first step and come as they are and take part in various activities such as hiking, trail running, backpacking, canoeing/kayaking, mountain biking, rock climbing, camping, potlucks and anything else we can think of, where we can meet up and socialize, share Raw Vegan experiences, discuss health and fitness, etc. - raw or not, everyone is welcome to join in on the fun.

For me, it's up to the individual what goals they set for themselves because we all understand that we all have to start from somewhere and we all recognize that we can only get to where we want to be by putting the work in. Our goal is simply to help you get to where you want to be. So, for that reason, we all strive to provide a motivating and supportive environment.

(RG): Very impressive. You are so right about if you are really wanting to do something for someone, you wouldn't charge a fee. When a person charges a fee, it's helping them, not the other people. Tell me about the hike and pot luck you had recently.

(R: It was pretty nerve racking, waiting for people to show up, especially when I really had no way of publishing it before hand. It pretty much came about from conversations with various people that turned into action. It turned out that all but one of the people that said they were going to show up actually showed up and we actually had a great time. I wasn't sure what to expect but, I knew that the shyness and anticipation would melt away as soon as we hit those hills. We were blessed with great sunny weather and dry conditions. We set off on a difficult hilly trail and although we had kids in carriers and on foot, I knew we could complete it. We just took it easy, yet still got our workout done. We took a break halfway through at a stopping point and it was great to see everyone coming together and discussing their raw experiences and sharing advice. It warmed my heart to see.

The guys did really well, my wife did excellent and they beat those hills in good style. It got tough in parts of our mantra during the hike became "I WANNA SEE THE SWEAT!!!"

 When it was all done, we gathered for the potluck and brought out the big guns: watermelon, apples, nuts, and other's brought some homemade juice, which went down real well in the Texas heat. One of the juices nearly knocked me out because it tasted like "gin & juice" but,it was just a strange mix of pineapple, aloe vera and oranges. A good day was had by all and the slower pace was a good chance for me to actually see the scenery that was around me instead of whizzing straight through it like I would normally do if I was by myself.


(RG): That sounds like that would have been fun. Sometimes a slow pace hike is good. Like you said, so you can enjoy it. How many followers do you have in the fruitarian?

(R: When it comes to the Fruitarian Lifestyle, I don't believe in people being followers. I believe in sharing information and encouraging people that come to me for advice to experience the Fruitarian lifestyle for themselves. I don't believe in spoon feeding information to people or soft soaping issues. I tell it like it is. I've got nothing to sell so, I don't have to pet or pamper people. For me, it's all about tough love and getting people to realize that they got to put the work in to get the results. I've been called "Hardcore" many times and a lot of people get scared or shy away from me and my group because they know that I don't listen to excuses and that I'm going to push them outside of their comfort zone. But, I've learned that you got to get "hardcore" about your health because nothing about going Fruitarian is easy and support is going to be pretty hard to find.

On my forum, I currently have over 20 members and we've seen many people come and go on there but, the guys that have stuck with it have amazed themselves by achieving great things. We are very supportive but at the same time, we keep it real. We don't stand for any nonsence because some of the guys are going through some sensitive issues due to detoxification. Keeping the environment positive is a key element to their success. There's also many, many people that contact me via email that I help out too. My whole philosophy with all of this is that I'm not here to be a Fruitarian guru, I'm just a guy that has got further than most and is willing to share his personal journey.


(RG): How do you feel your health differs from those that eat american/western diets?

(R: Over ther years, I've learned that cooked food is extremely dehydrating because, the cooking process robs it of oxygen, water and enzymes which puts more work on the body to digest it and get rid of it's waste. This continual process will eventually rob the body of it's energy and ablity to rebuild or protect itself from disease. Whenever I used to quit Fruitarianism and go back to cooked foods, all my aches, pains and allergies, etc. would return like clock work. Now back on Fruitarianism, I'm experiencing the best health I've ever had and by getting active, my stamina and strength have gone sky high. I just want to show everybody that with dedication and patience, they too, can experience improved health and well being.


(RG): You really do sound so positive about what you are doing. What do you feel stands out the most about a fruitarian lifestyle?

(R: For me, it's got to be the urge to get active and building muscle. I've been on both sides of the track, I've been a hard core meat eater and I'm now living life as a Fruitarian. I can honestly say that if I eat cooked food, my motivation to get out and do what I enjoy goes away and I feel heavy and sluggish. Another thing is, that back in the day when I was on cooked food, what I thought was muscle was not and I now realize that the rules we lived by when we were on cooked food don't apply when you go raw, The problem is that cooked food gave me the impression of mass and bulk but really it was just water retention and fats, When I go raw, my body gets rid of all of that and I would feel naked. Unfortunatly, our bodies don't know anything about machismo and goes about doing it's job of cleansing us.

It took me years to come to terms with my "nakedness". I would quit many times because I felt embarrassed because I was too skinny. I learned that my health was more important than my vanity and that cleansing is a process we have to go through and part of that process is letting your body get back down to it's natural size and shape and letting it do what it's got to do.

As far as building muscle goes, I realize that I never really built muscle until I got active as a Fruitarian When I was on cooked food, I was athletic and strong but ,it was all water and fat. Building muscle is a slow process. It's important that, as raw bodybuilders, we set our sights on cleaning first and while your doing that, you can stay active until your body has done cleansing and is ready to grow.


(RG): You are not saying anything I haven't already studied upon. I know what you are saying is true. I am just not 100% positive about eating nothing but fruit. I know God placed fruit on this earth for us to enjoy. I don't believe meat is the answer for our bodies either. So, I am still listening to everything you are saying. But, for some reason, you are opening my eyes more than others have. Do you have any advice to people that wish to build more mass?

(R: Think about your health first, make your gains naturally, find what exercises/activities you enjoy the most and work best for you and do them like there's no tomorrow. Just remember that you get out what you put in so make every workout better than your last!

(RG): What projects do you have in the future?

(R: My aim is to spread the word and show how important it is to get Raw Vegans and Fruitarians up and active via my website, discussion board and outdoors club. I'm also looking to make a Fruitarian Fitness/Day in the life type video or DVD, featuring myself at some point. I have no idea how it's going to happen because I'm operating all this on no budget what so ever but, I'm believing that some way, some how, it will happen. I'm working hard at building up and promoting my outdoors club as it is still in it's infancy.


