Don’t Forget the Pigs, i.e., We’re All Guilty of a Little Conspiracy PDF E-mail
Boyd Pearson   
Friday, 27 July 2007

 

If you’re sitting there condemning Michael Vick, you may want to take a long look in the mirror.

 

Now, I’m not writing this to try and even begin to defend Michael Vick’s alleged (God I hate it that you’re supposed to say that) actions. They were barbaric. They were despicable. They were without conscience. Quite frankly, I’ve been very suspect of Vick’s intelligence ever since the water bottle incident. I mean, really?

 

However, I don’t think that most of us can sit back and talk about how bad of a person he is and how terrible he is, without first acknowledging that we too are guilty of, at least, negligence, if not conspiracy.

 

Do you know where your food comes from?

 

 

Are you aware of The Colonel’s secret recipe ?

 

You hear about how pigs on factory farms are kept and treated?

 

You enjoy veal? Foie Gras?

 

 

Do you know we use animals to test fun products like tasers?

 

Chickens definitely seem to get it the worst.

 

I could continue to link to articles and videos until the cows come home (pun intended), but I won’t. You can go to YouTube and see as much animal blood as your heart so desires. And if the reality is too much, Sustainable Table made a short little movie called The Meatrix, just so they could make animal cruelty palatable enough for the masses. Most people turn those disgusting videos off and choose not to think about them. It’s easier that way.

 

Now, I’m not an expert, but I have done some homework, and if you really look into it, we eat a lot of food every day that comes from tortured, mutilated animals. And we know this. We just don’t want to think about it. Have I eaten and enjoyed all of these products? Yes. But, I have to tell you, after reading and learning about a lot of these practices, I’m changing some things about my behavior.

 

Really, at the end of the day, among the plethora of mistakes Michael Vick made, the biggest mistake, the mistake that’s going to likely cost him his career in Atlanta and maybe the NFL, is that his actions resulted in many deaths of America’s sacred cow: the dog. Nearly every culture has an animal held in high esteem (except, it seems, for the Chinese), and for ours, it’s the dog. (For instance, this would not be tolerated in India.) If Michael Vick had been cock fighting in Louisiana, then he’d be A-okay.

 

We care more about dogs than we do any other animal. Even though we know that veterinarians consider pigs as smart or smarter than dogs, we choose not to worry, or not to think, about their well being. We know that all of these animals can feel. Yet, we allow them to be tortured and brutalized so that we can have them put on our dinner table. And it’s completely unnecessary. The only argument you could make is that these animals don’t have a soul and can’t feel. But if you believe that, then you have to believe it for dogs too.

 

Do I honestly think that we are all guilty of conspiracy? Well, some of these companies definitely are. They know what they’re doing, and they know it isn’t right. They’re doing it to be efficient. And food shouldn’t be efficient. There are lives at stake. And in the long run, it’s not any more efficient, because we pay for it with our health.

 

Negligence is defined as “careless, inattentive, neglectful, willfully blind.” In my opinion, we intentionally avoid the reality of this situation, thus we are partly responsible for the way these animals are treated. Of course, technically, they haven’t committed conspiracy and we haven’t committed negligence because there are no strict laws in place for the treatment of these animals, but to me, that’s just semantics. We’re guilty. And we know it. Additionally, there should be laws in place, and they should be strict, like they are with inhumane treatment of dogs.

 

Look, I know this all might piss you off, but the reason is, deep down, you know that I’m right. You’ve read Fast Food Nation or seen some of these horrible videos, and yet, you and I don’t look into where our chicken, beef or pork comes from. We all allow it to happen. And I think that has to stop. We have to start caring. And moreover, we have to ask our government to stop allowing these practices to persist. Micro changes are fine. You and I can do our part. But just like going green, no real changes are going to happen until we get the government to force them to happen on a macro level.

 

Is this a call to action for everyone to be vegetarian? No. We’re omnivores, plus, I enjoy BBQ, burgers, fried chicken and steak too much to ever stop eating it…or to ask or tell anyone else they shouldn’t.

 

This is a call for awareness. If we all refuse to eat meat from animals that have been mistreated, then it can make a difference. If we ask the government and these companies to stop allowing these things to happen, it can make a difference. It also benefits true farmers rather than these factory farms…which are not farms. Warehouses on farmland do not a farm make. That’s why I’m proud to work with Chipotle. Their goal is incremental change. It can’t change overnight, but bit by bit, we can make a difference.

 

It’s awareness that leads to things like Farm Sanctuary. It’s awareness that leads to changes in the law.

 

Sure, you can argue, “Why does it matter? They are all going to die anyway.” It’s a rather heartless position, but you can argue it. My response would be: So do you. So do I. So do dogs. We all die. Isn’t how we live important? Doesn’t it matter?

 

I’ve never been a big fan of PETA. Similar to Michael Moore, their tactics many times lead to the story being more about them than the change they are trying to affect. However, at least they are consistent. They’ve been talking about these issues for years, and until recently, I, along with many others, have selectively decided not to listen. And that’s where the negligence comes in.

