Vegan lifestyle articles that discuss ways of living in peace with humans, animals, and the environment.
There's an Elephant in the Room blog
September
2018
Feet of clay: a weakness or hidden flaw in the character of a greatly admired or respected person
On social media, as soon as the fact that they are not vegan is mentioned by anyone who is, there is an unseemly rush from apologists ready to defend their heroes on the basis of what is shrugged off as inconsequential, coupled with a barrage of what can only be termed vitriolic bile being levelled towards the one who had the audacity to mention it.... As long as the message that ‘heroes’ are broadcasting, ignores or trivialises the need for veganism as the absolute least we can all do, the rest of us will just have to work twice as hard to defend their victims.
Image:
FilmingForLiberation.com
Without any effort at all, I can think of a number of high-profile
persons who are hero worshipped for their claims to represent the interests
of animals of various species, but who, by their own admission, are not
vegan. By definition, this means that they support and fund brutality and
violence in their consumer choices. This is simply a fact.
On social media, as soon as the fact that they are not vegan is mentioned by
anyone who is, there is an unseemly rush from apologists ready to defend
their heroes on the basis of what is shrugged off as inconsequential,
coupled with a barrage of what can only be termed vitriolic bile being
levelled towards the one who had the audacity to mention it.
Today on social media I had the misfortune to witness one such exchange on
the page of a staunch animal rights advocate who lives by every single word
that they say. The thread unfolded in the sadly predictable pattern that
results from any naming of names; the same way in fact that this essay
would, if names were named. However the names are not important; what these
non-vegan ‘heroes’ represent, most definitely is.
Today, apologists, non-vegans and the ‘can’t all be perfect’ brigade weighed
in to accuse, contrast and condemn on the basis of what in this instance was
proclaimed to be the ‘wonderful work’ done by their hero, with scathing
remarks demanding to know ‘What are you doing compared to that?!’ According
to critics, only a ‘zealot’ would consider that self promoted ‘good works’
do not grant a free pass to at least some brutal and exploitative behaviour.
According to the defenders, the predilection of the hero for consuming
cheese made from nonhuman breast milk, and the slaughterhouse-tainted
nightmare that the practice inflicts annually on millions of defenceless
mothers and infants, should not only be discounted as a mere trifle, but the
vegan ought to be ashamed for even mentioning the matter.
So before I continue, let’s step back and consider this phenomenon in a
human context. Such an exercise is always useful to reveal aspects of our
view that may be speciesist. I use it frequently.
Thinking about human rights
If you will, I’d like you to think of a high-profile, human rights
campaigner, past or present. I’m sure we can all think of at least one such
person whose shining example has inspired our admiration. Now, still
thinking of this person, imagine that you have just been made aware that
this icon was, by their own admission, a supporter and promoter of something
incompatible with their stance, such as – say – child pornography.
Would this revelation that they were saying one thing while doing something
completely contradictory, affect our perception of the chosen hero? For the
sake of those who may, at this point, choose to deny any change, we can try
taking this a step further. What if, when the stash of child porn was
uncovered, we were to discover that our own children were amongst those
whose innocence had been violated for a thrill?
Would we see on social media a spirited defence of this human rights paragon
on the basis that their ‘good works’ outweighed their predilection for
sexualising infants? Would we see derision, scorn and vitriol being levelled
at anyone with the audacity to point out that no matter how ‘good’ the
‘works’, it is impossible to dismiss and forgive on behalf of their victims,
such a fundamental betrayal of every human rights issue ever? Would we see
scathing comments of ‘So what? Nobody’s perfect!’?
I suspect we wouldn’t. Because it’s not so easy now, is it? By defending
those who harm other animals, we’re saying that collateral casualties are a
reasonable price to pay as a scientifically unproven route to some imagined
‘greater good’. However that sort of high ideal is fine only when we’re
talking about someone else’s loved ones. Or in fact for some, preferably
some other species and their loved ones. It’s always easy to sound
magnanimous about situations that are never going to touch us personally.
Heroes as influencers
So, to return to the conversation that I mentioned at the beginning, what we
have to ask is what is the message being sent out by these high profile
animal users?
My merciless memory raises its hand at the back of the room again. Until
2012 I was not vegan and I admired and aspired to emulate many other non
vegans who claimed to represent the interests of animals. I was influenced
by what they said. And what I heard was a vindication of my own efforts to
be ‘compassionate‘, and I felt reassured that I was doing the best anyone
could reasonably do. I already thought that the use of members of other
species for any and all reasons was a ‘necessary evil’, and so from these
non-vegans my impressionable former self learned that there was a ‘kind’ and
‘caring’ way to deprive my victims of their lives and of every single thing
that made those lives worth living. Through such teaching in my decades as a
non-vegan, my ‘awareness’ was not even slightly ‘raised’ above the corpses,
the eggs and the breast milk products on my plate. Only vegan education did
that.
With clay-footed heroes elevated onto pedestals by those who either don’t
know any better, or by those who see in the failures of their ‘heroes’ some
vindication of their own inconsistencies, a message is proclaimed to a
non-vegan world only too happy for the reassurance, that some animals matter
but there’s no need to be extreme. They don’t all matter equally and it’s
perfectly fine to harm and kill them as long as we are ‘kind’ and
‘compassionate’.
On the cult of celebrity
It is dismaying that there is an escalating media circus surrounding vegan
advocacy, with the inevitable result that the victims of our species are so
often becoming eclipsed by the clamour of ‘celebrities’. We don’t need to be
looking for ‘heroes’ to put on pedestals. We don’t need to be hanging onto
every word of ‘celebrities’.
The decision to be vegan is a personal one, made in the silence of our own
thoughts and guided by our conscience. Once we understand the inevitable
consequences of our consumer choices to use broken lives and bodies, the
decision to be vegan is a line that we draw as an individual where we say
‘Enough. Not in my name.’
Yet for as long as the message that ‘heroes’ are broadcasting, ignores or
trivialises the need for veganism as the absolute least we can all do, the
rest of us will just have to work twice as hard to defend their victims.
Be vegan.
In memory
Let’s be mindful of the following in the single year 2016:
Return to Animal Rights/Vegan Activist Strategies