“Vajon Donald Watson Mit Tenne?” – Hogyan Erősíti ez a Kérdés a Szexizmust

Posted on August 15, 2015 by Vegan Feminist Network

Translation by Eszter Kalóczkai. See more Hungarian translations of intersectional vegan essays by visiting their blog, Tudatos Vegán. The original English version of this essay can be found by clicking here.

Black and white image of Donald Watson tending to some beanstalks in a garden.

Donald Watson. Image from The Vegan Society

írta: Dr. C. Michele Martindill

“Mit tenne Donald Watson?” – hogyan erősíti ez a kérdés a szexizmust és hogyan akadályozza az inkluzivitást a vegán abolicionista mozgalomban?

Micsoda szentségtörés! Hogyan mondhat bármelyik vegán bármi negatívumot arról a férfiról, aki kitalálta a “vegán” szót! Olvasd el a címet újból: nem Donald Watson a probléma, és nem is az állatok szenvedésének a felszámolásáért végzett munkája. Az a problémás, ahogyan a mai vegánok mindig Watson nevét és az ő veganizmus-deinícióját hívják segítségül, mint egy csodaszert, akárhányszor vita keletkezik a mozgalmon belül, ahelyett, hogy a kritikus és reflexív gondolkodás segítségével vizsgálnák, hogy miért botladozik a mozgalom.

Ha valaki megérdezi, hogy a vegán mozgalom miért áll szinte kizárólag nőkből, de a vezetői miért szinte kizárólag férfiak, akik patriarchális értékeket hangoztatnak, arra az a válasz, hogy azért, mert a veganizmus az állatok segítéséről szól. Ha felmerül a kérdés, hogy egy vegán csoport logójáról miért üvölt a korizmus, akkor az a megjegyzés lesz a válasz, hogy az állatokra kell koncentrálnunk, nem a korizmuson fennakadni, valamint, hogy az idős férfit és nőt ábrázoló karikatúra csak egy vicc. Ha valaki azt kérdezi, hogy színes bőrű emberek miért nem képviseltetik magukat a vegán mozgalomban, az lesz a válasz, hogy lehetnének vegánok, de egyszerűen nem akarnak azok lenni.

Minden esetben előkerül az emlékeztető, hogy a vegánság az állatokról szól, és persze idézik Donald Watsont és az ő veganizmus-definícióját, hogy véget vessenek a társalgásnak. Azok a vegánok, akik a veganizmust eszerint a nagyon szűk definíció szerint értelmezik, akár azt is kérdezhetnék: “Mit tenne Donald Watson?” (MTDW?) – a népszerű “Mit tenne Jézus?” mondás alapján. Minde esetben, amikor a mozgalom kirekeszti a nőket, az idősebb embereket, színes bőrű embereket, a szegényebb, vagy fogyatékossággal élő embereket: MTDW? Eközben a peremre szorult csoportok tagjai azon gondolkoznak, hogy hogyan tudja minden elnyomásnak és kihasználásnak véget vetni egy olyan fehér férfi, aki a fehér felsőbbrendűség, patriarchátus, gyarmatosító és birodalomépítő ideológiák korában élt?

A legtöbb vegán pontosan tudja, hogy Donald Watson 1944-ben találta ki a “vegán” szót mind arra, hogy különválassza a korábbi vegetárianus életmódjától azt az új szemléletet, hogy az embereknek hogyan kellene a környezetükhöz viszonyulniuk, és, hogy a hozzá hasonló gondolkodásúakat összefogja egy egyesületbe – így született a Vegan Society (Vegán Egyesület). Sokan kívülről tudják Watson veganizmus-definícióját:

[…] egy olyan filozófia, ami – amennyire lehetséges – elkerüli az állatok mindennemű kihasználását, és az ellenük irányuló kegyetlenséget, történjen az étel, ruházkodás, vagy bármilyen egyéb célból; és ennek következtében állathasználat-mentes alternatívák használatát és fejlesztését segíti, hogy az mind az emberek, mind az állatok, mind a környezet javára váljon. Az étrend terén ez azt jelenti, hogy el kell hagyni minden olyan terméket, ami részben vagy egészben állítoktól származik.
– The Vegan Society

Ez egy eléggé radikális álláspont volt 1944-ben, ahogy ma is az, úgyhogy Donald Watson biztosan radikális volt a maga idejében… ugye?

Egy jelenlegi vezető az abolicionista vegán mozgalomban vitatja, hogy Watson definíciója arra inspirálná a vegánokat, hogy dologozzanak a társadalmi igazságért az emberekért is, és nem-emberi állatokért is, de azt is hozzáteszi, hogy a radikális veganizmus évtizedek óta halott, mert most már csak a konzumerizmus, egy fogyasztói szemlélet maradt meg belőle. Ez a vezető egyéniség azt kérdezi, hogy hogy lehet, hogy a vegánokat jobban érdekli egy új állati termék-mentes csokoládészelet megjelenése, mint az, hogy a Vegan Society és más csoportok profitorientált vállalkozássá válik, miközben mindenkinél több adományt kap, amit aztán a magasan fizetett vezetői kapnak. Hogyan kebelezte be a veganizmust a kapitalizmus? Itt egy jobb kérdés: Vajon mennire lehet radikális Donald Watson és az ő veganizmus-koncepciója, amikor egy olyan társadalomból származik, amit átitat a fehér felsőbbrendűség, a patriarchátus, a gyarmatosítási politika és az imperializmus? Megjegyezzük, hogy ez a kérdés nem Watson személye ellen irányul, hanem azt hivatott megmutatni, hogy a rendszerszintű elnyomások hogyan befolyásolják a társadalmi aktivizmust, ezáltal az alaápítása körülményei sebezhetővé teszik a mozgalmat. Ez az esszé nem kívánja Donald Watson személyét támadni.

A “radikális” egy társadalmilag konstruált fogalom, ami azt jelenti, hogy a “radikális” definíciója aszerint a történeti és helyi kontextus szerint változik, amelyben a szó előfordul. Donald Watson társadalmában, az 1944-es Angliában bizonyára radikálisnak számított, hogy nem eszik húst és semmilyen más állati eredetű terméket nem használ. De egyes vegánok nagy bánatára, 2015-ben nincs semmilyen kijelentés Donald Watsontól, amit a mi korunkban a többi társadalmi igazságon belüli kérdésre lehetne alkalmazni. Megkérdezhetjük, hogy MTDW? a szexizmussal, rasszizmussal, akadályozottság, osztály vagy kor alapján történő megkülönböztetéssel, de nincs végleges válasza azon vegánok számára, akik a perifériára szorult csoportok tagjait is bevonni az abolicionista vegán mozgalomba – és ezek az erőfeszítések felismerik, hogy az emberek nemi, etnikai, akadályozottségbeli, osztálybeli és korbeli identitásának a kereszteződését (interszekcióját) a különböző csoportokon belül.

Sose fogjuk tudni, mi volt Watson szándéka. Ahhoz, hogy ismerjük valaki szándékait, a gondolataiban kellene olvasnunk, úgyhogy csak a történelmi kontextusra támaszkodhatunk az elemzésünkhöz. Tudjuk, hogy Watson a társadalomban betöltött pozíciója segítségével tudta megalapítani a Vegan Society-t, egy olyan társadalomban, ami tisztelte a Watsonhoz hasonló fehér férfiak munkáját és ötleteit. Ugyanakkor korlátozottan tudta volna népszerűsíteni az elnyomott embercsoportok számára a társadalmi igazságosságot, mert a felszólítása, hogy vessenek véget az állatok mindennemű használatának már eleve annyira radikális volt. Számtalanszor kellett már ezt elmagyaráznia, és nem nehéz elképzelni, hogy az állatok használatából meggazdagodott cégek és politikusok részéről micsoda ellenállásba ütközött. Watson radikális volt, mert megkérdőjelezte azt a közismert hitet, hogy a nem emberi állatok csak tárgyak az emberek számára, és lehet őket használni étel, tudományos kísérletek, mezőgazdasági munka, öltözködés, közlekedés és szórakozás céljából. Összefoglalva, rengeteg a megválaszolatlan kérdés: hogyhogy a mai abolicionista vegán mozgalom legfőképpen fehér, még mindig a patriarchátus értékei szerint működik, és vajmi kevéssé próbál befogadó lenni.