 

Am I judging you? Well, I’m judging all of us. I’m not good enough about it either…but I’m starting to try.

 

You may say, “But Michael Vick took pleasure in the dog fighting. He enjoyed the brutality.” Do you not enjoy chicken or beef or pork? Never? My guess is the majority of people would say yes. And terrible, terrible things happen to many of those poor animals so they can provide you with sustenance. They give their lives so that you can be nourished. Don’t you think that we owe it to them to provide them with at least a decent existence on this planet before they become our food?

 

So, as you sit there and judge the horror of what Michael Vick "allegedly" did, remember what my dad always said. “When you’re pointing a finger at someone, you’ve got three pointing right back at you.”



Reddit!Del.icio.us!Google!Slashdot!Technorati!StumbleUpon!Newsvine!

Comments (16)Add Comment
I'll sign the letter... passionlessly
written by Chronic Carnivore, July 27, 2007 03:39 PM
you were doing good until the part about my enjoying my steak being the same as Vick enjoying the dog fights. i'm not at the slaughterhouses, cheering on the decapitation, scaldings, or electrocutions. I'm chillin' on the back porch with a coke and a smile. Better to have stuck with the vitualized murder of the bull, which is a good correlation. Most anglers enjoy fighting that fish into the boat too, yes? that hook can't feel good. i do see the sadism of dog fighting as different than the indifference of consumers to factory cruelty. One is active, the other passive. Neither are great, but they are different.

I guess I agree with most of what you say, but i can't get too worked up about this beyond the health implications of the unsanitary places we raise our food. there are just too many of these issues to wage war on them all. I'm glad to see someone is though. write the letter. I'll sign it.
not efficient?
written by farting jim, July 27, 2007 04:19 PM
Food shouldn't be efficient? Hmmm. Enjoy grocery shopping - and starving - when it is inefficient. The shelves will be empty, and then the animals that will suffer most will be the humans. Some pigs are worth more than other pigs, or whatever it is Animal Farmers say.
well, jim
written by too much methane gas in your brain, July 27, 2007 04:29 PM
Terrible logic. Slaughtering animals in this manner isn't what makes the grocery experience efficient. Study up my friend. It allows these factory farms to make more money. They're cutting corners to reap profits. You must also be a fan of big oil.

Plus, America did just fine without Wal-Marts and massive grocery stores before. I don't think we'd all starve if they went away. (Many of us need to go on a week or two fast anyway. We're a pretty fat country: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19845784/ Thanks efficiency!)

Something tells me that if were all a little more involved in the process, we'd be healthier and so would the animals. Back to the land my friend. You can sniff the farts of many a cow out there...but that may be dangerous too: http://www.hammeruncut.com/farting-major-cause-of-global-warming/
hypocrisy inaction
written by kristina, July 27, 2007 04:40 PM
this is very provocative and also quite fair, in my opinion. it's elitist (i suppose, but still, it's so much fun...) to pick on americans' self-indulgence and general cluelessness when it comes to industrial food and animal welfare, but isn't it important to think about how our supposed values align with our actions? see the july gourmet magazine article on industrially processed chickens, for example, which are commonly dropped in an electrified water bath before becoming boneless skinless breasts for our stir fry. it is naive to think any of us can travel through a day without causing harm, but being mindful is a start, and these are all great resources you have given! thanks.
oh christ!
written by farting jim, July 27, 2007 05:02 PM
i see the tired, tired, tired argument you are making, methane. profit is bad. we should all hug a snail. i bet you are personally really happy to never get a raise? to eat government issued cheese? to wear a soviet issued chapeau? efficiencies do indeed create profits. those profits are fair compensation for having to deal with all manner of risk to get good, safe, high quality nutrition in your socialist mouth. don't like it? tell me, how big is your personal garden? how many gently petted organic turkeys are you personally raising? or is this all fashion, just checks at Holierthanthou Foods? The rich can always afford your attitude. Funny, profit seems to feed the indulgence of organics that way, but nobody likes to admit the truth of their own politics. i smell all the methane imaginable already from your stinking face trap.
Arguing what nobody ever said
written by too much methane gas in your brain, July 27, 2007 05:14 PM
Again with the weak argument, Jim. Nobody said a single thing you are ranting about. Nobody said profits are bad and they never wanted to make money.

We simply said mutilating animals and forcing them to live and root in their own shit is bad. Do you not think so? Then I ask, do you think dog fighting is bad? How do you reconcile the two? Because one is for profit and meets your need of cheap fast food? (You can profit from both btw.)

It's more profitable for companies to dump their waste in the river rather than dispose of it properly. Do you think they should just dump it in the river? It's more efficient. It leads to more profit.