(RG): Where there is a will, there is a way. Maybe someone that is reading this could have an idea to help you, since you are helping so many other people. If someone wished to contact you, how would they?

(R: I can be contacted at fruitarianone@yahoo.com . I can also be found on my own forum www.rawfitnessandoutdoors.com


(RG): Could you tell me a story of how you have gotten where you are today?

(R: When I first started on my Fruitarian journey, I pretty much had to blaze my own trail. I had no experience or knowledge of raw foods and needless to say, I really wasn't prepared for my detoxification. I had to learn my trade by trail and error. I tried to research but, there wasn't enough information to prepare me. I didn't wean myself off of cooked food gradually. I made the big mistake of thinking I could go cold turkey and after having a great week or two the detoxification, symptoms crept up on me and took me by surprise and before I could get a grip on myself, I was foul, aggressive mentally and physically, resentful towards things that I normally would not bother with!

I also had a lot of anxiety too... my thoughts were very negative. I was lashing out at people that meant a lot to me and I was even worse to the one's that didn't mean anything to me at all! A couple of relationships were fractured in the process. On top of this, I was usually mentally and physicaly exhausted 24-7. Every body thought I was crazy, nobody supported me at all, and I was totally overwhelmed. I didn't have the chance or the skills to detach myself from what was going on inside me like I had planned. I believed every bad thing that was going on in my head to be true. It was impossible for me to tell the difference between fact or fiction at this time. I went from a happy go lucky guy, that every body wanted to be around to the exact opposite! But, it really wasn't anyone's fault.

What was really going on was that I was detoxing! My body was using every thing it had to clean itself! My detox was very uncomfortable because I was eating to many heavy fruits and not enough juicy fruits and my body wasn't flushing out the toxins. So my toxins were just being re-absorbed. It was also the first time I had done anything like this ever! I didn't know what was going on or how to deal with this. My liver/gallbladder was being cleaned and I was releasing my anger/resentment from the past/present and I had a lot of that!! Pretty soon, I built up a healthy resentment towards this Fruitarian diet. It was the cause of so much pain and confusion for me! I decided that I wasn't happy doing it.

I didn't like the change that went on in me. It stopped me from being social and pleasent. It made me lose so much weight and besides, I wanted to eat pizza and fried chicken and fries, ice cream, etc. sooooo bad! I would quit! I'd be happy for a week or two then, I'd start feeling blocked up and bloated again. I would go back to getting sick and feeling like an old man. This would go on for years but, the more I cleansed, the worse I felt . When I went back to cooked food and the more of an opportunity I had to look at how my emotions were controlling my progress.

I've learned that I had to detach myself completely from the get go and also research and learn exactly what my body was going through in the detox process. I began to see what was really going on and help my body instead of getting stressed and making things worse My main problem was getting over my cooked food addiction. I found that condiments and salt were the hardest of all to give up. For example I used to eat 6-9 avocados a day with some type of condiment, then after a while I started to notice that I'd get mad if we had run out of dressing. I began to question if it really was the avocado I was wanting? I stopped using the condiments and now I found that naturally, I can barely eat one avocado a day.

What I found really helped me was writing down my goals and how I felt when I was on cooked food and it also helped to stay from stressful situations/people. I always say that if you have an issue, going fruitarian will bring it to the the surface wherever you like it or not! So, be prepared for a fight. A fight that may last years but it's a fight that WILL get easier but please let me tell you this: YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE A NICE PERSON OR HAVE A NICE TIME in the begining, you may have cut down on your social activities for a while, stick fast to your goals and don't let this society tell you any different.

When I first started, every body, including the guru's, told me that I couldn't survive on just fruit and that I was "doing it all wrong" but it was the way my body wanted it and to be honest with you, I feel like I'm not of this world. I often feel as though I can blend in with the air I breath. Breaking away from societies addictions was the best choice I ever made and I will never go back. My skin, from head to toe, has transformed from rough and tough to soft and silky. I don't get colds or flu's anymore. I don't feel the aches and pains I used to have. My body has gone to it's natural shape and I'm no longer bloated and constipated. I'm more physically active and at one with my body. But, my biggest victory of all is that I'm no longer a slave to cooked food. My thoughts are clearer and more positive. Don't get me wrong, it's not all sweetness and joy, the world is still what it is and I'm still human but believe me, when I say that the quality of my life has changed for the better, now the thought of growing old before my time and leaving strangers responsible for my health no longer seems mandatory.


(RG): I know you have done most of this alone but you have educated yourself so well. I can see the dedication in you. I can hear it in your words. You have went through detox just like a drug abuser does and you did it alone. Not many people would be here today to talk about it. You have peaked my interest enough that I will be researching this myself. And I understand what you are talking about when you say you don't feel you are of this world. I know I am the same way when I am around other people that eat normally. They eat sweets and snack all day and actually see me as someone that isn't like them since I refuse to eat that stuff. But you know what I have learned? They want to be more like me, they want to be able to say no. They want something to believe in. A goal to reach. But, they don't want it bad enough. Instead, they would rather hate me for achieving it. They would rather shun me, talk about me and turn me away because I have the strength in me to do what they can't or won't. But I use to be on the other side, too, when I ate what they ate, sat around all day and watch TV just like they do. But, I have to tell you, I was miserable...just like they are now continuing to live the way they do. Since I have changed my life, my life is so great! I feel great. I look great. And they hate me for that. But, I just find people that are like me, which is really hard to find this day in time. I look for people that are active, love themselves, and care for themselves. If I don't find anyone like me, I'd rather be alone. Thank you! Okay, enough about me. On with the interview. Do you have anyone you can thank for helping you get where you are?

(R: Yes, mother nature and My wife. Before I met my wife, I was just constantly having to deal with other people's fears about not eating cooked foods, even people that didn't know me would make rude comments on how skinny or bad I looked. Yes, I looked bad and I lost a lot of water and fat, which made me look as if I had lost a bunch of weight. But, I had already accepted the fact that this was what I had to go through to rejuvanate my body. My wife was the person that got me on to cleansing and this was the main element to me gaining muscle because the cleaner I was internaly, the more energy I had to rebuild myself. After my workouts, I was also able to absorb more nutrients from my fruits.


