Dropping Links

Some stuff I want to keep track of, and you might like to peruse, listen to, or watch…

• NPR : Debate Over Whale Hunt Focuses On Japan - It looks like the whole idea of defending a ridiculous practice just for the principle is losing traction. Aired June 21, 2010.
• NY Times Magazine: Tuna’s End by Paul Greenberg – Maybe the best summary I’ve seen on the plight of Bluefin, especially in recent times. Covers the CITES failure, the oil spill, and some great visuals that make the animal seem more real, and how they are caught. Published June 21, 2010.
• On Point (NPR): Killer Whales: Tanks and Tensions with Tom Ashbrook. – A 47-minute radio program exploring whales in captivity, including Tilikum in Orlando.
• Plants & Animals Denver – www.plantsanimals.org – the vegan advocacy group I help organize. We are currently working on a local Bluefin tuna campaign, and putting on vegan community dinners every month.

Methinks Someone at the Denver Post is on the Big Ag teat.

This Denver Post editorial from today’s paper just smacks of Big Ag influence to me. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but come on: the editor is defending keeping pizza in school lunches (as an “example”). Has the mighty agriculture lobby resorted to paying off newspaper editors to influence public opinion before laws get to close to passing? It’s the only explanation to me for defending the need for “palatable” unhealthy choices in school cafeterias.

The article expresses concern over how far the new legislation (called the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010) could go. According to USA Today, it aims to “bolster the safety and nutritional value of school lunches.” The Post editors worry that

the potential that nutritional standards, yet to be developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, might be written so strictly they would effectively eliminate local control and individual choice.

The editors don’t seem to acknowledge the results of kids having that “individual choice.” Personally, I keep hearing about how kids tend to pick the tater tots, pizza, and Taco Bell when given the choice. Of course they do. Those things taste better to kids. Maybe they know they should be eating something healthier, and yeah, the idea of giving them a choice is nice and all, but I’m kind of a realist on this one: American kids don’t care about the healthy option. Some of them may have been hazed enough to know that they probably don’t want to be fat the rest of their lives, but what justification is there for slapping a burger and fries in front of them every day? They will eat it. The salt and fat will taste good to them, and they will continue to want that burger or pizza or taco every day.

Looking back at what I’ve written, I realize I am coming off as a bit of a totalitarian food Nazi- the children will eat what I say they will eat! But that’s not the case. I think kids should be allowed to eat food that tastes good to them. There are plenty of delicious nutritious options that I’m sure the lunch-ladies (and lunch-gentlemen) can handle cooking and serving. We need school lunch reform because the current options are lazy, underfunded, and bad for the kids. We need the bad-for-you stuff out because it keeps the kids hooked on the junk and headed towards obesity and diabetes. We need to present the message in our SCHOOLS (places of education!) that certain foods are healthy, and that we won’t subject our younglings to the food that will harm their bodies in the long run.

Here’s an analogy that probably most people will roll their eyes at: We do not put pornography in school libraries. We don’t because we believe our kids should not be subjected to certain things. We want the library to be a fascinating place that develops their love for reading, exploring, and imagination. We don’t want it to be the place where they are exposed to the seedy, sexualized world of adults. That would be bad for their development, their psyche, their health. So why do we still expose kids to unhealthy food in our school cafeterias? Because they’ll eat it? That’s the reason? We might not want to think so, but kids will look at porn if it’s sitting on the school bookshelf. They will. And they’ll eat the pizza if it is offered a-la-carte as a competitive food in the lunchroom.

Okay, so different stories, food and porn, I know. But am I that far off-base here?

Put burgers and pizza in schools, and kids will think: I am allowed to eat that. My prinicipal, lunchlady, and parents allow it to be there, so it can’t be so bad, right? I believe as much as anybody that proper nutritional education starts with the parents- they are the voice of reason, the ones who identify good and bad food. But why provide the mixed message of meat, cheese, and milk at every single lunchtime? Stay on-message, people!