Nemrég egy internetes vita rámutatott, hogy mennyire nehéz Watsonra támaszkodni, hogy ő döntse el, hogy hogyan lehet befogadóbb a vegán mozgalom. Amikor egy csoport tagjait kérdőre vonták a mozgalmon belüli szexizmussal kapcsolatban, akkor egy férfi azzal válaszolt, hogy a strukturális szexizmus mindig is létezett, úgyhogy nem kellene miatta aggódni. Ez a hozzászóló attól tartott, hogy valaki szerint Donald Watson nem volt radikális, hanem a fehér felsőbbrendű társadalom egy terméke. Inkább védett meg egy vélt sértéstől egy fehér férfit, mint, hogy komolyan vegye a mozgalmon belüli szexizmust. Egy másik férfi hozzászóló kijelentette, hogy rengeteg nő vett részt a mozgalomban, és annak vezetőségében, és nekiállt a számoljunk vaginákat (1) játéknak, felsorolva az összes híres női vegánt. Arra is kitért, hogy Watson felesége is részt vett a “vegán” szó feltalálásában, minden bizonnyal a konyhaasztalnál. Mások azt felelték, hogy az Egyesült Államokon kívüli országokban rengeteg női vezetp van a vegán mozgalomban, akik nem “férféiként gondolkoznak”, ezzel azt bizonygatva, hogy a szexizmus csak egyes földrajzo területeken érvényesül, és nem létezik például az Egyesült Királyságban Új-Zélandon vagy Ausztráliában. Mindezek a válaszok semmibe veszik a lényeges mondanivalót: nem számít, hány női vezető vagy szervező van a vegán mozgalomban addig, amíg egy olyan társadalomban élünk, amiben a fehér férfiak ideológiái, társadalmi struktúrái és mozgalmi stratégiái érvényesülnek.

Amikor az abolicionista vegán mozgalomnak leginkább foglalkoznia kéne a befogadással/inkluzivitással, a tagadás és védekező pózolás mocskába ragad. Amíg a férfiak gyorsan rávágják, hogy #nemmindenférfi (#notallmen – McKinney, 2014), ha bárki felhozza a szexizmus problémáját, mintha csak egyes rosszindulatú egyének hibája lenne a szexzmus, azonban annak a rendszerszintű lebontását továbbra is elfojtják. A vállalati szemlélet és a kapitalizmus él is virul az úgynevezett vegán társaságokban és egyesületekben, mert nem ismerjük el, hogy az abolicionista vegán mozgalom gyökerei a férfiak által irányított fehér felsőőbbrendű társadalomból nőttek ki.

Semelyikőnk sem szállhat szembe ezekkel a társadalmi struktúrákkal, csak a puszta létezésük elleni küzdelem által. A nőket nem fojtja le egészen a patriarchális társadalmi rend, de mindenképp tudatosítaniuk kell magukban, hogy hogyan működik ez a berendezkedés, és milyen hatással van minden nőre, hogy aztán aktívan lebonthassák ezeket, és a helyükre egyenlőségen, együttérzésen és békességen alapuló struktúrák kerüljenek.

De mi lesz a férfiakkal?

Az abolicionista vegán mozgalomban azt mondani a nőknek, hogy ne panaszkodjanak a szexizmus miatt nem más, mint a férfiak hatalmi pozícióját védeni. Felsorolni, hogy hány meg hány női vezető van a mozgalmon belül, és, hogy a mozgalom tagjainak a tübbsége nő nem más, mint figyelemelterelés arról, hogy a férfiak hogyan tartják meg a helyzetüket és a privilégiumukat. Azt mondani a nőknek, hogy foglalkozzanak inkább az állatokkal és ne rontsák a mozgalom hírnevét egy másik módszer arra, hogy a férfiak hatalmi helyzetét állandósítsák. A férfiak akár azt is mondhatnák, hogy nem akarnak a nemek közötti egyenlőtlenségekről beszélni, és inkább megmondanák a nőknek, hogy hogyan szolgálhatnák legjobban a férfiak érdekeit. A férfiak folyamatosan félbeszakítják a nőket, mind az interneten, mind személyesen, és kérdésekkel bombázzák őket, olyan kérdésekkel, amelyek mikroaggressziónak számítanak (Khan, 2015).

Példák a mikroaggresszív kérdésekre:

Hogyan mondhatod, hogy a szexizmus probléma a mozgalomban, ha Donald Watson munkájába is besegített a felesége? (megjegyzés: mindig Donald Watson munkásságáról van szó, nem a feleségééről)
Hogyan mondhatod, hogy a szexizmus probléma a mozgalomban, ha az 1980as években rengeteg nő szervezett állatmentő akciókat, és ez a mai napig így történik?
Hogyan mondhatod, hogy a szexizmus probléma a mozgalomban, amikor elsősorban a vegűnság terjesztésével kellene foglalkoznunk, főként mivel a vegánság a szexizmus végét fogja jelenteni?
Hogyan mondhatod, hogy a szexizmus probléma a mozgalomban, amikor te magad vagy szexista? Azt se tudod, mit jelent a szexizmus. Én tudom, mit jelent, te a közelében sem jársz. Szexista dolog engem szexistának hívni.

ÉS MÉGVALAMI:

A férfiaknak az elnyomott társadalmi csoportok helyzetébe kellene képzelniük magukat, és átgondolni, hogy vajon hogyan hangozhat, ha egy fehér férfi egy másik fehér férfit – Donald Watsont – idéz, amikor a vegánságot definiálja. Hallanunk kellene mozgalmon belüli nők hangját, de ne csak nőket idézz nőknek – lépj oldalra és hagyd, hogy a nők magukért beszéljenek. Ez a radikális.

Idézetek:

Khan, A. (2015, January 18). 6 Ways to Respond to Sexist Microaggressions in Everyday Conversations. Retrieved from Everyday Feminism:http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/01/responses-to-sexist-microaggressions/

McKinney, K. (2014, May 15). Here’s why women have turned the “not all men” objection into a meme. Retrieved from Vox: http://www.vox.com/2014/5/15/5720332/heres-why-women-have-turned-the-not-all-men-objection-into-a-meme

Megjegyzések

1. Ezt inkább szólásnak szánta a szerző, és nem azt akarja mondani, hogy minden nőnek vaginája van. A mozgalmon belüli fehér férfiak még mindig nem ismerik el a transz vagy egyéb gendereket, nemi identitásokat, még mindig binárisan képzelik el a világot. Ha netánkettőnél több gendert ismernek el, akkor is csak a vaginákat akarják számolni a mozgalmon belül.

Dr. Martindill earned her Ph.D. in sociology from the University of Missouri and taught there in the Sociology Department, the Peace Studies Program and the Women’s and Gender Studies Department. Her areas of emphasis include political sociology, organizations and work, and social inequalities. Dr. Martindill’s dissertation focuses on the no-kill shelter social movement and is based on ethnographical research conducted during several years of working in an animal shelter. She is vegan, a feminist and is currently interested in the stories women tell through their needlework, including crochet, counted cross stitch and quilting. It is important to note that Dr. Martindill consistently uses her academic title in order to inspire women and members of other marginalized groups to pursue their dreams no matter what challenges those dreams may entail, and certainly one of her goals is to see more women in academia.

Kedves Újdonsült Vegán

Posted on June 27, 2015 by Vegan Feminist Network

Tartalmi figyelmeztetés: szóba kerül a szexizmus és a nemi erőszak

[kép leírása: két félmeztelen, fehér, vékony, cisznemű nő, a testükre szaggatott vonalak vannak felfestve, és a testrészeik húsipari nevei, egyikük kezében tábla: “minden állatnak ugyanolyan részei vannak”]

Kedves újdonsült vegán!

