- checking login information
Loading...Why I’m Still Vegan
The Guardian published an op/ed piece a week ago by a woman named Jenna Woginrich titled “Why I Stopped Being a Vegetarian“, and I knew that I had to post a response of some sort.
In her piece, Ms. Woginrich exhibits levels of mental contortion and Orwellian doublethink that would be impressive if they weren’t so horrifying. She describes how after ten years of vegetarianism she came to the baffling realization that vegetarianism was only avoiding the question of animal treatment instead of confronting it.
She makes the argument that if you care about animals, the only logical course of action is to eat them, with the caveat that you should only eat animals that lived a happy, respectable life. Her argument is typical of the animal welfare philosophy: that animal slaughter will continue forever no matter what and that the only change that can possibly be made is a superficial reduction in some kinds of cruelty inflicted on livestock animals.
It is easy to see the weakness in the welfare argument: first and foremost it requires cognitive gymnastics to mesh the idea that caring about animals means killing animals. This is not an easy idea to grasp so she fills her piece with a lot of nonsensical metaphors like “you can stay in the rabbit hole…but the only way out is to eat the rabbit.”
The argument she makes – that refusing to consume animals doesn’t make a difference – is rooted in disempowerment. By convincing people that their choices are meaningless she can paint her own ideas as pragmatic when they are anything but.
The truth is that cruelty and compassion are non-issues. The western world didn’t attempt to deal with the problem of slavery by adopting legislation that gave slaves better housing, and it certainly didn’t deal with the problem by telling people to only buy goods from plantations where slaves were treated “humanely”. We dealt with slavery by ending the practice of humans owning other humans.
We don’t embrace “humane” reforms to other problems, we don’t advocate for humane murder of humans, we don’t advocate for compassionate genocide or humane pedophilia. We understand that these things are wrong and as much as we begrudgingly admit that it may be nearly impossible to rid the world of them completely, that doesn’t stop us from trying.
I’ve been vegan for over three years and every day I realize more and more why my decision is the right thing to do. Veganism isn’t about trying to change the conditions in one slaughterhouse or even all slaughterhouses. It isn’t about making life easier for one type of animal in one situation or saying that some kinds of torture and murder are acceptable while others are wrong.
The real question is whether or not a sentient being with a mind of its own should ever be considered the property of another being. For me that’s an easy question.
Being vegan isn’t about a diet, it isn’t about making a list of things I do not wear or consume. Veganism is the real life extension of my belief that an animal is not an object. I can no more own an animal than I can own a person. I can’t kill an animal because it’s smaller, weaker, or less intelligent than I am anymore than I can kill a child for the same reasons.
This theory is the foundation of all of my actions as an activist for animals. For more on the abolitionist theory, read “The Necessity of Theory” by Gary Francione.
I’m still vegan because I believe that my actions have meaning. I’m still vegan because I believe an animal has the right to live without being the property of another. I’m still vegan because peace, justice, and equality cannot exist in a world that slaughters billions for the trivial reason that they taste good.
Related Stories:
Animal Welfare Reform: Total Denial, One Step at a Time
Abolition or Regulation? New Book on the Animal Rights Debate
Read more: animal rights, animal welfare, Carnivore, guardian, sentient being, theory, vegan, vegetarian
Photo: Public Domain
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may
not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.
Recent Comments from Causes
A little lemonade goes a long way! Appreciation goes to not only Jayden, but all those who supported…
Thanks.
It is nice the cat(s) survived and also lucky, but not a miracle. It was a birth defect that required…
722 comments
+ add your ownBy the way, dear, are you also 'unfriending' your friends who continually and falsely accuse others of being 'paid trolls', or is that part of the hypocrisy and double standards that is all too common among anti's?? Perhaps you ought to have a chat with your 'friends' too. Maybe hand out a few mirrors. ;)
pssssst....pay attention, dear--the title of the article is WHY I'M STILL VEGAN. It's NOT why I eat animal corpses.
It's obvious that you and the other anti-vegans who have flooded this discussion (as the same anti-vegans have flooded literally EVERY discussion on Care2 that even mentions the word vegan), even though you have ZERO interest in being vegan. We get it dear. We all know that neither you nor the other anti-vegans will ever be happy till everyone pats you on the back and says: aw, you are doing such a great job of eating the animals that I am fighting to protect, we sure hope their corpses were yummy.
It amazes us that people who have ZERO interest in being vegan, yet you feel the need to chime in and announce that you 'need' to eat animals even on a discussion that CLEARLY is about NOT eating animals. You then have a fit because you don't receive a arm welcome. What do you expect??? Get a clue already. If you aren't anti-vegan, then why do you ALWAYS seek discussions that clearly pertain to NOT EATING ANIMALS?? Don't bother answering, as it was a rhetorical question. Seriously, get a clue.
@ Marie - Because it is about both subjects, just like the burger article is, and you do not get to decide who posts where on Care2. You can complain and wonder all you want. You make the biggest messes on these threads.