I am not yet a parent, so you can take all of this with that grain of salt. But I care about our food system, and I see how corruption, corporate influnce, and poor governance have brought the National School Lunch Program to it’s current status: broken. It is an obvious symptom of the broader industrial-food system disease we have become accustomed to: one that has been warped by improper subsidies, lax regulation, corporate lobby, Wal-Mart-thrift-obsessivness, and our view of food items as tongue-masturbators. OK, eye-roller, that’s another unnecessary one, I know… But the food-porn hedonism I see in the U.S. these days is disgusting enough to me that I feel justified in using such language. If we look at food solely as a source of pleasure, we’re going to get a food system that reflects only that: cheap food that tastes good. Not healthy food that reflects our own personal values.

It starts when we’re kids. Do we want our children to make food choices on base flavor instincts (me want salt and fat!), or do we want them to think about where their food comes from, how it nourishes them, and  how their choices affect the world?

Radiolab: Animal Minds

photo by The Marine Mammal Center

The Animal Minds episode of Radiolab explores what we often wonder about our pets and other animals: what are they thinking? Jad and Robert get into discussions about dog guilt, anthropomorphizing, and the most amazing story about a whale caught in a web of crabtraps. It’s an excellent hour of radio, and I definitely recommend checking it out. Considering the mind of an animal is a good thought experiment.

We often think animals may have thoughts and feelings similar to our own. This concept usually advances the pursuit of animal rights, as it helps us relate to them and thus show compassion. However, making comparisons between animal and human minds can also impede compassion towards animals. I say this because it is unfair to animals to make that comparison. Scientists really know so little about the brains of animals, let alone humans. When we try to think about whether an animal is as smart as a human, we too often look at the problem in the context of human intelligence: Do they use tools? Do they communicate with each other? And when we find that they are not very human-like, we tend to classify them as somehow sub-human. This tendency is what feeds the widespread belief that animals do not deserve the same rights as people. Thinking this way justifies zoos, validates factory farms, funds animal testing, distorts our own sense of morality.

 Consider the humpback whale. The evolution of a whale’s brain happened in a way that has been advantageous to its species’ survival, while the long process that led up to the (seemingly) exceptional human brain occurred under vastly different circumstances. Realizing this, we must acknowledge that our brains are not necessarily that special in the animal kingdom. Yes, our brains have given us the ability to create, imagine, dream, love, and all that, but that does not make the human brain superior, except by our own biased standards of what intelligence means. Who knows what a whale brain can do? They are incredibly complex creatures that we know very little about. Maybe a humpback freed of its entanglement by a friendly group of human divers is showing gratitude when it nuzzles them afterward, or maybe it is doing something we just cannot yet understand. That behavior is something though, I gotta say.

Kevin Rudd gets serious about whaling?

 

Australia’s prime minister Kevin Rudd, and the country’s government, have been criticized repeatedly by activist groups like Sea Shepherd over the years for avoiding taking a strong stance against Japan’s whaling practices. Though it is the country nearest the Southern Ocean hunting grounds, where the whaling activity takes place, Australia has been reluctant to risk the friendly economic partnerships it has with Japan by showing any opposition to what most of the world views as illegal whaling.

According to a new story published today (which I noticed through the “whaling” trending link on Yahoo), Rudd is finally getting serious about the issue. He is apparently living up to one of his campaign promises from two years ago and threatening Japan with international court action if they do not respond to diplomatic talks on the issue. He promises to make progress with Japan or take them to court before the next whaling season starts (though the current season is still going).

Hopefully this gets us somewhere. It looks a bit like political posturing, but I’m happy to see a world leader addressing the issue of whaling. It gives anti-whaling activists a bit more legtimacy and maybe even some hope.

As Smart as Us… or Smarter?

Are they playing, or are they trying to spell S.O.S. to the dumb humans? Either way, you have to wonder how there are people in modern civilizations (Japan!) who see dolphins as beneath us. Please, everybody see The Cove.