(RG): Do you have any sponsors you would like to mention?

(R: I wish, I'm always looking for sponsors/businesses in the Dallas area to get behind us that can donate their services such as printing RF&O T-shirts, leaflets and flyers/posters or provide space for RF&O, to hold free talks on the active natural lifestyle or hold a RF&O activity/event?


(RG): Where do you want to be in 5 years?

(R: I want to be training, reaching a wider audience, motivating and supporting people in their pursuit of a healthier, more active lifestyle. Ideally, I want to get some sort of natural fitness certification and then have some type of facility for people to come to. Again, I've no idea how all this is going to happen but I know it will.


(RG): Where do you go for your knowledge of bodybuilding?

(R: Vegan bodybuilding.com and Rosstraining.com, plus I do my own research so I can pass on knowledge to members on my forum, I've learned the majority of my bodyweight stuff from rosstraining.com. The guys there are pretty accepting of guys that train that with their bodyweight.


(RG): You talking about www.veganbodybuilding.com, Robert Cheeke, which is one of our Team Real Gainz VIP runs that site. He is awesome! What one secret can you share with me on how to gain the most muscle the fastest?

(R: I guess, most of my info would be more relevant to people going Fruitarian or Raw Vegan but, for me first and foremost, it's all about cleansing then to give the body as little to deal with as possible interms of what you put in your stomach. I've learned that as the years go by, the more troublesome foods you give it to digest, the less energy and resourses it has to get it's other rebuilding duties done.


(RG): Actually, the information you just gave can go to people that are not vegans and fruitians. Everyone needs to make sure their body is cleaned and the energy they have goes to being active, not spend on trying to digest food. You are married, right? Can you tell me about her?

(R: Married to the most beautiful women in the world, she's been very supportive even when, at times, it's been hard to understand the changes I go through.


(RG): It sounds like we need to do an interview with her and name it, "My life with a Fruitian". Have kids, can you tell me more about them?

(R: I have two children living in Dallas,Texas. My wife has always been extremely supportive of my choice of lifestyle. She's an inspiration and the other half of my heart. We raise our two kids as vegans and they have access to as much raw foods in their diet as they wish. We count ourselves lucky, because both children enjoy eating fruits. My daughter has greater access to them, because she spends more time with me at home.

It's such a great feeling when you actually hear your child pleading and even throwing a fit for fruits. It's a better feeling when you go shopping and you're picking up grapes as snacks for the children instead of cookies. My wife and I like to take every opportunity to teach the children as much as we can about respecting animals and their environment.

 I also run a rescue mission for Doberman Pinschers, which is handy because the children get to see the correct way to treat and care for dogs that have been neglected. We have our own Doberman called Luke, and he came to us with all kinds of allergies. But now he's raw too and no longer has allergies. I've come to some of my best insights just by watching Lukes progress on raw foods.


(RG): I've never thought about that! My mom's dog will scratch itself silly from allergies. It mostly comes on her dog when she feeds him meat! Hummm.....Something to think about....Who had the most impact on you growing up?

(R: My mother and my uncle Tony, for their mental toughness but ,most of all, it was the people that I Rugby League brought into my life that took me under their wing when I was just a young kid away from home like Alf Tattersfield, Mick Smyth and Malcomn Shuttleworth and Trevor Oldroyd, my old amature Rugby coaches, for seeing something special in me and taking time out to pass on their knowledge. I'll always say that Rugby League saved me from following the wrong path, it was the Father I never had, it's hard and uncompremising work ethics taught me how to be honest and honourable. let's face it, when your playing in front of 2-3000 people and the fate of the game rests on you because your on your try line and you have a 250-300lb dude intent on running through you to score because your the smallest person in the line, you soon find out what your made of.


(RG): Any shout outs?

(R: To my wife and children and all the poeple that said I would not succeed.

David Klien at Living Nutrition.com

Ross Enamait and the guys at rosstraining.com

Robert Cheeke at Vegan Bodybuilding and Fitness

Richard Watts from godfist.com

To anybody that felt they had the right to shoot my dreams down

Frank Obudo, my friend, and "ghetto gym" workout partner

(RG): Now look, all of those people that tried to shoot your dreams down, how many magazines have they been featured in? (laughing) Nanny nanny boo boo! What is your greatest achievement in life?

(R: For me personally, it was getting married to a supportive woman that I could share my life with.


(RG): Well, she has a well educated, respectful man that cares a lot about her. What is the proudest moment of your life?

(R: Becoming a dad. It was my first child and we are into the whole natural child birth thing so, we had a mid-wife and our daughter was born at home and my wife had no medication. I got to be in the middle of everything. It was amazing and I simply can't imagine why any guy wouldn't want to be at the birth of their child. So, I got to say that the proudest and most moving moment is being there for my wife and being the first person to see the top of my daughters head appear for the first time, then within a minute she was born.


(RG): My ex-husband was there when our son was born and he will say the exact same thing, what a chance of a life time it is to share the birth of your child with your spouse. He still talks about it. What are your interested outside of bodybuilding?

(R: First and foremost comes my family then, comes the great outdoors. I'm all about living life to the fullest and I'm pretty much up for trying any outdoor activity, but there's nothing like getting out on the trails, putting some tough routes together and going on a long hard hike, bare chested, with the hot sun beating down. It's my dream to one day take my family to see the sights of different places around the world.

Also, I'm a great fan of Tattoo's. If I had the money to spare, I'd be covered from head to toe. Helping people that want to go raw has unexpectedly become a big part of my life. I also run a Dobie rescue for unwanted Dobermans.


(RG): What is the one thing you would like to change about yourself, if you could?

(R: I'm not business/money orientated...I'm always helping people out and doing stuff for free! I really should turn this raw thing into a business like everyone else does but, I don't believe in making people pay for something that mother nature already gave to us for free!


(RG): What are your PR's in press ups, squats, pull ups, and Dips?

