"In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a
revolutionary act."
- George Orwell
While I try to shine a light on the truth, others seek to cower from it and live in the dark, as if not seeing will make it all disappear. Don't they realize that their own blindness and apathy is the reason why the world is such a terrible place, especially for nonhuman animals?
Image of Nicole Kidman in 'The Others'
I was interviewing for a job and was prepared for the ubiquitous
question: tell me a little about yourself. I mentioned a few interests, like
organizing, reading, and writing, but it wasn't enough to satisfy my
interviewer. I hesitated to mention my being vegan and knew if hired that it
would eventually come up, but I went for it anyway. The interviewer seemed
intrigued and as most "animal" conversations go, she related to a former dog
companion whom she had loved and discussed at length.
"It must be a great sacrifice to be vegan," she finally stated, almost
questioningly.
"It isn't a sacrifice, but a great joy," I beamed. "Going vegan is one of
the best decisions I ever made because I no longer contribute to animal
suffering through what I eat." I could see the wheels turning.
"Well, it's a choice, right?" she asked, rather rhetorically and smugly.
"And that's your choice."
I smiled, noting the usual self-protective posturing. "Yes," I said.
Nonvegan rebuttals like the one above are both confounding and instructive,
and provide interesting studies in psychology. When confronted with my being
vegan, the interviewer quickly sought to make me "the other" so she didn't
have to examine her own behaviors. Likewise, she sought to separate herself
from me by implying that my being vegan is my own "personal choice," instead
of a moral requirement. This begs the question: why would anyone want to
defend a choice to do harm to others?
Years of experience has taught me that people need to put distance between
themselves and what I'm espousing so they don't have to examine their own
self-deceits. When someone insists that my being vegan follows my own
"personal beliefs," I promptly point out that we both share the same
beliefs. When I ask them if they believe that causing other animals
unnecessary harm is wrong, they agree. Thus, when I point out that eating
the flesh, milk, and eggs of other animals is unnecessary, causing billions
of animals to be needlessly tormented and killed every year, they typically
get defensive. The only difference is that I'm acting on our shared values
and beliefs, while they are not.
"A person who tells you that eating animal products is a personal choice is
experiencing a state of cognitive dissonance," wrote Robert Grillo in
"Eating Animals and the Illusion of Personal Choice" (Circles of Compassion:
Essays Connecting Issues of Justice, 2014). ". . . they have made this issue
personal precisely in response to vegans making it public. Making the issue
personal is a nice way of saying, 'I don't want to be judged or held
accountable for my actions that harm animals.' So this is not so much an
attempt to defend eating animals as it is a defense intended to block any
further discussion or evaluation. Moreover, personalization removes animals
from public discourse and keeps them tucked away in our closet of denial and
silence."
Farhad Manjoo, who is not vegan, recently addressed the topics of guilt and
cognitive dissonance that make people hostile to vegans and veganism in his
deeply honest and heartfelt piece, "Stop Mocking Vegans."
"Many [nonvegans] understand the toll that meat wreaks on the planet, and we
can’t help but feel the tension between loving animals in the abstract while
eating them with abandon on the plate. All of this creates feelings of
defensiveness, so when a vegan comes along, their very presence seems like
an affront."
I recently became aware of the term "moral envy" after reading Bullshit Jobs
by David Graeber. He describes moral envy as "feelings of envy and
resentment directed at another person, not because that person is wealthy,
or gifted, or lucky, but because his or her behavior is seen as upholding a
higher moral standard than the envier's own." I strongly believe that
nonvegan resistance, whether unconscious or conscious, is also tied to moral
envy.
There is, however, an easy solution to moral envy: align one's actions and
behaviors with one's purported values. Ah, and there's the rub!
Many people claim to love and care for nonhuman animals, but few people
actually do. Most people do not see themselves as persecutors and murderers
of other animals, so when someone exposes the truth of what their actions
bring about, rather than ask what they can do to alleviate this great
injustice and make things right, they try to justify their actions to avoid
self-correction and to make themselves feel better.
If we believe the lives of other animals matter, then abstaining from
manipulating and massacring them for food, clothing, and entertainment is a
moral requirement, not a personal choice. Grillo went on to say quite
plainly, "mere personal choices don't have victims."
This false sense of choice that makes people think that they have the right
to oppress, use, and execute the bodies of other living beings—either
directly themselves or by paying someone else to do the dirty work for
them—is made possible because the law gives it cover since other animals are
still considered property. In addition, because the majority of people
exploit and eat animals for personal pleasure, convenience, and
entertainment, a mob mentality allows such injustices to continue. I was
once told by someone very close to me that "millions of people can't be
wrong." Indeed, they can, and centuries of history has borne this out. As
Leo Tolstoy once exclaimed, "wrong does not cease to be wrong because the
majority share in it."
There was once a time when husbands could beat their wives without
prosecution and white people could enslave Black people. These and other
great injustices were legal, but that didn't make them right. There is a
higher moral law than just legal man-made laws. As Dr. Martin Luther King
Jr. wrote in his “Letter from Birmingham City Jail” in April 1963, “. . .
there are two types of laws: there are just and there are unjust laws.”
People have a personal choice when it comes to what kind of car they drive,
what style of hair they wear, and what color they paint their living room
walls; however, their sense of entitlement to the lives and bodies of other
animals is morally bankrupt and baseless. It is self-deceptive to argue that
one has a right to personally harm another being, which is why murder,
assault, and rape are not considered personal choices in our society. The
distinction between persons (bodies) arises from nothing more than arbitrary
notions of property and what is considered socially acceptable by the masses
at a given time.
Which brings me back to my interviewer. While her love for her dog companion
was apparent, she was unable to apply the same consciousness and status to
those animals whom she imposes upon and consumes.
"In the Western world, we feel it wrong to torture and eat cats and dogs,
but perfectly acceptable to do the same to animals equally as sentient and
capable of suffering," said Canadian activist Twyla Francois. "No being who
prides himself on rationality can continue to support such behavior."
Whenever I share information on animal abuse and exploitation I get lots of
push back and, in certain cases, even warnings. I'm not surprised that in a
world like ours, facts and truth can be so threatening. People don't want to
hear about day-old male chicks ground up alive or suffocated in plastic bags
because the egg industry finds them useless. Nor do they want to know about
newly born male calves ripped away from their wailing mothers and sold to
the veal industry or left for dead because they can't produce milk for dairy
enslavers. This knowledge requires action, and action requires change.
"In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
While I try to shine a light on the truth, others seek to cower from it and
live in the dark, as if not seeing will make it all disappear. Don't they
realize that their own blindness and apathy is the reason why the world is
such a terrible place, especially for nonhuman animals?
I am vegan because I'm only doing what I am obligated to do—the most good
and least harm. People frequently repel what is good and holy because it
deprives them of carnal pleasures, and that is why there is contention. We
often know what the right thing to do is, but we fail to do it.
Unfortunately, I have become accustomed to nonvegan opposition. I can only
hope that one day soon such reactions will be the exception and not the
rule, and that people will realize that I am not so different from them.
Social constructs that teach us that it is acceptable to manipulate, use,
and kill other animals for personal gain are learned and can just as easily
be unlearned. All it takes is a willingness to open one's eyes and do the
right thing.
Return to: Animal Rights/Vegan Activist Strategies