BBC’s One Planet: Animals and Us

One Planet is a weekly half-hour show on the BBC World Service. The producers always put together an interesting, thoughtful look at environmental issues around the world. The most recent episode touches on issues with animals. 

 Click here to listen to the podcast.

Here is the synopsis from the One Planet website:

It was 28 years ago that the documentary maker Victor Schonfeld produced The Animals Film about the way humans exploit other species. He returns to the subject in a two-part documentary to give a very personal view on what, if anything, has changed since then.

In the first programme he looks at the use of animals for food and turns to experts in fields such as psychology, history, language and neurology to find out why humans seem so attracted to eating meat.

Next week, he focuses on the scientific establishment’s attachment to using animals, and considers the future. Might social justice for other species actually benefit humans?

The Conversation is Ignored

I’m not sure why I feel like posting this article; it is an op-ed in The Detroit News by some dude who works for one of Big Food’s lobby groups, the “Center for Consumer Freedom.” I guess I just find it funny. This is a person whose job entails protecting the status quo of the American industrial food system, and his editorial reads like a C high-schooler’s essay on why vegetarians are stupid. Read it if you want. You won’t get much out of it except maybe a chuckle and a reinforced sense of how weak the arguments against our lifestyle are. Don’t say I never look at the other side of things…

Thanksgiving Field Roast with mushroom gravy

I spent Thanksgiving visiting my girlfriend’s famil(ies), and got to have a mini Thanksgiving with my sister’s fam the next evening. On thursday we brought one of our favorite dishes (mac and no-cheese), as well as some salad and vegan blondies. I’m glad we did because otherwise there would have been almost nothing for the vegan weirdos to eat at the first place. Luckily, the second dinner stop had more for us: vegan yams, a bean dip, fruit salad, and rolls- enough that I continued the tradition of overeating. We saw both sides of the Thanksgiving-for-vegans conundrum: one where we had to forgoe nearly everything our hosts were eating, and one where some kind folks went a little out of their way for us. I was proud that we stuck to our guns and managed to avoid any negativity on such a non-vegan-friendly holiday. It was really nice to have a few different people make sure we had some vegan options; it really added to the warm holiday cheer of the occasion for me- I guess you could say I was thankful. I hate to have people think I need special treatment or to be a a burden in any way. But I do appreciate when they at least leave the options open- such as leaving the marshmallows and butter out of a recipe so that those who want those ingredients can add them at dinnertime (and those who don’t can actually eat it!).

On friday we were heading to a smaller, more casual gathering with my sister, brother-in-law and niece, and we had a Field Roast in the fridge, so we decided to bring it over to share. That way my sister would not have to worry about cooking again (although she still had some vegan stuff for us- thanks sis!). We cooked it in a small baking pan with onions and mushrooms and basted it every 10 minutes with a vegan chicken-flavored broth.  We also whipped up an awesome mushroom gravy from an online recipe that was sooo good (sorry, no gravy pics- forgot). Even the non-vegans seemed to like it, so we left the leftovers with my sister.

It was a fun vegan Thanksgiving. It had some awkward moments. You tend to forget how foreign this lifestyle is to many people. My tact was to just smile and mostly deflect getting into the nitty gritty of the whole thing. I had no intention of being a disruption, and I really hate feeling like people think I am judging their choices (even though I must admit that can happen). I just remember that I have only been vegan for a little over 2 years, and even though I knew a vegan or two before that, the whole thing was a bit of a mystery to me too for a while. The beauty of being a vegan at Thanksgiving is that you get to show off a little. Friends and relatives get a better sense of how important is is to you. Even if you don’t discuss it much or make a big deal out of it, they notice what you choose to not eat and in some small way you think you may have opened their eyes a little more. They are forced to realize that at least some people find it more important to make strong personal choices than to just go along with tradition. The awkward times come when a few tablemates, perhaps feeling guilty, mention how they do not eat much meat, or how they enjoy a veggie burger now and then (what do they want- a high five?), or when somebody refuses to try a vegan dish just because they know the vegans brought it (vegan? it must be full of tofu and taste terrible!), but you just smile and let your choices do the talking. We may not have converted anybody, but that was not our goal. I am just happy that year after year we will show that this is not just a phase. I love being vegan, and I cannot imagine ever going back. Those who are close to me will at least have to learn that. And maybe by seeing my passion for this lifestyle, they will decide to look into things for themselves.

