portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

animal rights | community building

Obligatory Freegan Mandates

A response to "Vegan Rules", which reminded me of authoritative, self-aggrandizing activist egos, such as mine sometimes turns into without me recognizing it. Most recent vegan converts seem to be sorely unaware that the ethics of veganism and straight-edge aren't resultant of Ian McKay and Fugazi and the hardcore music scene, which I earnestly admire and adore. Those roots can be found in ancient, 6,000 year and older, sacred texts from Kemetic, Abrahamic and India's Jainist scripture. For our modern times, this is "required reading" on the philosophy of animal liberation  http://www.animal-rights-library.com/texts-m/singer02.htm
"...expel the last of the ingested animal based foods from one's body, before one can be called vegan."

The process may take decades. We might say were 'becoming vegan' until we know we are as pure as the purist. How are we to know when that happens? Is there a test? Does the cosmos open a portal to a ethereal dimension where we bathe in the primordial essence which assures us of our ascendance over others who haven't been granted the same privileged opportunity to establish a vegan foundation for living as we have? Puritanical thinking seems to me to create apprehension and turn people off.

"As well, no breast-fed babies are allowed to be called vegans (even if their mamas adhere to veganism) until they can switch to soy and other plant-based foods for 100% of their sustenance; after all, human mamas are every bit as much animals as are those of the four-legged variety. And, along those lines of ingesting human body fluids, how can those who, uh, swallow be called vegan? Shouldn't this apply to ALL bodily fluids? So, what if a vegan has a catastrophic accident that involves major blood loss (like falling off a bike or being attacked by a cougar? Would it be OK by vegan standards for the vegan to accept a blood transfusion to survive his or her injuries?"

All ridiculous, hypercritical, pedantic, self-righteous and alienating; especially the breast milk opinion because the beloved vegan solution to everything, the soy bean, has an estrogen like molecule which people wishing to change gender from male to female take (albeit in concentrated doses) to develop feminine physiological traits. That effects the developing body of the infant more readily than an adult. Also, babies are greatly, physically and psychologically harmed by being fed formula instead of drinking from Mommy's supple breasts. So, I am an ethical vegan, rather than an ingestion vegan. That means I don't support anyone deriving profits from or funding animal exploitation as part of business, and I'm as careful as possible to avoid directly harming fellow animals in daily life. (Not swatting flies, not even mosquitoes, watching out for worms and slugs, awareness. I suppose people can call me a hypocrite because of the default self I've been killing over the years to become a more humane person today. It's an ongoing self-forgetting process to continue practicing doing the Most Good and Least Harm, the MOGO principle, in all areas of life. Author Zoe Weil shares her journey to establish Humane Education in that book. The issues being inquired on are relative non-issues when set aside the vast injustice and holocaust being perpetuated for the billions of our fellow animals in Concentrated Animal Feedlot Operations (CAFOs). These and vivisection account for a vast enough amount of infliction and suffering that I cannot devote time to be an authority on whether we can face fuck without losing vegan cred. Time and effort devoted to one concern is unavailable to another.

"What if a person eats a vegan diet for 9 days out of 10, and then enjoys a piece of meat? Wait, a REAL vegan wouldn't enjoy a piece of meat, would s/he. OK, what if a vegan eats a piece of cheese every 20 days? Is s/he vegan for 19 days and then a calloused asshole on day 20? And would there then be another period of expelling the animal food from one's body before legally referring to oneself as a vegan again?"

Hypothetically, there is a cow who lived a long and happy life at a sanctuary then died of old age, if I ate her carcass I will have only broken the aspect of veganism which concerns inflicting harm on the animal body of self.

"We all have heard that there are likely to be insect parts in nut butters. How can a so-called vegan conscientiously eat these butters? Insects have feelings too."

Unless we wild-harvested everything we need to survive, while in a super-sensitive place of awareness to avoid ever accidentally injuring anything which has free agency to move on or under the forest floor where we must walk to find our food, we're not able to be considered Vegan by the puritanical, hypothetical elite. Is that what you plan to do?

"And lastly, what about people like that poor guy who got OYSTER sauce in his Thai food last week? I think he should be required to have a cleansing period before he can be called a vegan again. Sorry, Pal - but hey, at least you have the resources to go out and eat at a restaurant, unlike most of the world's human population."

The last statement is a good point, people with capital to invest or purchase excesses are more responsible for shifting the socio-economic factors of animal exploitation than most of the world's population who, as I do, find digging through the trash well worth the while. For instance, last night I found an 18 oz jar of Glory Bee Raw Honey and I'm freegan happier than an oyster about it. Freeganism: we'll steal your scrap, but we won't buy your crap.