As many at VCU know, there was a display recently at VCU which compared human suffering throughout history to that of animals today. I ask you, please don’t stop reading, as I’m sure is the reflex reaction of many who are tired of this worn out subject, and consider my words.
I was reading over some of the media coverage of the Animal Liberation exhibit and was surprised (although, maybe I shouldn’t be) at just how angry and how upset some people were by the exhibit. It contained images of human suffering throughout our history, including pictures of men being lynched, branded in the face, hung, and shacked in chains. The human images were accompanied by images of animals going through similar ordeals, attempting to draw a comparison between the fight for human civil rights and for animal welfare. The article by Dionne Walker (www.newsday.com) caught my attention the most, especially with the closing quote by Senior Kariss Rogers: “Chicken is food! This organization is wrong for even trying to make the comparison.” I read this and it occurs to me that the majority of angry students have missed the message entirely.
Or maybe PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) just isn’t communicating it well. They’ve established such a name for themselves as being controversial, shocking, and to some, ridiculous, that many turn a blind eye and a deaf ear the moment they know PETA is involved. Who could blame them? It’s only a natural reaction to become defensive if you feel that someone is accusing you of doing something unethical – it’s a very dangerous territory and it seems many people have completely closed themselves off to even considering what others have to say on the subject.
So before anyone asks, yes, I am a vegan, but NO, I am not here to tell you that I think it’s wrong to eat meat. Ms Rogers may very well be correct: maybe chicken is food. I’m not going to even touch on the universal question on whether or not the simple action of eating meat is wrong, because I don’t know that it is. But I wonder how students can look at images of animals being burned alive and not care? Some would say that animals are commodities, and we should therefore not concern ourselves with such matters. But what if it was a dog, or a cat? Many states have laws against animal cruelty (http://www.americanhumane.org for details) towards domestic animals, some even resulting in felony charges. If the images depicted in the PETA exhibit were done against domestic animals, it would most certainly upset a lot of people – imagine a dog being set on fire before being slaughtered for food. In fact, even if a dog was slaughtered humanely, most students would object to it. So why, then, do we draw a distinction between traditional livestock and domestic animals? Not only are people comfortable with eating them (opposed to a cat) but they get angry when they are told how cruelly these other animals are treated.
It’s a fairly well-known fact that animals on factory farms suffer abuses that are beyond what many of us can begin to comprehend – beatings, cramped quarters, rampant disease, castration, electric prods, and slow deaths, all without the use of painkillers. Are all of these things necessary for meat production? In most cases, no – but they persist because there is no legislation for non-domestic animals, despite the fact that they are sentient creatures which feel just as much pain as fear as the animals we typically love and cherish, many of them intelligent and highly social creatures.
I said earlier that people were missing the message – and perhaps they still are. The primary message from animal welfare groups (yes, welfare, even if animals aren’t afforded rights, their welfare should be taken into account) is not “Go Vegetarian!”, although that’s often how it’s presented, but that’s something I don’t care for or support. The message was never about going vegetarian, it’s about taking a stand against cruelty. Even as a meat eater, there are a ton of things you can do in regards to animal welfare, because the concern doesn’t stop at food. Tons of household items, including shampoo, detergents, and deodorants, are needlessly and endlessly tested on animals. Doing a little research and purchasing meat from producers you know take the animals’ welfare into consideration can go a long way – the more of a demand there is for it, the more likely producers (and lawmakers) will start listening.
Honestly, I could care less if you decide to go vegetarian or not. At the very least, though, it’s important to understand where your money is going and to at least attempt to make ethical purchases. If you still don’t care, then I don’t know what else to say you to, but thanks for listening.
If anyone would like to discuss this article with me, feel free to write me at johnnypark33@gmail.com
Matt Wetsel
(for Commonwealth Times use only)
I can be reached at 804 921 2736