Kapaszkodj, mert kicsit döcögős lesz az utad. Amikor vegánná válsz, az először nagyon stresszes és sokkoló élmény lehet. Megtanulod, hogy mit egyél, mit vegyél, hogyan bánj a barátaiddal és a családtagjaiddal, és, hogy hogyan kezeld az intenzív haragot és szomorúságot, amit akkor érzel, amikor tudatosul benned a más állatok szenvedése. Ezek közül egyik sem lesz könnyű, de kérlek, ne add fel, mert minél tovább kitartasz, annál könnyebb lesz. Megígérem, hogy mindez teljesen normálissá fog válni, méghozzá hamarabb, mint gondolnád.

Valószínűleg meg fogod keresni a vegán közösséget, hogy segítsenek a váltásban, és rengeteg jóbarátot fogsz köztük találni, és rengeteget fogsz tőlük tanulni. Megnyugtat majd, hogy nem vagy egyedül, és, hogy vannak mások is, akik annyira szenvedélyesen meg szeretnék változtatni a világot, mint te.

Idővel viszont belátod majd, hogy vegánnak lenni egy dolog, de vegánnak lenni és nőként azonosítani magadat (1) teljesen más tészta. Ha épp párkapcsolatban élsz, lehet, hogy a párod ellenségesen fog reagálni a vegánná válásodra. Főként akkor, ha a társad férfiként azonosítja magát, a vegánságod kihívást jelent a férfiúi tekintélyére nézve. Lehet, hogy kijelenti, hogy sose tudnád őt megváltoztatni (akkor, is ha sose mondtál ilyet). Esetleg ragaszkodik hozzá, hogy főzz neki nem vegán ételeket, vagy menj vele nem vegán éttermekbe enni. Mivel nőként azonosítod magad, úgy érezheted, hogy nyomás nehezedik rád, hogy engedelmeskedj. A nőket kiskoruktól kezdve arra nevelik, hogy a férfiak érdekeit nézzék elsősorban. Ez nem jó, de így van – ne érezd magad rosszul, ha belemész.

[kép leírása: egy fehér, szemüveges kopaszodó férfi egy hamburgerbe harap, mellette egy fehér vörös nő dühös arccal szóra nyitja a száját]

Ha nőként azonosítod magad, ne csodálkozz, ha a magukat férfiként azonosító barátaidban is ellenérzéseket vált ki a vegánságod. Például egy jószándékú Facebook-poszt, amiben emlékezteted az olvasóidat, hogy a nem emberi állatoknak is számít az életük, könnyen olyan reakciókat válthat ki a férfiakból, miszerint a.) túl érzelgős vagy, b.) túl nagypofájú vagy, c.)“meg vagy őrülve”. Az érzelmességet, a véleményednek hangot adást és a szellemi betegségeket mind a nőkkel azonosították a történelem során. A nőket könnyű semmibe venni ha túl nőiesek, vagy nem eléggé nőiesek. Évszázadokon át “hisztérikusnak” skatulyázták be a nőket, és intézetekbe zártak minket, hogy elhallgattassanak. Sokszor nem tudod, hogy viselkedj: ne legyél túl nyápic, de ugyanakkor azért figyelj a hangnemedre és ne legyél túl agresszív. Látni fogod, hogy lehetetlen nekik eleget tenni, úgyhogy inkább csak tedd, amit teszel, és ne törődj velük.

De a vegán nőként nem biztos, hogy itt véget érnek a nehézségeid. Ha úgy döntesz, hogy nem elég egyszerűen vegánnak lenned, és szeretnél aktivistaként is tenni az állatokért, valószínűleg még több férfiak által elkövetett agresszióval fogsz szembesülni. Mivel a vegán aktivisták többsége nő, ezért azt gondolhatod, hogy biztonságos hely neked. Sok szempontból persze az is, rengeteg női szolidaritással is találkozhatsz. Ugyanakkor a vegán mozgalom nagyon is a férfiak irányítása alatt áll. A férfiak vezetik a vegán aktivizmust – ők írják az elméletet, és ők döntik el, hogy milyen stratégia az elfogadható. Ők foglalják el a legtöbb helyet, és az ő hangjuk a leghangosabb.

Ez a gyakorlatban azt jelenti, hogy sok nyomás fog rád nehezedni, hogy vagy csöndben, a színfalak mögött asszisztálj ezeknek a férfiaknak, vagy arra bátorítanak, hogy levetkőzz az egyes kampányok érdekében. Lehet, hogy nem kifejezetten a férfiak bíztatnak rá, hogy levetkőzz (a nők is sokszor részesek ebben), hanem a mozgalom patriarchális normái olyan környezetet teremtettek, ahol a nőktől elvárják, hogy szexuális tárgyak legyenek a “az állatok érdekében”. Talán elkezdesz arra gondolni, hogy mennyire “felszabadító”, hogy a jó ügy érdekében meztelen leszel. Ha ez jár az eszedben, akkor állj meg egy pillanatra, és gondold át! Jusson eszedbe, hogy csak vékony, fehér, cisznemű nőknek van megengedve, hogy az állatokért “felszabadítsák” magukat, és hogy a férfiakat szexuálisan felizgatni nem ugyanaz, mint izgatottá tenni őket a veganizmus ügyéért.Tapasztalaton alapuló kutatások tisztán mutatják, hogy a nők elnyomásának az alkalmazása nem állítja a befogadókat szembe az állatok elnyomásával.

Sajnos sokszor találkozhatsz nők felé irányuló szexuális zaklatással és erőszakkal a mozgalmon belül. Nem akarlak megijeszteni, de ez így van, és ezért előre figyelmeztetlek. Nem sokszor beszélnek erről, de valójában eléggé elterjedt. Ha nő vagy, ne hagyd, hogy ez elriasszon, csak arra emlékezz, hogy a nem emberi állatok társadalmi igazságáért küzdeni nem ugyanaz, mint mindenkinek a társadalmi igazságáért küzdeni. Tulajdonképpen azok a férfiak, akik hirdetik, hogy érdeklik őket a nők, színes bőrű emberek és más hátrányosabb embercsoportok jogai, nos, ezek a férfiak ugyanolyan veszélyesek, mint azok, akik nem is tettetik, hogy mindez érdekli őket. Ha te férfiként azonosítod magad, felszólítalak, hogy állj ki a nőkért, és tedd a vegán helyeket biztonságosabbá.

Úgy tűnik, a világ megváltoztatása bizony férfimunka. Ha nőként azonosítod magad, akkor valószínűleg ellenállásba fogsz ütközni, ha másként akarsz részt venni az eseményekben, mint a kávéfőzés, vagy a levetkőzés. De ennek nem kell így lennie. Ne hagyd el magad, maradj erős, hallasd a hangod, és követeld meg a tisztelelet. Ragaszkodj hozzá, hogy a vegánság pozitív, megerősítő élmény legyen. Ne hagyd, hogy egyeseknek az elnyomó mentalitása megakadályozzon a fontos munkában, amit elkezdtél. És ti, férfiak – mutassatok szolidaritást a nők iránt. Jól jön a segttségetek.

U.i. Ha színes bőrű nő vagy, akkor még tovább kihívásokkal kell szembenézned. Fehér nőként nem ismerem ezeknek a kihívásoknak a kiterjedését, de anni biztos, hogy a vegán mozgalom elég gonosz “színvak” hely tud lenni néha- Mindenképpen nézz rá a Sistah Vegan Project oldalára.

– Corey Lee Wrenn, M.S., A.B.D. Ph.D.

Lábjegyzetek

1. Ez a cikk a női élményről szól, beleértve a transz, interszex és genderqueer nőket is. Meg kell jegyeznünk viszont, hogy a transz, interszex vagy genderqueer vegánok további kihívásokkal találhatják magukat szemben a vegán mozgalmon belül.