(R: Bodyweight reps in one hour:

Dips: 800
Chins: 420
Press ups: 2015
Squats: 540
calf raises: 4000
One Handed push ups: 700
In one set:

Press ups: 160
Chins: 36
Dips: 100
squats: 400
Handstand push ups: 28
One leg calf raises: 2614
(RG): Do you use dumbbells, free weights, machine or all of the above?

(R: No, I do Calisthenics/bodyweight exercises

(RG): Explain why.

(R: It actually started off with me being sick and tired of not having the weights equipment I needed to continue with my workouts, I had ran out of weights and didn't have the money to buy anymore. For this reason, I was also contemplating on joining a gym, so in between time I started messing around and making up the rest of my routine with push ups and bodyweight squats until I could figure out what I wanted to do. I didn't really know what I was doing but from there I went on to doing as many reps as I could do in an hour and I found that it was actually harder and more enjoyable than my regular weights routine and by this time the idea of spending money every month on a gym membership plus all the fee's that go with it, just wasn't sitting well with me at all. Before I knew it, one thing had led to another and it wasn't long before I had created a full body routine of bodyweight exercises and making solid gains. The longer I continued doing the bodyweight stuff, the more I learned that there was a whole lot more I could do without needing to use any weights or spending money on gym fee's. I felt that this discovery went hand in hand with my Fruitarian lifestyle and my efforts to get Raw Vegans more active and wanted to find a way of sharing my message and so Raw Fitness and outdoors was born and as they say, the rest is history.


(RG): What is your favorite exercise and why?

(R: I'm not really sure if I have a favorite because I love them all for different reasons but, I really get a kick out of doing dips because it's a classic example of the use of brute strength and I always make good gains with dips. I feel like a beast after each set. I think I'm just a fan of the pushing exercises in general.



(RG): It has been really a pleasure interviewing you. We are about to close, If you have anything else you would like to add, now is the time:

(R: Yes, thanks for having me and giving me the opportunity to share my story.....THERE'S NO EXCUSES FOR BETTER HEALTH WE ALL GOT TO GET UP AND BE ACTIVE Y'ALL. WE ARE ALL GETTING OLDER AND WE ONLY GET ONE BODY AND ONE LIFE AND DON'T LEAVE YOUR HEALTH IN THE HANDS OF OTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!

Even though i strongly disagree with the last part of this interview about the use of violence, this guy is really on the right spot for all that is around animal rights & speciesism!! i just hope he eventually changes his mind when it comes to direct actions

The Gary Yourofsky Interview

By Claudette Vaughan

Gary Yourofsky is an ex-employee of PETA’s and founder of his own organization ADAPTT- Animals Deserve Absolute Protection Today and Tomorrow. Here he speaks to the Abolitionist on animal rights and liberation, on Ingrid Newkirk, on violence as tactic and veganism as lifestyle.

Gary Y: PETA and HSUS are a hindrance to the animal liberation movement. Their endless compromises, persistent shenanigans and myopic tactics do NOT bring animals closer to freedom.

I am tired of being silent about it.

As long as PETA and HSUS exist, animals will remain enslaved by the billion. . Ingrid Newkirk, a serial cat killer, goes out of her way to trap homeless, healthy cats in the Norfolk, Virginia, area and then kills them in a shed located on the grounds of PETA's Norfolk headquarters. She has maniacally deified herself as the supreme arbiter of life and death, and convinced her clique that all cats (and dogs) who have no human family should be murdered. She rationalizes this psychosis by claiming that if the animals die they are no longer suffering. Everyone understands that dead animals (and humans) no longer suffer. But that approach is akin to America's invasion of Iraq in 2003, when U.S. mercenaries killed innocent Iraqi civilians and then proclaimed that they wouldn't be suffering anymore under the tyrannical regime of Saddam Hussein.

Rational people want to end the pain and suffering that animals endure, and eradicate dictators like Saddam (and his sons Uday and Qusay). However, killing innocent civilians in Iraq, and murdering homeless animals by pre-emptively assuming that one day they might suffer, or believing that they suffer without human companionship, is insanely delusional. If this movement rightfully condemns the meat and dairy industries for murdering cows and chickens, then this movement has to condemn PETA for the murder of homeless dogs and cats.

Sadly, I see no difference between Newkirk and a hunter like Ted Nugent or a slaughterhouse designer like Temple Grandin. They all prey on innocent creatures. They all rationalize their homicidal acts with diabolical excuses. They are one and the same; skulking serial killers who wouldn't know the meanings of honesty, compassion or decency if Noah Webster came back from the dead and bit them on their asses! Newkirk has turned PETA into an efficient killing machine mirroring the companies - like Neiman Marcus or HLS - she claims to despise.

Furthermore, under Newkirk's guidance, she has single-handedly turned the animal liberation movement into a mockery with her naked women campaigns and cartoon-costumed protests. And when rational vegans condemn PETA’s irrational approach, Newkirk tries to fool everyone with trite lines about “animals suffering without PETA” or “animals suffering from the infighting in the movement”.

Those aforementioned comments are deceptive and only allow PETA to continue on its course of destruction. Doing some good while intentionally doing bad is neither acceptable nor beneficial. Each person or group must always do good. You can make mistakes along the way. Acceptable mistakes like bringing the circus placards to the vivisection protest, or misspelling someone's name in an op-ed piece, or realising that you should be focusing your efforts on education instead of lobbying, or understanding that breaking laws is actually a valuable tactic to achieving liberation. But killing homeless animals by the thousands is more than a mistake. It is serial murder!

As for HSUS, they are just as destructive as PETA. Besides Wayne Pacelle’s $300,000 annual salary as the new head honcho of HSUS, his obsession with lawmaking is a waste of time. He loves to cite examples about the value of the U.S. civil rights act of 1964 and the 19th Amendment of 1920 that gave women the right to vote. But he doesn't understand that these laws were only approved BECAUSE of all the violent and non-violent protests, and because people took the issue of inequality to the streets FIRST. It was the culmination of violent and non-violent protests, countless acts of civil disobedience, and thousands of marches that created WIDESPREAD, MASSIVE support for the laws to be passed and, most importantly, enforced. Pacelle wants to jump the gun and pass laws even though society doesn't understand the immorality of speciesism.