The Conversation Gets Louder

This is a link to some letters written to the New York Times editor in response to Gary Steiner’s November 22 op-ed in the NYT. I found it interesting to see what the Times found fit to print. It has ethical vegans writing in their support of Steiner’s views, as well as the opposing side’s arguments. What I noticed in the latter was a lot of the defensive, uninformed flawed logic that we vegans encounter a lot; justification based on human evolution, the theory that you hurt animals no matter your diet, and the supposed hypocrisy of a vegan with a pet. All of these omnivore excuses are still incredibly weak to me, even if  they are written by supposedly ethical intellectuals. I am so glad to see the ethical eating conversation in a big national venue. I know I am biased, but it is great to see those arguments fail yet again.

“What we know about eating animals is that we don’t want to know.”

This quote comes from Elizabeth Kolbert’s thoughtful review of Jonathan Safran Foer’s Eating Animals in The New Yorker. Foer’s book is getting a ton of publicity, it seems, and it is a very exciting time for vegans like me. By virtue of his hipster-approved novels and his combination of intellect and youth, Foer has shown that he has the power that many vegan freaks wish they had: the power to get more people to pay attention. I could blog about modern food problems until I was blue in the fingertips, and so could the rest of the vegan blogorazzi, and none of us would have the influence that he has. I am very happy to see it happening, but book tours and press junkets end after a while. We will have to see if interviews on Ellen Degeneres’ show and reviews in The Onion and New Yorker will merely start the conversation, or actually create a new movement towards veganism and vegetarianism. I hope Foer’s book is coming at the right time.

I want to believe that there are a lot of people out there who have thought a bit about the source of their meat. The sad thing is that most people choose to believe that if a burger can legally be sold to them for a dollar, everything with the system must be fine. These people do not choose to think about the power of corporate influence, the economics of how meat is created so cheaply, or maybe even the fact that a cow had to live a short horrible life so they could get a little salt-induced dopamine spurt. Like Kolbert said: “What we know about eating animals is that we don’t want to know.” Those who don’t want to know probably will not be part of the conversation. They are often the same people who say that eating meat is a god-given right and pleasure, or reduce the whole argument to “I have canine teeth, therefore I am supposed to eat meat.” Argh, it bugs me to think about the ignorance, so lets move on. Ignore the ignorant.

So, what about the people who do want to know? This is where we can get some hope from Foer’s book. There are potentially millions of new vegan converts out there, right? I mean, there has to be. Modern grocery shoppers increasingly care about organics, food-born illness, fair-trade, etc… So why not animal rights and corporate justice? For me, the biggest reason to go vegan was, and probably always will be, the satisfaction of removing myself from a system that repeatedly deceives us and corrupts everything it touches. To me, the food/agriculture industry is more evil than any of the bailed-out bankers, Big Tobacco, or Big Oil. I imagine there are a lot of people that hate being lied to as much as I do. Hopefully this book will make more veggie-leaning thinkers out there take the next step and do the right thing, just like Natalie Portman did (she became vegan after reading it).

I am simultaneously excited and frustrated by the transparency provided to us by the information age. The internet and investigative journalism should be giving us the truth that all the evil corporations are trying to hide. Unfortunately, that promise of transparency isn’t living up to its potential. Until our society at large decides that it is important to know where our food comes from, we cannot expect a high enough level of snooping around by do-gooders to make a difference. This is why I believe it is important to read (and buy) newspapers and magazines that do a good job. Those passionate journalists can’t find the dirt if they don’t get paid for it; at least not as effectively. This is also why I plan to read Eating Animals as soon as I manage to scrounge up the money.