Dr. Wrenn is Lecturer of Sociology. She received her Ph.D. in Sociology with Colorado State University in 2016. She received her M.S. in Sociology in 2008 and her B.A. in Political Science in 2005, both from Virginia Tech. She was awarded Exemplary Diversity Scholar, 2016 by the University of Michigan’s National Center for Institutional Diversity. She served as council member with the American Sociological Association’s Animals & Society section (2013-2016) and was elected Chair in 2018. She serves as Book Review Editor to Society & Animals and has contributed to the Human-Animal Studies Images and Cinema blogs for the Animals and Society Institute. She has been published in several peer-reviewed academic journals including the Journal of Gender Studies, Feminist Media Studies, Disability & Society, Food, Culture & Society, and Society & Animals. In July 2013, she founded the Vegan Feminist Network, an academic-activist project engaging intersectional social justice praxis. She is the author of A Rational Approach to Animal Rights: Extensions in Abolitionist Theory (Palgrave MacMillan 2016).

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.

From Domestic Violence in a Homophobic and Meat-Centric Country to Animal Rights Activist: Destroying the Hero Worship

Posted on June 18, 2015 by Vegan Feminist Network

Trigger Warning: Discusses sexual abuse, domestic violence, heterosexism, eating disorders, and suicide.

By Raffaella Ciavatta

Before I dive into this article I have to confess that writing it was not an easy decision. I’ve been wanting to write about it for a very long time but undressing myself before the eyes of people I’ve never seen, talked to or interacted with in any way can open the door to a lot of hatred. But it also opens the doors to all of you out there, who can relate to my experiences, and my hope is that you too, can turn violence into activism. This story is for you, brothers and sisters.

I too have regarded women as prizes. I am no heroine. And for that I am sorry.

I was born and raised in Brazil, a tropical paradise, people say, where everyone is always partying, LGBTQ flags flapping on a hot breezy day, gunshots and pools of blood, a country which has as many steak houses as the U.S has Starbucks’ stores.

Growing up there was far from paradise. I discovered glimpses of my sexuality at a very early age, so young I’m not sure how old exactly I was but I’m going to estimate 5 years old. I remember this girl came to play with me and I took her to my bedroom. I loved to pretend I was camping so I used to make tents with my bed sheets. I invited her in. I kissed her. We touched each other.

About a year later, age 6 a man came to live with us. I’ve always had a talent to read people and I knew something about him was terrifying. I refused to call him father not because I was jealous that my mother was with someone but because I could smell the violence in him. I called him “Big Bee” (if you translate it from Portuguese), probably because I had been stung by bees before and I knew it hurt a lot.

Like most predators, he took some time to unveil his true self. Before that he had to gain our trust and approval, which he tried to get from me by buying me things, taking me to places I wanted to go, and by supposedly making my mother happy. I pretended to give him my trust but inside I was shaking.

Then the days when he would come home somewhat drunk started. At first it was because he had a bad day at work, long hours of art direction call for some whiskey. Those days started to get more frequent, the tone of his voice started to raise, his hands also started to raise. I put myself between him and my mother day and night, I begged him to stop, leave her alone. For some reason I knew I was immune to him. I didn’t fear for my life, I feared for my mother’s.

Every night I knew he was coming home because I could hear the revving sound of his car entering the garage. Sometimes I would hear it for minutes because he was too drunk to drive through it. I would never fall asleep before knowing he had arrived, even when it was very late and I secretly hoped he would die alone in a car crash. But he never did. He always came back.

He would come straight to my bedroom since my mom had started sleeping with me. Sometimes she would come out to talk to him. Inevitably I had to go out to stop him from beating her because he always did.

I studied a lot then, from 8am to 4pm. I loved school and I hated home. I never told anyone about what was happening at home. I became so hollow and cold I remember this one time I was looking at myself in the mirror, forcing myself to cry right before I went to school to see if one of my friends would notice so I could tell them what was going on. Not one single drop came out. I grinned and beared. It was almost relieving, to live this double life. In the eyes of the world I was just this kid, innocent and naive.

The drinking then started to happen at home. He would sit in his study, writing his pathetic poetry, pretending to be some kind of artist while quenching his thirst with a Johnny Walker bottle. He would fall asleep with his mouth open, in such deep sleep I imagined myself throwing all sort of disgusting things in it.

I have almost completely erased the 6 years of abuse from my mind without erasing the consequences of it, of course. But I vividly remember one night when I must have fallen asleep and I woke up to sounds heavy suffocation. I jumped out of bed. He was giving my mother a choke hold. My mother, someone who suffered from asthma, a choke hold. I jumped on him, I took him off her. I think this was also the same night when he had almost broken her wrist.

In anticipation of people saying I became gay because of an abusive male figure in my life, even though it’s a fact I was already attracted to girls before, I started to give boys more of my interest but let me point out, I was obsessed with Leonardo DiCaprio – androgyny anyone? I was reassured not all boys were abusive and violent but I knew I didn’t want to be with them.

Not long then my mother had a brain aneurysm, right in front of me. She told me she covered her face because she felt like her eye was coming out. She was identified with aneurysm pretty quickly. I told her it was going to be okay, but that she was going to look like Sigourney Weaver in the movie Alien – basically saying that she was going to have her head shaved, operated.

She survived. With no neurological damage. A true miracle if you ask me. It would all have been good if we hadn’t gone back home and it had taken another act of violence from him to finally dictate that we were leaving for good. I was in my pajamas.

Not surprisingly my sense of justice and determination to fight against injustices only grew bigger: the same way I felt it was my responsibility to protect my mother, I felt like it was my responsibility to also help others. “Trauma and activism appear to be in contradistinction—the former defined by exclusivity and concealment, being hidden and out-of-sight; and the latter by action, out-in-the-open, in public,” says Outspoken.

I had always been drawn to helping animals, cats and dogs for the most part, but insects, birds and fishes also. At age 15 I also thought I was helping women by getting involved in relationships in which women seemed to need my help with a specific issue: straight rebel girls who wanted to piss off their parents, girls who couldn’t feel anything at all, girls who were taking a break from their current relationship, later in life married women, women who were just as lost as me. I would immerse myself completely in them, ensuring that they were completely in love with me. It was almost like art for me, how they would put me up on a pedestal.

The cycle basically went down like this: get involved into a relationship with a woman who supposedly needed an issue resolved, be the heroine of the day, get bored because the “challenge” was finished, leave. A few things to point it out is that this cycle was very gradual. It was never about the sex, quite the opposite, I despised one night-stands. It was for me a narcissistic need for attention, to feel loved but to anticipate the inevitable destruction of that relationship and so be the one who leaves it first.

I would then start to destruct the relationship, usually by cheating. I have cheated on almost every single girlfriend I had and I had many – I will not get into detail of every individual since I don’t have the consent to share our story publicly. I had given them what I thought they wanted and it was time for them to be on their own. So I abandoned them. “If I could recover from all the atrocities I had gone through, they sure could recover from a breakup,” I told myself over and over again to justify my behaviour.

Those relationships made me feel alive, made me feel like I was in charge. Between my self-destruction spiral with anorexia, a disease in which one disappears to be seen, bulimia nervosa (and very shortly with alcohol), my attempt of suicide, and my struggle with homophobia (Brazil has highest LGBTQ rate of murder in the world), from verbal to physical abuse, those relationships were something I had control of and I didn’t even have to feel guilty about it: it was consensual.

My favorite character in The Little Prince was the Fox, “People have forgotten this truth,” the fox said. “But you mustn’t forget it. You become responsible forever for what you’ve tamed. You’re responsible for your rose.” My mother, seeing my vicious patterns tried to warn about the consequences. But I did not want to take love advices from her. Not after everything she had put me through.

I left Brazil to come to the US in hopes to leave my demons behind. But they followed me. I became involved in LGBTQ activism, feeding the homeless and became involved again into helping cats and dogs. My good deeds were still taking place while I continued to treat women like trophies, to self-destruct and of course, I continued to eat the flesh and drink the secretions of non-human animals.

It was time to go back to therapy. I was 26 and I was still getting involved in relationships in which I was the heroine, bragging to my friends about my “adventures.”