It’s all fucking backwards. I will not deny that a few people have been prosecuted with anti-cruelty legislation, but no one has ever been prosecuted for any SERIOUS atrocities against the billions of animals killed in slaughterhouses or research labs. There are no Saddam Husseins on trial for the mass murder of animals. If anti-cruelty laws were effective, then everyone at a Smithfield slaughterhouse would be arrested and jailed. Every vivisectionist at HLS would be arrested and imprisoned for life. Furthermore, what’s the point of punishing someone after the fact anyway? It’s only revenge. Don’t misconstrue what I am saying. I enjoy revenge as much as the next person, but I want to get to a point where there’s no revenge. Revenge becomes unnecessary when there is no wrongdoing in the first place. This is where we need to be.

There will always be people who have no morals and no conscience and who will commit heinous acts like Nugent and Newkirk, and we need to be vengeful with these serial killers. But we have to enlighten the masses first via education, direct action, civil disobedience, and violent and non-violent activism ... in order to radicate the majority of the killings. We can’t only seek to prosecute a few psychos who punch dogs in the face at vivisection torture-houses while concurrently billions of animals are being massacred for sandwiches, and billions of humans are mindlessly taking part in the massacre. If we opened people’s eyes with education or violent force, then that would reduce the murders and be a BIGGER victory than any paltry law the HSUS got passed.

Abolitionist: It can be argued that the so-called "Humane Meat" Movement led by Newkirk’s PETA and Pacelle’s HSUS has a case to answer in that the Humane Meat Movement, running along side the Animal Rights Movement is doing far more damage than what introducing violence into the AR Movement ever would.

Gary Y: As ethical vegans, it's logical for us to proclaim that the only nice slaughterhouse is an empty slaughterhouse. This statement, however, is often challenged by those who believe that baby steps and compromise are the only ways to move forward. It is my belief that baby steps and compromise prevent any forward movement whatsoever. These tactics actually allow people to continue the killing with a clearer conscience. For example, in 2000 the state of Florida banned the use of gestation crates for sows. Florida, however, did NOT ban the abuse of pigs, the murder of pigs or the consumption of pig flesh. They removed one piece of torture, which is akin to asking a slave-owner 200 years ago not to rape female slaves on Sundays, nor beat male slaves on Fridays. The slavery problem would not have been solved if people spent their time asking for absurd baby-step concessions. The murder of pigs will not be solved by asking the murderers to no longer confine the females in gestation crates. People in Florida have a mistaken belief that pigs are no longer being abused because crates have been banned; therefore, it is okay to eat pork chops and ham.

When we deny every animal's inherent right to fly, swim and run freely via compromise and concession, we are being cruel and dishonest, because no animal would choose to be enslaved and killed. Many people who purport to care for animals rarely apply empathy to examine the issue from the animals' point of view. Empathy allows people to understand an injustice without over-analyzing the issue, especially when those in power deem the victims unworthy and expendable, something Hussein, GW Bush, slave-owners, meat-eaters, and organizations like PETA and HSUS have all done to their respective victims.

In the book DOMINION, Matthew Scully explained that people have a choice to be radically kind or radically cruel. This illuminates the hypocrisy of the meat-eating animal welfare movement, which seeks to regulate the enslavement and killing of billions of animals via "humane slaughter" laws. By definition alone, slaughter is radically cruel. Therefore, it can never be humane. Taking an animal's life for profit or preference is a crime. Killing "nicely" does not exonerate a killer from the killing. Buying meat, milk or eggs from organic or free-range farms doesn't exonerate the consumer from complicity either. From the animal's point of view, the killer and the consumer are one and the same.

Fortunately, de-programming the perfunctory ways of meat-eaters is possible.

During my annual vegan lecture tour (250 talks for 10,000 carnivores in college classrooms), thousands of people convert to veganism, vegetarianism or significantly reduce their meat, cheese, milk and egg intake. Reduction and abolition are the only options to ending a massacre. Regulating torture, abuse andmurder does not reduce nor eliminate torture, abuse and murder.
Regulations are an explicit stamp of approval to let the carnage continue unabated because compassionate ways of enslaving and killing billions of animals do not exist.

Abolitionist: In SATYA magazine March 05 article titled “A Whole New Alternative" ‘Compassionate Meat At Whole Food Prices, Bruce Friedrich from PETA had the sheer audacity to say "{PETA} …we’re trying to ensure that farmed animals are treated as well as dogs or cats until they’re killed…". First of all, PETA kills homeless animals in their thousands and secondly I don’t want Bruce Friedrich speaking on my behalf since there’s a presumption even today that PETA is the "voice of the international animal rights movement". What are your views Gary?

Gary Y: It's a damn shame that PETA has become synonymous with the phrase ‘animal rights’ ... in the same way Kleenex has become synonymous with the word tissue or Levi's with the word jeans. PETA does not and should not represent the animal rights movement. They are an absolute embarrassment. They have become a destructive enterprise that murders dogs and cats, praises animal killers like slaughterhouse designer Temple Grandin, exploits and degrades women in disgraceful (and ineffective) naked campaigns, and believes that revolutions can be won in the boardroom instead of realising that revolutions are only won in the classroom, on the street corner or in the jailhouse!

PETA has turned itself into a corporation like the environmental corporation that Greenpeace has become, and the civil rights corporation that is the NAACP. All three groups used to be hungry for progress, and used to demand change, and never back down nor compromise. However, they all decided along the way to focus their crosshairs on wallets and purses instead of scumbags who commit injustice.

Abolitionist: Where’s the cavalry? I mean where’s the cavalry for the weak, the disabled, the innocent and the defenceless in life and why did it never arrive in the animal rights movement?

Gary Y: Apathy, consumerism and complacency are powerful opiates. Even those who care enough to adopt a vegan lifestyle continue to selfishly love their jobs, houses and cars so much that they refuse to risk their freedom for those who have none. This is why there have been so few Gandhis, Malcolm X's and Cesar Chavez's. It's not that they were superhumans who possessed magical powers. They were simple humans who were determined to eradicate injustice at any cost. We all have the capacity to be a Gandhi, an X or a Chavez. We simply have to let go of that disgusting trait of selfishness and walk the talk. Be the epitome of altruism.