@Nyack - I have unfriended you because you keep accusing Diane of being a paid troll, and I obviously you do not care that she isn't, so I consider your behavior bullying.
These conversations can be had like adults, and it would be delightful to see everybody act as such.
Save it, Diane. You have disrupted every single discussion you have polluted with the same, tiresome disdain, ignorance and negativity. There are people here who, unlike you, actually CARE about the topic. We are sick of it.
The topic is WHY I'M STILL VEGAN and the fact that you and other nasty anti vegans have flooded this entire thread speaks volumes. No person in their right mind would EVER waste time spreading their animosity and ignorant anti-vegan rants. Care2 needs to investigate and realize what a disgusting mess these trolls have made of literally every discussion that even mentions the word VEGAN. It's disgusting to see so called adults behaving like troubled prepubescent children. Many of us are disgusted beyond words and something needs to be done about this.
Hi Kye, I, and several others on Care2 have also blocked her as well as the rest of the group of anti-vegan trolls who flood any and every discussion that even mentions one of the countless benefits of being vegan or the countless negative aspects of meat eating. The fact that anti-vegans are even posting their ignorance and disdain on a thread titled WHY I'M STILL VEGAN speaks volumes. No one in their right mind would spend time condemning people who fight against the atrocities that animals are forced to endure. We are obviously a threat to these people.
Here you go again, Elizabeth. If anyone is paid to post, it's certainly not me. I so wish. Kye, you've been blocked from sending me obsenities and nasty private messages, and you were also blocked by a few others that I know of, but seems that hasn't dampened your desire to insult and post personal attacks. Gail, your username is not familiar to me, so I'll give you a free pass with that clear violation of Care.2's C.O.C. in a way, but you should realize that using that type of phrasing and name-calling are clearly against all the rules, not to mention civility.
Why is it that a difference of opinion is so against your ability to accept or comprehend? Members here don't have to be "prolific writers", and it would seem neither do many of the authors of the articles. Why would you think that Care.2 is a site where only those who agree with you have a right to comment? Why do you think it's required that everyone have a "common goal"? Read the C.O.C. It states very clearly that differences of opinion are encouraged, but members should have respect for others and their rights to express them. You seem not to accept that. I do, but I don't accept personal attacks or name-calling.
I don't eat very much meat, not because I buy into the argument about animal rights (though that we have a moral obligation to keep animals in our care happy even if we intend to eat them is undeniable), but because a diet rich in meat is unhealthy and it's expensive... both on my wallet and the environment.
Mac McDaniel's assertion "I’m still vegan because I believe an animal has the right to live without being the property of another." sounds fair enough, but his ideal world where animals are not exploited will also be a world with no farm animals... he's solved the problem of animal welfare by denying them existence.
I also tire of the "my diet does not kill defenseless animals" argument. Yes it does. Multitudes that either die at the edge of a tractor blade, or lose their habitat to monoculture. And not just creepy crawlies, but cute furry and feathered beings as well. To conflate humane animal husbandry with genocide, slavery (although factory farms, yes, I would agree) or pedophilia is what requires the mental gymnastics.
Do you have a pet? There is a perfect example of animal slavery.
I enjoyed and agreed with the article you are answering to. Her point is very well taken.
Furthermore, the bulk of "veggieburgers" (Boca Burger, Garden Burger, Morningstar, - seems Amy's is the only one that is not owned by a corp) are owned by companies like Hain and Kellogg who are engaging in earth raping, non-organic monoculture crops, and even if that one product is organic and non-GMO, by giving those companies your dollars you are complicit in an agricultural problem that is just as serious as that of factory farming in terms of environmental destruction.
It's interesting that whenever the subject of veganism comes up it creates such conflict between the commenters. I find it encouraging as obviously people are thinking about it. I was vegetarian for about 16 years, and became vegan about 3 1/2 years ago when I learned that cows cry for up to 7 days grieving for their babies taken away so we can have their milk. I am no longer willing to put an animal through that kind of torment. I am probably healthier now than I was beforehand, mainly because I take care. Being vegan is not automatically resulting in poorer health or an unbalanced diet. The only thing that you can get in a non-vegan diet that you can't get as a vegan really is Vitamin D3, but if you get a good dose of sunlight you'll be OK. I had a lengthy talk with a naturopath about a vegan diet and he told me about research conducted on Tibetan monks who had been vegan for at least 10 years. What they did find was that they were not deficient in anything, but that they didn't consume anything from the plant family that includes onions, garlic etc. Apparently eating this branch of plants inhibits Vitamin B12, so if you do love onions etc as I do, just take a vegan friendly B12 supplement. There are plenty of meat eaters who are really unhealthy but nobody blames their consumption of meat. So why do people justify not being vegan on the false argument that being vegan means nutritional deprivation? Whatever reason people wish to eat meat, please don't deny responsibility
login to add your comment
use your care2 login
add your comment