In parallel I became the board director at a dog and cat rescue. It was then that I came to realize the hypocrisy into saving some animals but not all by watching slaughterhouse videos, today I recommend this one. Long story short, I went vegan overnight, and most importantly I became a vegan activist.

I knew I needed help. To understand why self-destruction was taking over my life and how I could end my relationship patterns. It was because of doctor Laura and over 1 year of intense therapy (this was followed by other years of therapy I had done) that I was able to identify my mechanisms and make sure my patterns were broken. It was not easy. It was painful, humiliating in many ways, but enlightening.

I am a product of a broken home, like Placebo would say. It is true that childhood trauma affects and changes someone forever:

The Adverse Childhood Experiences Study is something that everybody needs to know about. It was done by Dr. Vince Felitti at Kaiser and Dr. Bob Anda at the CDC, and together, they asked 17,500 adults about their history of exposure to what they called “adverse childhood experiences,” or ACEs. Those include physical, emotional, or sexual abuse; physical or emotional neglect; parental mental illness, substance dependence, incarceration; parental separation or divorce; or domestic violence. For every yes, you would get a point on your ACE score. And then what they did was they correlated these ACE scores against health outcomes.

What they found was striking. Two things: Number one, ACEs are incredibly common. Sixty-seven percent of the population had at least one ACE, and 12.6 percent, one in eight, had four or more ACEs. The second thing that they found was that there was a dose-response relationship between ACEs and health outcomes: the higher your ACE score, the worse your health outcomes. For a person with an ACE score of four or more, their relative risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was two and a half times that of someone with an ACE score of zero. For hepatitis, it was also two and a half times. For depression, it was four and a half times. For suicidality, it was twelve times. A person with an ACE score of seven or more had triple the lifetime risk of lung cancer and three and a half times the risk of ischemic heart disease, the number one killer in the United States of America. (Nadine Burke Harris 2014)

Do my destructive relationships have do with my past? Absolutely. But it does not excuse me or anyone else from seeking help. Multiple times if you have to. Our past cannot be used as an excuse to justify our actions.

I overcame my personal trauma and transformed it into a catalyst for activism. It was most likely because of my trauma that fighting against injustices was so dear to me. However, as you have seen, I am no heroine. Despite my exhaustive dedication to Animal Rights and for that matter, to all forms of oppression, I have treated women like trophies. I have never been a predator, or engaged in any form of nonconsensual act but I have used those relationships as a way to feel empowered and then to self-destruct. I have also never shared anything about the women I was with publicly without their consent but I have disregarded the feelings of countless individuals.

What triggered me to write this article was the return to Facebook of Hugo Dominguez, former Direct Action Everywhere organizer, who has admitted to sex crimes. I see a few parallels between us, this is why I want to bring him into this story.

Hugo may have acknowledged his behaviour but he hasn’t actively and truly sought help. Someone who wants to get better will remove themselves from situations that will trigger the behavior again, and in his case his attention-seeking addiction is being fed by his latest return to Facebook.

I too have regarded women as prizes, so I know exactly where Hugo stands. I too have moved away from my country trying to escape my past, I too have taken a few months to reflect but those were band-aids on a hemorrhage. Overcoming a vicious behaviour takes time and commitment. It also includes giving time and space to the victims.

I have described my upbringing in detail to inspire others who have gone through childhood trauma to seek help. Consciously or unconsciously I have let my past dictate my present but we must use traumatic experiences to push us forward, to help us and others grow. I sincerely hope Hugo can.

We have seen the dangers of hero worship, so please, let’s destroy pedestals and let’s embrace one another on the same level.

Co-founder of Collectively Free, Raffaella Ciavatta is vegan animal liberation activist, art director, poet, photographer wanna-be, DJ in some past live and most importantly… a big dreamer who makes things happen.

Dear New Vegan

Posted on June 6, 2015 by Vegan Feminist Network

TRIGGER WARNING: Discusses sexism and sexual violence.

Dear New Vegan,

Brace yourself, because it’s going to be a bumpy ride. Becoming vegan is, at first, a very frustrating and traumatizing experience. You will have to learn what to eat, what to buy, how to deal with friends and family, and how to manage the intense feelings of anger and sadness that come with opening your mind and heart to the suffering of others. None of this is going to be easy, but, please don’t give up, because it will definitely get easier the longer you stick with it. It will become normal and habitual before you know it, I promise.

You will probably reach out to the vegan community to help you through this transition. You will make lots of great friends and learn a lot from others. You will find great peace in knowing you are not alone and that other folks are out there who are just as passionate as you are about changing the world.

Eventually, however, you may start to realize that being vegan is one thing, but being vegan and female-identified¹ is another one altogether. If you are in a relationship, you may find your partner is hostile to your choice. Especially if your partner is male-identified, your vegan presence may present a challenge to his masculine authority. He may insist that you can never change him (even if you never mentioned any intention of doing so!). He may insist that you cook non-vegan meals, or join him in non-vegan restaurants. As a self-identified woman, you may feel considerable pressure to concede. Women are groomed from early on to put the interests of men first. It stinks, but that’s how it is. Don’t feel bad if you do.

If you are a self-identified woman, you may find that male-identified friends are turned off to your veganism as well. For example, a well-meant Facebook post that reminds your readers that Nonhuman Animals matter, too, may aggravate men who are quick to respond with comments about how you’re a) too sentimental; b) loudmouthed; or c) “crazy.” Emotionality, outspokenness, and mental illness are all highly gendered characteristics. Women are easily dismissed for being either too feminine, or not feminine enough. For centuries, we women have been stereotyped as “hysterical” and subsequently institutionalized to control us and shut us up. You’ll often find yourself between a rock and a hard place: don’t be too sappy, but at the same time, watch your tone and don’t be too aggressive. You’ll find they’re pretty much impossible to please, and I suggest you just keep doing what you do.

But your struggles as a vegan woman might not end there. If you decide that simply being vegan isn’t enough and that you want to get involved with activism, you are going to come up against more male violence. Vegan activism is dominated by women as far as the numbers go, so you may think it’s a safe space for you. In many ways, it is. You will find female solidarity. On the other hand, the vegan movement is very much controlled by men. Men lead vegan activism—they create the theory and they define what tactics are acceptable. They take up the most space and their voices are loudest.

What this means is that you are going to feel a lot of pressure to help other animals by taking a quiet role behind the scenes in support of these men. You may also be encouraged to take your clothes off for some campaigns. It may not be men directly telling you to get naked (women are in on it, too), but the patriarchal norms of the movement have created an environment where women are simply expected to become sex objects “for the animals.” You might start to think that getting naked for the cause is “liberating.” If you start thinking that, woah, stop. Think again. Consider also that only thin, white, cis women are allowed to “empower” themselves for other animals, and that turning men on sexually is not the same as turning men on to veganism. Empirical research shows that facilitating the oppression of women does not challenge the oppression of other animals.

You will also find a lot of sexual harassment and violence against women in the vegan movement. I don’t mean to scare you off, but it’s true, and you should be warned. It’s something that isn’t talked about a lot, but it’s actually quite common. If you are a woman, don’t let this deter you; just remember that commitment to social justice for Nonhuman Animals does not necessarily translate to a commitment to social justice for all. Really, those men who insist they care about the rights and wellbeing of women, people of color, and other disadvantaged human groups tend to be just as dangerous as those who don’t purport to care at all. If you identify as a man, I implore you to step up and work to make advocacy spaces safer.

Sadly, the work of changing the world is men’s work. If you are female-identified, you are likely to meet resistance if you want to participate in vegan outreach in ways more meaningful than making the coffee or stripping. It doesn’t have to be that way. Try not to lose yourself. Stay strong, demand voice, and demand that you be respected. Insist that veganism be a positive and affirming experience. Do not let the oppressive mentalities of some prevent you from doing the important work you’ve set out to do. And men, please stand with women in solidarity. We could use your help.