Gurdjieff, the Great Russian Seeker of Truth, explained that life is the payment of promissory notes one makes while in a waking sleep. He said that humans spend the majority of life going through the motions, making promises (marriage, employment) they never intended nor wanted, and then suffering from the burden of fulfilling those unintended commitments. Commitments to our jobs, our homes, to our spouses and family members are ignoble. The only commitment should be to justice by any means necessary.

Abolitionist: Has there been a deliberate ploy to dumb down Americans since the 1970’s? Take the media’s analysis on Iraq for example. Anyone who resists Amerikan foreign policy is a "terrorist" as are animal rights activists within Amerika. And now the US has a president who embodies this overly simplistic analysis. What are your comments on the current political state in the US today?

Gary Y: The USA defines the word imperialism. GW Bush commits evil acts, such as lying and murdering, on a daily basis. But what's even scarier than Bush’s iniquity is that 58,000,000 Americans voted him into office! Sometimes I am not sure if I am more embarrassed to be human or more embarrassed to be an American. Americans have been turned into walking zombies via religion, government, schools and the media. Buy this product or go to this university and you'll be happy. Wear this cologne and you'll get laid. Eat these dead animals and you'll be a man. Believe in this invisible being in the sky, and you'll go to a pretty place after you die. Sometimes I think that the only effective and productive method of destroying speciesism would be for each uncaring human to be forced to live the life of a cow on a feedlot, or a monkey in a laboratory, or an elephant in the circus, or a bull in a rodeo, or a mink on a fur farm. Then people would be awakened from their soporific states and finally understand the horrors that are inflicted on the animal kingdom by the vilest species to ever roam this planet: the human animal!

Deep down, I truly hope that oppression, torture and murder return to each uncaring human tenfold! I hope that fathers accidentally shoot their sons on hunting excursions, while carnivores suffer heart attacks that kill them slowly. Every women ensconced in fur should endure a rape so vicious that it scars them forever. While every man entrenched in fur should suffer an anal raping so horrific that they become disembowelled. Every rodeo cowboy and matador should be gored to death, while circus abusers are trampled by elephants and mauled by tigers. And, lastly, may irony shine its esoteric head in the form of animal researchers catching debilitating diseases and painfully withering away because research dollars that could have been used to treat them was wasted on the barbaric, unscientific practice of vivisection.

Abolitionist: Is not the problem the age-old problem lies in complicity and the silence of the by-standers, vegan or not?

Gary Y: The hate that humans hold toward animals is matchless. It is impossible to overcome with compromise, or with only entreaty. It is so vicious, aseptic and bitter that a thousand peaceful Gods and Goddesses couldn't eradicate it. This is why corporations like PETA and HSUS must be destroyed. And why their naked women campaigns and inane cartoon costumes must be stopped. This is why violence must be employed at some point, in association with education and civil disobedience and direct action. And this is why we must not love the enemies of animals.

I firmly believe in trying to educate and deprogram the direct killers of animals - the vivisectionists, the hunters, the slaughterhouse workers, the CEOs of every company in the meat, dairy and egg industries - and the indirect killers of animals (the meat-eaters). However, when education and civil disobedience and protests do not work, actions have to be stepped up.

The callousness of the human species cannot be solely washed away with a leaflet and an op-ed piece. Humans need to be kicked off their pyramid of domination. As activists, we should realise that we work for the animals and the animals alone. We should NEVER seek human approval nor human adoration. We shouldn’t care less about sanctimonious verbiage vomited out from judges, prosecutors, police officers, media outlets and politicians. We should take action, and MAKE justice reign. We should not wait for change. We should not ask for change. And we should not beg for freedom. It must be demanded!

Abolitionist: Will total animal liberation occur without bloodshed and should the movement not turn away from this indisputable fact but instead accept it, if one is serious about engaging in the fight for animal liberation?

Gary Y: Since the majority of people are close-minded, rude, incoherent, incognizant and just plain mean, and since logic and compassion can not solely deprogram and educate the masses, it is time to resort to powerful tactics that make them understand. I've said it before and I’ll say it again: Love does not solely conquer hate, reason does not solely conquer ignorance or flat-out stupidity, and compassion cannot always eradicate institutionalized violence. Any thoughts disputing the latter are only textbook fantasies. The majority of Gandhi’s followers rioted in the streets, killed British soldiers of oppression and routinely set fires. The Black Panthers and Malcolm X’s BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY brand of activism were integral to the civil rights struggle. Vitriol was rampant. Even MLK’s pacifist followers hose to riot and set fires in the streets after his assassination. So much for pacifism in the times of heated moments, huh?

I am only bringing up these examples because so many people in the AR movement are naïve when it comes to substantive change. Power concedes nothing without demand. And unethical people don’t always change their unethical ways with a smile and a dose of logic.

Gary Francione: Questions and Answers on Introduction to Animal Rights: Your Child or the Dog? (an interview done in 2000)

There is a great deal of confusion surrounding the public debate on the matter of animal rights. This confusion is attributable in large part to the fact that there has been to date no theory of animal rights that is easily accessible and does not require that the reader have a background in philosophical theory or law. In an attempt to provide a theory of animal rights that explains the rights position in a simple and straightforward way, I have written a book entitled, Introduction to Animal Rights: Your Child or the Dog?, published by Temple University in July 2000. The following questions and answers cover some of the topics that I address in the book.

Is there a difference between the animal rights position and the animal welfare position?

Yes. The animal rights position holds that that we ought to abolish the institutionalized exploitation of nonhumans. The animal welfare position holds that it is acceptable for us to use animals for at least some purposes, but that we must regulate animal use so that we treat animals ‘humanely’ and do not impose ‘unnecessary’suffering on them. Animal welfare advocates maintain that we must ‘balance’ human and animal interests to determine whether animal use is appropriate in particular circumstances. The animal welfare position is reflected in laws, such as state anticruelty laws, or federal regulatory laws, such as the Animal Welfare Act, which concerns the use of animals in experiments, or the Humane Slaughter Act.

Does the animal welfare position succeed in providing any significant protection to animals?

