Sometimes, I feel a little abolitionist.

And then another part of me says “Hey, a little different is better than none at all, because people are still going to eat animals and animal product anyway, so let’s just make it as ethical as possible.”

But what is “ethical”? Would people force their cats or dogs to get pregnant then take away their young as soon as they’re born and hook them up to milking machines until they’re too old to be of any use, then kill them and eat them?

SOMEHOW I THINK NOT.

Well, you never know.

What’s weird is the way that people go vegetarian; in some ways it makes sense (people don’t want to eat animals), but as far as suffering goes, shouldn’t people give up dairy and eggs first, and then give up meat when they become vegan, rather than starting with meat and then giving up dairy and eggs? Because at least in the meat industry, the suffering of the animal ends, even if it is horrible.

Then, really, shouldn’t people just be told to go vegan straight off the bat?

Which brings us back to “a little difference is better than none at all”. We should encourage people to give up any animal products they are willing to, or at least to ensure that any animal products they use are produced ethically.

Which brings us to the “ethicavores”; omnivores who only eat meat when it’s been killed “ethically”. Kind of the next level from buying free range eggs.

Should we settle for ethical slaughter because people are going to eat meat anyway, so, in the very least, we should reduce the animals’ suffering? That’s Temple Grandin’s standpoint.

But if the fight is just for ethical slaughterhouses, aren’t we encouraging complacency? “Oh, I only eat ETHICALLY slaughtered beef” hangs around and never turns into “You know what? I’ve decided killing a living creature just so I can eat is a little bit gross” and then “I don’t know if I’d like someone taking my hair / milk / eggs / children without my permission, so I don’t think we should do that to animals either.”

Isn’t fighting for high standards just leading to a point where, when there are high ethical standards for the egg, dairy, and meat industries, all of us crying out for the end of animal consumption are redundant, or seen as extremists without a real cause because, hey, everything I eat is ethically raised and slaughtered so you can’t guilt me with you “oh but they feel pain” bullshit.

Is there an answer?

Really, we need both sides: we need people saying “VEGAN IS THE ONLY ETHICAL CHOICE” (well, maybe just a few…), just as we need people saying “LOL Natalie Portman is cool because she’s a vegan vegetarian veganish :D :D”.

Kind of.

Let me be more clear.

The fact is, we live in a world where most people have spent their entire lives eating animals, and people are always (at least in the foreseeable, and quite a large portion of the unforeseeable, future) going to eat animals. So we have to fight the pragmatic fight and say “Look, we don’t like it, but you’re going to do it anyway, so we’re going to make sure as few people get hurt as possible.”

Kind of like safe injecting rooms, and legalised drugs and abortion.

CONTROVERSIAL.

moving on…

But, at the same time, we need people who just take the first part of that and say “Look, we don’t like it”. We need people who say “The only “ethical” way of eating animals is to not eat them” and say that ethical slaughterhouses / egg/dairy farms are not enough.

I suppose I’ve not really answered anything or made any particularly interesting or original points, but hey, this is a blog. SO THERE.

I’m just a winner at those smooth endings.