P.S. If you are a woman of color, that’s a whole extra set of challenges. As a white woman myself, I can’t speak to the depth of these challenges, but I can tell you that the vegan movement can be a really nasty “color blind” place at times. Definitely check out the Sistah Vegan Project!

Notes:

1. This piece speaks to the female experience, which may include that of trans women, intersex women, and gender-queer women. It should be acknowledged that trans, intersex, and gender-queer vegans have a number of additional challenges faced by the movement.

This piece was originally submitted to an advocacy anthology designed to introduce new vegans to the movement, but did not make the final cut. I suspect that the piece was accepted but later rejected due to its political undertones. It is reproduced here because I feel strongly about bringing honesty and accountability to our movement as a matter of justice for marginalized women. For more information on sexism in the Nonhuman Animal rights movement, please see my book, A Rational Approach to Animal Rights: Extensions in Abolitionist Theory (Palgrave Macmillan 2016). Please also see my publication with the Journal of Gender Studies, “The Role of Professionalization Regarding Female Exploitation in the Nonhuman Animal Rights Movement and my essay for The Feminist Wire, “Gender Policing the Vegan Woman.”

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.

Sustainability If

Posted on May 20, 2015 by Vegan Feminist Network

By Lisa Kemmerer

All oppression creates a state of war.

– Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex

“Sustainability” refers to an “ability to endure across time.” In the environmental movement, “sustainability” statements always entail an unstated “if.” In this usage, a particular action is deemed unsustainable if we value and wish to protect and preserve certain aspect of the natural environment. Certain actions/consumer options are considered sustainable if they do not cause worrisome environmental problems. Environmentalists who note that our beef habit is unsustainable are really saying that our beef habit cannot be sustained if we are to preserve rainforests and freshwater, if we are to arrest dead zone growth and climate change. In these instances it is readily apparent that sustainability rests on common shared moral commitments to protecting the environment on which we depend. In this context, if we were to make a full and complete statement with regard to sustainability, we might say:

Eating bluefin tuna is unsustainable if we intend to protect endangered species.
Eating cheese is unsustainable if we hope to arrest the spread of dead zones.
Eating shrimp is unsustainable if we value ocean ecosystems, including essential, fragile deep-sea reefs.

In each of the above cases the “if” is rarely stated, and what we are likely to hear or read would look or sound something like this:

Bluefin tuna is unsustainable.
Cheese is unsustainable.
Shrimp is unsustainable.

When we finish the sentence, stating clearly the unspoken but essential “if,” we realize that statements of environmental sustainability rest on a moral commitment to make selections that decrease, rather than increase, environmental degradation. In short, we come to see that sustainability statements rest on commonly held moral values. We also come to see that our responsibility as consumers is often omitted—the product is labeled “unsustainable.”

What is most interesting about the missing “if” in the environmental context is that reinserting this conjunction allows us to see that sustainability is the key not just to environmental justice, but to social justice more broadly. Sustainability can fruitfully be employed in any social justice context. Consider in these more diverse applications of the term:

It is unsustainable for racist police to brutalize Black civilians if we hope to arrest the spread of hatred and violence.
Forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term is unsustainable if we value self-determination.
Permitting only heterosexuals to enjoy the financial and social benefits of legal marriage is unsustainable of we intend to protect human rights.
If we are committed to an ethic whereby we value justice and protect the vulnerable from the exploitation of the powerful, eating chickens is unsustainable.

Sustainability is not just about cycling and recycling, it is also about redistributing wealth, yielding wrongly-gained power to the disenfranchised, and protecting all who are vulnerable from the miseries of exploitation and oppression. Unsustainable behaviors—racist, sexist, homophobic, speciesist, ableist, ageist, and consumer behaviors—ought to be avoided not only if we value clean water and forests, but also if we value justice and peace.

At the end of the day, these unsustainable behaviors are interconnected. For example industrial fishing is unsustainable not only because it harms ocean ecosystems, but also because it is unjust—industrial fishing harms indigenous communities dependent on depleted ecosystems for subsistence survival. Industrial fishing is therefore unsustainable if we intend to protect the comparatively powerless—ocean ecosystems, indigenous peoples, and fish—from powerful corporate interests and their indifferent/uninformed consumers. Similarly, factory farming is unsustainable if we value rainforests, fresh water reserves, and the earth’s present climate, and also if we value worker’s rights, the protection of defenseless farmed animals, and the health of unsuspecting consumers who suffer from heart attacks, strokes, diabetes, and obesity because of animal products they consume. These practices are unsustainable if—but not only if—we intend to protect the natural environment from horrendous environmental degradation. They are also unsustainable if we value justice and peace—if we intend to protect the vulnerable, whether minorities, the disenfranchised, or other species.

Further Reading

Kemmerer, Lisa. “Defending the Defenseless: Speciesism, Animal Liberation, and Consistency in Applied Ethics.” Les Ateliers de l’éthique/The Ethics Forum 9:3 (2015).

Kemmerer, Lisa. “Ecofeminism: Women, Environment, Animals.” DEP: Deportate, Esuli, Profughe. Ca’ Foscari University of Venezia, Italy, 23 (2013).

Click here to download the introduction to Speaking Up for Animals: An Anthology of Women’s Voices

Click here to download the introduction to Sister Species: Women, Animals, and Social Justice

Dr. Kemmerer is a professor of Philosophy and Religion and a prolific author in animal ethics. Her books include In Search of Consistency: Ethics and Animals, Animals and World Religions, Sister Species: Women, Animals, and Social Justice, Call to Compassion: Reflections on Animal Advocacy, Speaking Up for Animals: An Anthology of Women’s Voices, and Primate People: Saving Nonhuman Primates through Education. She is particularly interested in intersections of Nonhuman Animal advocacy and environmental advocacy in the spirit of Marti Kheel, as is evidenced in her 2015 publication Eating Earth: Environmental Ethics and Dietary Choice and her editorial work for the 2015 anthology Animals and the Environment: Advocacy, Activism, and the Quest for Common Ground.

“Sexy at 70” and “Grumpy Old Vegans”: Ageist Stereotypes in the Vegan Movement

Posted on May 16, 2015 by MicheleM

By Dr. C. Michele Martindill

“Ageism? Who cares about old people anyway? I volunteer with a group of white women over the age of 50. They are so behind the times and not helpful at all,” said a vegan.

“Why was it important for you to mention their age or gender?”

“Um…I don’t know.”

Vegans seem to at least recognize the words racism, sexism, classism, ableism and speciesism, but ageism is consistently left off that list of oppressions. Erasure. Silencing. Stereotyping older people as useless, past their prime, set in their ways and not able to contribute to the vegan movement. As one vegan once posted on Facebook, “Taking a stand against ageism feels too much like a single issue campaign, not really worth the effort. People need to just go vegan.” Really? Ageism is just a single issue campaign?

PeTA is well known for its sexist advertising campaigns involving young women who pose partially or completely nude in an effort to get the public to stop eating or otherwise harming animals, e.g. celebrity Pamela Anderson posed in an almost non-existent bikini with her body marked off in the same way a butcher marks off the body parts of a cow—just to make the point that “All Animals Have the Same Parts.” Few would be surprised to learn that particular ad was banned in Montreal, Canada over the blatant sexism (Cavanagh, 2010), but how many people are aware that PeTA sponsors a Sexiest Vegan Over 50 contest? Judging is based on the entrant’s enthusiasm for their vegan lifestyle and “PeTA’s assessment of your physical attractiveness (PeTA, 2014).” Through a contest that objectifies women aged 50 and older, the public learns that a vegan lifestyle and diet should lead to what really matters in life—physical attractiveness. As if women don’t face enough pressure when they’re young to conform to standards of beauty created and institutionalized by men, they now have to face those same sexist standards as they age.