You can profit responsibly. Do you think Whole Foods or Chipotle or Patagonia do not want to make profit? You think they aren't interested in profit? No, they can walk and chew gum at the same time. They can make money and do their best to ensure things are done the right way...even if it costs them a few extra cents.
it's personal
written by farting jim, July 27, 2007 05:40 PM
i think people, not companies, are what matter. i shop where i want for what i want. i think overpaying for an orange or a burrito or a shirt is the easiest way to drive profits. i find the companies you mention to be excellent at playing on fear and heart string while doing no real good. it is all feel-good marketing hype, and you buy into it. treat other people in your daily life fairly. treat your own dog or cat or fish fairly. that's where it ends for me. everyone is responsible for his or her own actions. i do not condone the fashionable politically correct "better behave or else" view of the organics crowd. it's green, gentle police state, but a police state nonetheless.
now I get it
written by too much methane gas in your brain,, July 27, 2007 05:54 PM
So, Jim, by that logic, you shouldn't be upset with Vick at all. It's his personal choice to treat his dogs like that. He's allowed to do whatever he wants to his own dog.

Good to know. Now, I really know not to care about your opinion.
right
written by farting jim, July 27, 2007 07:29 PM
You are right. The law will take care of Vick, as it should. The system is in place; it works. My moral ground is secure. Vick did nothing to me.
an argument for the elite
written by common sense, July 28, 2007 10:54 AM
How can we be so myopic to think of this as an American issue. We provide a significant portion of food to the rest of the world. It's the factory farms that allow us to do this. Sure, all of us on this site can afford to pay more for food and probably should demand a higher standard. At the same time, we cannot let our elitist views create starvation for the poor in our own country and beyond.
common
written by beth, July 29, 2007 09:50 PM
common sense,

I understand what you're saying, but I don't agree with it. I don't think it's the factory farms that allow us to to feed the world at all. And I think if you looked into it, you'd find that that is not true. A lot of our food is rejected around the world because we have such suspect standards. We allow milk that the rest of the civilized world won't drink because of BGH. We have no standards, and that simply has to change.

Additionally, I think it's just basic morality to treat these animals with some semblance of respect. There's absolutely no need for these factory farms to treat them like this. It's cruel and unusual.

We have a dog over-population problem too. Do you think it makes "common sense" to let these dogs fight to the death? It's a solution to that problem...but is it right? Do you not think we have the same moral obligation to all living things? I guess if you think it's okay what Michael Vick did to those dogs, then it's okay to believe factory farms are fine. But I just don't think that either should be allowed.
...
written by Margarita, July 30, 2007 09:40 AM
Ok, I don't really agree with the logic of comparing dog fighting to eating a piece of chicken. Chronic Carnivore made a good point when he/she said that one is active and the other is passive. I absolutely support changing the way that food is sourced in this country and demanding sanitary and humane conditions for animals. However, contrary to Common Sense's belief, I cannot afford to shop exclusively at Whole Foods or Trader Joe's. I simply do not have the discretionary income. Because I too am disgusted by the things I read about meat processing plants, I simply choose to buy less meat. Recently, I ran across Tyson's antibiotic free chicken and was pleasantly surprised by the price. Perfect? Probably not. But better.
hey there Margarita,
written by trader joe, July 30, 2007 11:03 AM
Trader Joe's is VERY affordable. We ain't anything like Whole Foods. Come check us out.
...
written by P.K. Bowl, July 30, 2007 10:59 PM
Not where my food comes from. I'm a vegetarian.
Thanks!
Sorites Paradox
written by Paul, August 06, 2007 01:46 AM
"Consider a heap of sand from which grains are individually removed. One might construct the argument, using premises, as follows:

A heap of sand is comprised of a large collection of grains. (Premise 1)
A heap of sand minus one grain is still a heap. (Premise 2)

Repeated applications of Premise 2 (each time starting with one less number of grains), eventually forces one to accept the conclusion that a heap may be composed of just one grain of sand."

So, dogfighting is definite animal cruelty.
Factory-raised veal, chicken, foie gras, hot dogs, whatever -- consensus seems to be also animal cruelty.
What about all the furry, intelligent animals killed as a part of varmint control by factory fruit and vegetable farming operations?
Do you kill bugs? Is it satisfying to you?
How do we determine what's an acceptable amount of animal cruelty?
Pam Anderson's anti-KFC rhetoric is annoying because it's anthropomorphic. We're supposed to get upset because we imagine having our finger tips cut off or being dunked into electrified water.
Unless you're a vegan who's growing his own food without pesticides, apparently I can compare you to Mike Vick.

America is a nation of bloodmouths. We need bigger KFC buckets! Foie Gras is delicious! Put me in the right circumstances (and I'm talking vacation, not survival situation) and I'd eat dog! We're not barbecuing babies here. Yeesh.
...
written by Lauralam, August 25, 2008 07:38 PM
And exactly what non-speciesist, logical, moral value makes your baby more important than say, a baby seal? Basically, nothing. There is no rational moral argument for humans eating, harming, or exploiting animals in any way. Saying something tastes good is NOT a moral argument. Give it a try, you'll fail. There isn't one. I've heard it all, so please learn what "morality" means before you pipe in with something stupid like "we're the top of the food chain" or "god said we could".

Write comment
quote
bold
italicize
underline
strike
url
image
quote
quote

busy