Monday, 29 November 2010

me + usacentrism + monday morning links

I saw Frente yesterday! Everything else that happened over the weekend pales in comparison. Even the odd election (did you get to vote? I know people who couldn't get to any voting points because of the flooding!).

I realised that, two weeks after the fact, I had yet to post a link in my other blog about my intersectionality talk being up at The Scavenger, so I just did that, and took the opportunity to ramble a bit about the USA-centricity of AR (and other social justice topics) online. If you wanted to come over and weigh in, or give me your thoughts, that would be great! intersectionality 101: addressing racism and classism in animal rights activism (a talk) + USA-centrism.

This slightly odd article has been doing the rounds: The Rise of the Power Vegans. It's an interesting enough read, but I found it odd and I'm not sure why.

Unsurprising but interesting to have in a study: Animal-welfare news sways meat consumers:
News coverage of animal-welfare issues causes U.S. consumers to cut back on meat purchases and spend their money instead on non-meat items, a study indicated.
Cows, Goats Escape from Slaughterhouse, Only to be Forced Back In

I meant to link this a few weeks ago, but: Poultry producer's workers claim intimidation. Miscellaneous worker intimidation might not seem that relevant, though it is in a chook production facility, but I've started collecting these sorts of articles in Australia. One of the barriers to effective AR in Australia (I've found) is that all our information for back up comes from the USA or from Europe, so I think it's important to document the patterns (whether they are similar to those famously documented overseas or not) in order to have solid evidence.

One of the things that frustrates me about working in the environmental/climate change sector, as a vegan, is the fact that people are often really invested in not being vegetarian. This article frustrates me: Eco Friendly Fur or No Such Thing? Not necessarily because I'm like 'no fur no fur!' (though I am): but because an argument that starts with 'but they're a rodent! and they're doing environmental damage!' ignores the suffering aspects. Here is my confession: I totally prioritise reducing environmental damage. And I am very critical of introduced species. But humans, you know, did the introducing! So maybe it is our responsibility to not kill them in the usual painful methods used for getting fur. I'm there for reducing their damage on the environment, but pain is not really the answer.


Sarah said...

That Power Vegans article irritated the crap out of me. I hadn't seen it yet. I think it's an example of someone noticing a pattern, but with no real proof that there actually IS a pattern, and then filling in the reason. Inferential reasoning, anyone?

Hannah said...

Steph, I just wanted to say thank you for doing these round-ups every now and again. I really enjoy learning more around these issues, and hadn't really been aware of the debate surrounding the confluence of feminism and veganism before reading your blog. So yes, thank you. Off to read the USA-centrism article now... somehow I'm pretty sure I'm going to enjoy that one ;)

steph said...

@Sarah yeah, it felt like the conclusions were a bit random and erroneous. Not a great article!

@Hannah no worries! I'm glad you feel like you're learning things and making links and stuff! :o)