Of course, there are other stereotypes of older women in the animal rights movement. The Grumpy Old Vegans (GOV) Facebook page continues to use an avatar or logo depicting an older man and older woman with pronounced wrinkles, unfashionable clothing, grey hair, sour expressions and the woman is wearing pearl jewelry, a most un-vegan adornment (Grumpy Old Vegans, 2015). The representation of this pair as perpetually grumpy serves to stereotype older people, women in particular, as crotchety and is a form of ageism. While there is little doubt that if the GOV Facebook page used a logo featuring a couple in blackface or Native Americans as r-skins there would be a great public outcry, to date few have spoken up against the ageism of the wrinkle-bound couple logo.

Considering that vegans claim veganism is against all oppression, it is distressing to see them rank order which oppressions matter the most and which ones don’t even make the list, namely ageism. At the very least a definition of ageism is needed, explaining why and how it affects women more than men. Ageist stereotypes of older women affect the way they are stigmatized and contribute to their erasure from public concern. It is also important to explore how it is that men in leadership roles of the vegan animal rights movement can be so dismissive of older voices, particularly the voices of women.

AGEISM: The definition of ageism is straightforward–it is discrimination and prejudice against people based on their age, and is directed toward the very young as well as those who are considered old or elderly. Ageism is structural or systemic in our social world, meaning people learn it and enact it through social institutions, language, and organizations. People often don’t notice when they’re socially reproducing ageism, e.g. it is commonplace when someone forgets where they put something to say they’re having a senior moment, as if aging is universally defined by memory loss. Ageism is a relationship of power in that the dominant group in society uses ageism to oppress, exploit and silence those who are very young or much older. Just as the vegan animal rights movement stands against racism, sexism, ableism, classism, and speciesism, it stands against ageism—or at least some movement members claim it does. That remains to be seen.

STEREOTYPING: The tools of ageism are stereotyping and attaching stigmas to older people. Stereotypes are overly simple, fixed, rigid or exaggerated beliefs about an entire group or population of people. Stereotypes can lead to and be used to justify prejudice and discrimination. Aging women experience stereotyping more than men. Their bodies are criticized based on wrinkles, weight, hair color, posture, incontinence and overall loss of beauty; men may be similarly criticized, but are most likely regarded as distinguished in their later years and have the social capital—kinship, friendships, co-workers—to slough off negative stereotypes. Some of the most often used stereotypes of older people include:

1) All old people get sick and have disabilities, including hearing loss, urinary incontinence and blindness.
2) Old people are incapable of learning anything new; they are set in their ways.
3) Old women are a burden on everyone.
4) “Old people are grouchy and cantankerous.” (The Senior Citizen Times, 2011)

These and other stereotypes are communicated in multiple ways throughout the vegan animal rights movement. In a recent Facebook discussion of how PeTA uses young blonde white women in their advertising campaigns several women pointed out the sexism and racism of such a tactic. None mentioned ageism. One man stepped in to ‘mansplain’ and defend PeTA:

Humans are sexual beings and there’s nothing wrong with that. This doesn’t degrade women the same way half-naked male models don’t degrade men. It just looks like you’re actively looking for sexism, racism, or some sort of discrimination in an effort to be politically correct. I don’t think that’s a good approach. (Toronto Vegetarian Association, 2015)

When told by a woman that it degrades women to be reduced to the sum of their body parts and that they are only heard if they are considered sexy, this same man responded:

How exactly does it suggest that being sexy is the only way people will hear you if you’re a woman? That’s just ridiculous. People listen to not attractive people. Look at Hilary Clinton for godsake. [Emphasis added] That’s just a weird argument with no validity. I’ve never seen someone turn down a conversation with a woman based on their attractiveness.

How exactly does looking at and LIKING someone’s body disrespecting them? It seems like YOU are the one degrading women here. And it’s funny – aren’t feminists about women having freedom to wear what they want without being judged? Double standard much?

Oh my. If it’s not degrading to use half-naked men in advertising, then it’s okay to use half-naked women? What this man does not understand is how men have the power to deflect attempts at objectification. Women do not, not at any age. Please note there’s no mention of ageism in his reasoning, but Hilary Clinton, current presidential candidate in the United States, is held up as an example of “not attractive people” who can still get attention. Furthermore, this man calls out the women in the conversation for being bad feminists since they failed to support his admiration for attractive young women. The explicit ageism in this conversation was never mentioned, and it served to socially reproduce acceptance of ageism, acceptance of making disparaging remarks about women based on their age and appearance.

STIGMA: Stereotypes lead to stigmas. Sociologist Erving Goffman (1922-1982) defined stigma as society attaching an undesirable attribute to an individual and then reacting negatively to that individual in such a way as to rob them of their identity, their ability to function or fully participate in society (Link & Phelan). In our social world, age is seen as an undesirable physical attribute, a stigma that is attached to women through man dominated ideologies which favor younger women for their sexualized bodies. Whenever a person or group displays a stereotypical representation of women as wrinkled, grouchy, or set in their ways, they contribute to the stigma of aging and socially reproduce ageism.

Criticism of a stereotypical ageist logo on the GOV Facebook page was met with dismissiveness on the grounds that people have a right to identify themselves as old and grumpy, and then the author, who was a man, made an ad hominem attack on the person who challenged his group:

…if you truly believe that people who identify themselves as old, grumpy and vegan and run a page with that title, using caricatures to represent themselves, are ageist for those reasons alone then your thinking is as muddled as that of those who made the allegation originally.

The man continued to defend his group’s ageist logo by dismissing sociological research and by stating that since the majority of the group “liked” it on Facebook, the logo could not possibly be ageist:

sociology is not an exact science. For that reason, it would be foolish to regard every utterance from sociologists as gospel. The rebuttal of this allegation issued on the page was ‘liked’ by a large number of people, many of whom expressed appreciation for a page they identified with, as they often felt invisible in a movement that celebrates youth. There were no adverse comments. In short, there is no substantive evidence to support the allegation.

What some vegans fail to see is how their actions affect others outside of the group. A logo or mascot is not ageist based on the vote of a membership who benefit from the stereotyping; ageism is grounded in any action that stigmatizes people based on their age.

Kyriarchal or Interactive Systems of Oppression: Kyriarchal social justice addresses all forms of oppression—racism, sexism, ageism, classism, ableism, and speciesism—and focuses on the dynamics of how these systems are interactive, crisscrossing and layered oppressions in the lives of individuals and groups (see below for a definition of kyriarchy—what was formerly referred to as intersectional). All oppressions are socially reproduced and linked by social institutions, through the economic, medical, legal, educational, religious and any other type of social institutions people navigate on a daily basis.

Too often when women in the vegan animal rights movement point out institutional ageism they are told by movement leaders that drawing attention to oppressions such as ageism is wrong, that kyriarchal social justice means we should just get along and go vegan for the animals because ending speciesism is all that matters. These vegans seem fine with claiming they care about humans and readily assert they are opposed in a general sense to things like racism, but they rank order oppressions and try to cherry pick the oppressions that matter most to them, leaving the rest to sit unnoticed. Why? In part they fear doing harm to the vegan animal rights movement and its organizations; they fear attention will be drawn away from ending speciesism or that outsiders will not join the movement if they have to stand against all oppressions. It is also difficult for the movement to envision how to address kyriarchal social justice when most of the leaders are men and eighty percent of the followers are women, when most of the membership is white, cis-gendered, young, without disabilities and not living in poverty. By not addressing ageism vegans socially reproduce and reify the stereotypes and stigmas associated with aging in our society.

AGEISM DOES REAL HARM: What harm is there in ignoring ageism? Plenty. In a recent study, researchers at the University of Southern California found that negative stereotypes about aging can potentially impair the memory of older people. “The study found that a group of older people asked to perform memory tests after reading fictitious articles about age-related memory problems did less well than a group given articles on preservation of and improvement in memory with age (Shuttleworth, 2013).” The older people who experienced memory loss fell victim to a self-fulfilling prophecy and the cliché of older people losing cognitive function just because they are old.