No. There can be no meaningful balance of human and animal interests because animals are our property. They are commodities that we own and that have no value other than that which we as property owners choose to give them. It is simply nonsense to talk about balancing the interests of property against the interest of property owners. If someone suggested that you balance your interests against those of your automobile or your wristwatch, you would quite correctly regard the suggestion as absurd. Your automobile and your watch are your property.

They have no morally significant interests; they are merely things that have no value except that which you, the owner, accord to them. Because animals are merely property, we are generally permitted to ignore animal interests and to inflict the most horrendous pain and suffering or death on animals when it is economically beneficial. The failure of animal welfare cannot be doubted: there have been animal welfare laws of various types in existence for almost 200 years and we are using more animals today, and in more horrific ways, than we were in 1850.

If animals have rights, does that mean that they have all the same rights as do humans?

No, of course not. It would make no sense to say that animals have a right to vote or drive, or a right to an education, or a right to be free from discrimination in the workplace. The animal rights position maintains that animals have one right: the right not to be treated as the resources or property of humans. Treating animals are property is inconsistent with according animals any moral significance at all; as long as animals are property, then they will necessarily be excluded from the moral community.

Our various uses of animals for food, clothing, entertainment, and science all assume that animals are our resources, and none of these forms of institutionalized exploitation would be permissible were we to recognize that animals have this one right not to be property.

What is a ‘right’?

There is a great deal of confusion that surrounds the concept of rights. For our purposes, we need to focus on only one aspect of the concept of a right that is common to virtually all theories about rights: a right is a particular way of protecting interests. To say that an interest is protected by a right is to say that the interest is protected against being ignored or violated simply because it will benefit someone else to do so. We can think of a right of any sort as a fence or a wall that surrounds an interest and upon which hangs a no trespass sign that forbids entry even if it would be beneficial to the person seeking that entry. For example, my right of free speech protects my interest in self-expression even if other people do not value that expression and would stifle my speech merely because it would benefit them or because they disagree with me.

My right to liberty protects my interest in my freedom regardless of the value that others attach to that interest. If other people think I should be imprisoned for no other reason than that my imprisonment will benefit them, my right to liberty will prevent such treatment. To say that an animal has a right not to be treated as our property means that the animal’s interest in not being treated as an economic commodity should be protected and should not be violated simply because it will benefit humans to do so.

What is the basis of an animal’s right not to be treated as our property?

The basis is the principle of equal consideration, which holds that as a fundamental moral matter, we ought to treat like cases alike. Human and nonhuman animals are alike in at least one respect and unlike everything else in the universe - they are sentient, or capable of experiencing pain. Nonhuman animals have an interest in not suffering just as humans have an interest in not suffering.

We recognize that among humans there is a wide range of interests in that almost no two humans prefer or want or desire the same things. Some humans prefer La Boheme; others prefer Pink Floyd. Some humans have interests in obtaining a university education; others prefer to learn a trade; still others may be retarded and have absolutely no interest in either higher education or trade training. But all humans who are not brain dead or otherwise nonsentient have an interest in avoiding pain and suffering. Although we do not protect humans from all suffering, and although we may not even agree about which human interests should be protected by rights, we generally agree that all humans should be protected from suffering that results from their use as the property or commodity of another human. We do not regard it legitimate to treat any humans, irrespective of their particular characteristics, as the property of other humans. Indeed, in a world deeply divided on many moral issues, one of the few norms endorsed by the international community is the prohibition of human slavery. And it is not a matter of whether the particular form of slavery is ‘humane’ or not; we condemn all human slavery. It would, of course, be incorrect to say that human slavery has been eliminated entirely from the planet, but the institution is universally regarded as morally odious and is legally prohibited.

We protect the interest of a human in not being the property of others with a right, which is to say that we do not allow this interest to be ignored or abrogated simply because it will benefit someone else to do so. And the right not to be treated as the property of others is basic in that it is different from any other rights that we might have because it is the grounding for those other rights; it is a precondition for the possession of morally significant interests. If we do not recognize that a human has the right not to be treated exclusively as a means to the end of another, then any other right that we may grant her, such as a right of free speech, or of liberty, or to vote or own property, is completely meaningless.

To put the matter more simply, if I can enslave you and kill you at will, then any other right you may have will not be of much use to you. We may not agree about what other rights humans have, but in order for humans to have any rights at all, they must have the basic right not to be treated as a thing.

The principle of equal consideration requires that we treat similar interests in a similar way unless there is a morally sound reason for not doing so. Is there a morally sound reason that justifies our giving all humans a basic right not to be the property of others while denying this same right to all animals and treating them merely as our resources?

The usual response is to claim that some factual difference between humans and animals justifies this dissimilar treatment. For example, we maintain that animals cannot think rationally or abstractly, so it is acceptable for us to treat them as our property. In the first place, it is as difficult to deny that many animals are capable of rational or abstract thought as it is to deny that dogs have tails. But even if it is true that animals are not rational or cannot think in abstract ways, what possible difference could that make as a moral matter? Many humans, such as young children or severely retarded humans, cannot think rationally or in abstract terms, and we would never think of using such humans as subjects in painful biomedical experiments, or as sources of food or clothing. Despite what we say, we treat similar animal interests in a dissimilar way, and thus deprive animal interests of moral significance.

There is no characteristic that serves to distinguish humans from all other animals. Whatever attribute that we may think makes all humans ‘special’ and thereby different from other animals, is shared by some group of nonhumans. Whatever ‘defect’ we may think makes animals inferior to us is shared by some group of us. In the end, the only difference between them and us is species, and species alone is not a morally relevant criterion for excluding animals from the moral community any more than is race a justification for human slavery or sex a justification for making women the property of their husbands. The use of species to justify the property status of animals is speciesism just as the use of race or sex to justify the property status of humans is respectively racism or sexism. If we want animal interests to have moral significance, then we have to treat like cases alike, and we cannot treat animals in ways in which we would not be willing to treat any human.