In addition, stereotypes keep people from seeing the realities of aging; they erase and marginalize older voices. Telling older people—especially women—to just go vegan will not address the financial problems faced by an aging population. Older women are at particular risk to be living in poverty. A report from 2012 based on US Census Bureau data reveals that over half of elder-only households lack the financial resources to pay for basic needs. Sixty percent of women aged 65 and older who live alone or with a marriage partner cannot meet day-to-day expenses. Women of retirement age are hit particularly hard by economic insecurity. Their pensions are smaller than those of men, they own fewer assets, and lack the education and job skills needed for post-retirement employment. Some of this economic disparity is the result of women leaving their careers to care for families and for their own elderly parents, and thereby losing opportunities for promotions as well as building up Social Security income. Also, women outlive men, leaving them alone with a single income and having to exhaust assets just to have shelter and food (Wider Opportunites for Women, 2012).

Older women of color are more likely than white women to have sufficient retirement incomes. Almost 50% of white women have insufficient retirement incomes to afford daily needs, while nearly 75% of Black women, 61% of Asian women and 75% of “Hispanic” (see US Census Bureau definition of Hispanic below) women were in households that could not afford basic expenses—even with Social Security income and Medicare coverage (Wider Opportunities for Women, 2012). Vegans who stereotype and stigmatize older women as self-sufficient and out of touch with animal rights might want to consider how these women have more pressing concerns in their lives, e.g. how they will make the next rent payment or pay the heating bill. Keep in mind, too, these numbers do not take into account those who are homeless or who live in elder care of some sort.

STOP AGEISM in the VEGAN MOVEMENT: All vegans can work to eliminate ageism and extend empathic understanding to older people by considering how clichés and gaslighting—silencing someone with a barrage of questions and attacks—frame interactions with older people. Following are ten of the most often repeated ageist clichés found throughout the vegan animal rights movement and in vegan Facebook discussion threads:

1. “I feel old, so I know what you’re feeling even though I’m not really old myself.”
No, you don’t know what it means to feel old. You haven’t experienced it. Just as a white person has no way of knowing what it feels like to be Black, young people come across as dismissive and patronizing when they pretend to know how it feels like to be old.
2. “Age is just a number” or “You’re only as old as you feel.”
Condescending! Implicit in these statements is the view that young is better than old, so just don’t look at the number.
3. “I’m having a senior moment.”
This cliché is most often uttered when someone wants to explain a mental lapse of some kind or a moment of forgetfulness, and it stereotypes “seniors” as having diminished mental capacities. It’s not only ageist, but ableist!
4. “Ageism feels like a single issue campaign (SIC). Let’s keep the focus on the animals.”
Veganism is an effort to end the exploitation of all animals, including humans. Ageism in its many forms is exploitation. It misrepresents veganism to deny ageism exists or that its effects are harmless.
5. “I’m not ageist! You’re the one being ageist by bringing it up!!”
Here’s an example of reverse ageism. There is no such thing as reverse ageism, just as there is no such thing reverse racism. Only the group holding power can inflict oppression.
6. “I’m old, so I can say what I want about old people.”
Yes, old people can discuss aging in ways young people can’t, but remember disparaging remarks and stereotypes hurt ALL old people. Think about the big picture!!
7. “Jokes about aging are culturally relative. We poke fun at old people in the United Kingdom.” OR “Lighten up! Get over yourself!”
If a vegan anywhere in the world knows their words or actions will hurt others by contributing to ageism or any other oppression, then they can’t use cultural relativism as an excuse for their disrespectful behavior. It’s that simple.
8. “Old people discriminate against young people, so why can’t we make fun of old people?”
Yes, some older persons may be prejudiced against young people or discriminate against them, but stereotypes don’t stick to young people, don’t leave young people marginalized because of their age.
9. “You look like my grandma.”
While most likely meant as a compliment, these words stereotype women as being primarily in nurturing roles, especially later in their lives.
10. “The older generation let us down on social justice issues, so why should we care about them?”
Stop blaming the victims!!

In a cis-gendered white man dominated society ageism is used to silence older women. It’s a continuation of the objectification that starts early in the life of every woman. Older women are regarded as the sum of their body parts, parts that are stereotypically seen as wrinkled, sagging, graying and useless. Men dismiss the educational achievements and work of older women as a means of devaluing the contributions they make. The vegan animal rights movement has yet to acknowledge ageism or speak out against it. Instead, the older women who are in the movement support its man dominated leadership, both denying ageism exists and acting as apologists for the leadership. They tell those who mention ageism to not take themselves so seriously. Ageism is not a joke to be laughed off and forgotten. Vegans seem to at least recognize the words racism, sexism, classism, ableism and speciesism, but ageism is consistently left off that list of oppressions. At best, it is seen as a single issue campaign within the vegan movement, an object for disdain that distracts from the mission of saving other animals. Mark these words: The vegan social movement will not survive as long as it practices oppression against one group in order to elevate the needs of another group.

Notes
1 Kyriarchy is used in this essay to refer to networks or systems of interactive oppressions. The word emerged from the work of Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza. It is taken from the Greek kyrios, meaning lord or master, and archo, meaning to govern. It is considered a more inclusive and expansive term than patriarchy.

2 The use of “Hispanic” in this reference is based on the US Census Bureau definition: “People who identify with the terms “Hispanic” or “Latino” are those who classify themselves in one of the specific Hispanic or Latino categories listed on the decennial census questionnaire and various Census Bureau survey questionnaires – “Mexican, Mexican Am., Chicano” or ”Puerto Rican” or “Cuban” – as well as those who indicate that they are “another Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin.” Origin can be viewed as the heritage, nationality group, lineage, or country of birth of the person or the person’s ancestors before their arrival in the United States. People who identify their origin as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish may be of any race.” While it is not an optimal definition, it was all that was available for this data set. Much work needs to be done in defining and mapping the use of such categories. http://www.census.gov/population/hispanic/

References
Cavanagh, K. (2010, July 15). Pamela Anderson’s sexy body-baring PETA ad gets banned in Canada. Retrieved from NY Daily News: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/pamela-anderson-sexy-body-baring-peta-ad-banned-canada-article-1.463753

Grumpy Old Vegans. (2015, May 12). Grumpy Old Vegans. Retrieved from Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/GrumpyOldVegan?fref=ts

Link, B. G., & Phelan, J. C. (n.d.). On Stigma and its Public Health Implications. Retrieved from http://www.stigmaconference.nih.gov/LinkPaper.htm

PeTA. (2014). PeTA’s 2014 Sexiest Vegan Over 50 Contest. Retrieved from PeTA Prime: http://prime.peta.org/sexiest-vegan-over-50-contest/details

Shuttleworth, A. (2013, July 8). Are negative stereotypes about older people bad for their health? Retrieved from NursingTimes.net: http://www.nursingtimes.net/opinion/practice-team-blog/are-negative-stereotypes-about-older-people-bad-for-their-health/5060639.blog

The Senior Citizen Times. (2011, November 23). Top 20 stereotypes of older people. Retrieved from The Senior Citizen Times: http://the-senior-citizen-times.com/2011/11/23/top-20-stereotypes-of-older-people/

Toronto Vegetarian Association. (2015, April). Toronto Vegetarian Association. Retrieved from Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/torontoveg/permalink/10152808399662686/

Wider Opportunities for Women. (2012). Doing Without: Economic Insecurity and Older Americans. http://www.wowonline.org/documents/OlderAmericansGenderbriefFINAL.pdf.

Dr. Martindill earned her Ph.D. in sociology from the University of Missouri and taught there in the Sociology Department, the Peace Studies Program and the Women’s and Gender Studies Department. Her areas of emphasis include political sociology, organizations and work, and social inequalities. Dr. Martindill’s dissertation focuses on the no-kill shelter social movement and is based on ethnographic research conducted during several years of working in an animal shelter. She is vegan, a feminist and is currently interested in the stories women tell through their needlework, including crochet, counted cross stitch and quilting. It is important to note that Dr. Martindill consistently uses her academic title in order to inspire women and members of other marginalized groups to pursue their dreams no matter what challenges those dreams may entail, and certainly one of her goals is to see more women in academia.

Vegan Feminist Network

Critical essays and resources for vegan women and their allies

Tag Archives: Veganism