If we apply the principle of equal consideration to animals, then we must extend to animals the one basic right that we extend to all human beings: the right not to be treated as a thing. But just as our recognition that no humans should be the property of others required that we abolish slavery, and not merely regulate it to be more ‘humane,’ our recognition that animals have this one basic right would mean that we could no longer justify our institutional exploitation of animals for food, clothing, amusement, or experiments. If we mean what we say and we regard animals as having morally significant interests, then we really have no choice: we are similarly committed to the abolition of animal exploitation, and not merely to its regulation.

Is anything more than sentience required for an animal to have a basic right not to be treated as our property?

No. There are some who argue that chimpanzees or other great apes should have rights because of the genetic and mental similarities between great apes and human beings. But this position merely reasserts the arbitrary moral hierarchy of human characteristics: the great apes have moral status because they are like us and it is our characteristics that define moral significance. Dogs are not similar to humans in the same ways that the great apes are, but dogs are still beings who are conscious of pain. If we predicate moral status on the possession of human characteristics, we exclude from the moral community more than 99.5% of the animals that we exploit.

Will animals ever have a legal right not to be treated as things before there is a change in our general social attitudes about animals?

No. There will be no significant change in the status of animals as property as the result of court cases or legislation until there is a significant social change in our attitude about animals. That is, it is not the law that will alter our moral thinking about animals; it must be the other way around. It was not the law that abolished slavery; indeed, the law protected slave ownership and the institution of slavery was not abolished by the law but through the Civil War. Women did not get the right to vote until the United States Constitution was amended. Animal exploitation is not going to be ended by a pronouncement of the Supreme Court or an act of Congress—at least not until a majority of us accept the moral position that the institution of animal property is morally unacceptable. The present-day world economy is far more dependent economically on animal exploitation than were the Southern United States on human slavery. Legal protection for animal interests in not being property will only come after we as a society become repulsed by our domination of animals as we were repulsed by human slavery.

Often people say domestic animals, such as cows and pigs, and laboratory rats, would not exist were it not for our bringing them into existence in the first place for our purposes. So is it not the case that we are free to treat them as our resources?

No. The fact that we are in some sense responsible for the existence of a being does not give us the right to treat that being as our resource. Were that so, then we could treat our children as resources. After all, they would not exist were it not for our actions—from decisions to conceive to decisions not to abort. And although we are granted a certain amount of discretion as to how we treat our children, there are limits: we cannot treat them as we do animals. We cannot enslave them, sell them into prostitution, or sell their organs. We cannot kill them.

Indeed, it is a cultural norm that bringing a child into existence creates moral obligations on the part of the parents to care for the child and not to exploit the child. It should be noted that one of the purported justifications for human slavery in the United States was that many of those who were enslaved would not have existed in the first place were it not for the institution of slavery. The original slaves who were brought to the United States were forced to breed and their children were considered as property. Although such an argument appears ludicrous to us now, it demonstrates that we cannot assume the legitimacy of the institution of property—of humans or animals—and then ask about whether it is acceptable to treat property as property. The answer will be predetermined. Rather, we must first ask whether the institution of animal (or human) property can be morally justified. We cannot justify the institution of animal (or human) property simply because we are responsible for bringing certain beings into existence because to do so would beg the central moral question from the outset. Indeed, it is the property status of animals that creates the conflicts between humans and animals that we seek to resolve through our moral analysis of the human/animal relationship.

Isn’t human use of animals a ‘tradition’ or ‘natural’ and, therefore, morally justified?

Every form of discrimination in the history of humankind has been defended on the grounds that it represents a ‘tradition.’ For example, sexism is routinely justified on the ground that it is traditional for women to be subservient to men: ‘A woman’s place is in the home.’ Human slavery has been a tradition in most cultures at some times. The fact that some behavior can be described as traditional has nothing to do with whether the behavior is or is not morally acceptable.

In addition to relying on tradition, some characterize our use of animals as ‘natural’ and then declare it to be morally acceptable. Again, to describe something as natural does not in itself say anything about the morality of the practice. In the first place, just about every form of discrimination has also been described as natural as well as traditional. The two notions are often used interchangeably. We have justified human slavery as representing a natural hierarchy of slave owners over slaves. We have justified sexism as representing the natural superiority of men over women. Moreover, it is a bit strange to describe our modern commodification of animals as natural in any sense of the word. We have created completely unnatural environments and agricultural procedures in order to maximize profits. We do bizarre experiments in which we transplant genes and organs from animals into humans and vice versa. We are now cloning animals. None of this can be described as natural. Labels such as ‘natural’ and ‘traditional’ are just that: labels. They are not reasons. If people defend the imposition of pain and suffering on an animal based on what is natural or traditional, it usually means that they cannot otherwise justify their conduct.

A variant of this question focuses on the traditions of particular groups. For example, in May 1999, the Makah tribe from Washington State killed its first gray whale in over 70 years. The killing, which was done with steel harpoons, anti-tank guns, armor-piercing ammunition, motorized chase boats, and a $310,000 grant from the federal government, was defended on the ground that whaling was a Makah tradition although no living member of the tribe had ever participated in a whale hunt. But the same argument could be (and is) made to defend clitoral mutilations in Africa and bride-burning in India. These are cultural traditions that are required for cultural identity. The issue is not whether conduct is part of a culture; all conduct is part of some culture. The issue is whether the conduct can be morally justified.

Finally, some argue that since nonhuman animals eat other nonhumans in the wild, our use of animals is ‘natural.’ There are four responses to this position. First, although some animals eat each other in the wild, many do not. Many animals are vegetarians. Moreover, there is far more cooperation in nature than our imagined ‘cruelty of nature’ would have us believe. Second, whether animals eat other animals is beside the point. How is it relevant whether animals eat other animals? Some animals are carnivorous and cannot exist without eating meat. We do not fall into that category; we can get along fine without eating meat, and more and more people are taking the position that our health and environment would both benefit from a shift away from a diet of animal products. Third, animals do all sorts of things that humans do not regard as morally appropriate. For example, dogs copulate in the street and eliminate wastes in a rather public fashion. Does that mean that we should do so?

Fourth, it is interesting that when it is convenient for us to do so, we attempt to justify our exploitation of animals by resting on our supposed ‘superiority.’ And when our supposed ‘superiority’ gets in the way of what we want to do, we suddenly portray ourselves as nothing more than another species of wild animal, as entitled as foxes to eat chickens.