omar:
when you wrote, "It is not enough to acknowledge that you are a
recipient of privelege. The point is to work against your privelege,
your power. If you just accept your status, ..._____ you continue your
role as an active oppressor." would that include persons who have
struggled to achieve privelege also? i am considered a middle class
white woman, actually mixed, (my family has been in this country for
more than a hundred years) like most people in the US.
my attraction to ecofeminism is philosophical,( of the heart.) it was
my privelege to be raised in a stable family with relative privelege, if
arrogantly patriarchal. partly in response partly in rebellion i have
chosen to raise my family differently. it is difficult to live in this
society without capitulating. my sister, who is childless and a lawyer
with acreage in vermont believes that everyone lower down on the east
coast should do without cars. her house is large enough for a large
family and she can grow more organic produce than she needs. the number
of cars in delaware is ridiculous and is terrible for the ecosystem.
however pedestrians are routinely struck attempting to cross the road to
public transportation early in the morning. there are so many roadside
shrines for them i have considered a photo essay. i am raising my
children in the state with the highest percapita incidence of cancer in
the us... the chemical capitol of the "world" and when the governor's
committee looked into the incidence of cancer they decided that too
many people were smoking. we also (and not surprisingly) have the
highest incidence of infant mortality and have the distinction of being
the only state in which the murder rate by juveniles rose in the last
year. ecofeminism is not separate from concerns for human justice for
me. in my perception my concern for the children i see in my "low
status" job is ecofeminist. i work with children with disabilities,
driving a lift bus between home and school. i am aware that several of
the children i work with have been preventably disabled. for me the
crack epidemic is an ecological concern. and smacks of the violence i
connect with patriarchy at its worst. i know a child who was disabled
after birth. after surviving two overdoses, a third left her with
permanent tremors, unable to function normally, to speak or even to keep
from sucking her hands till they are raw. it seems as though an
impoverished neighborhood in LA was specifically targeted for an
injection of weapons and cheap cocaine possibly triggering a national
epidemic, by an expatriate Nicaraguan with skills acquired through his
MBA ( to support the contras.) the coke that disabled my children may
have spread from that locus. the cia has plausable deniability.
there are multiple superfund sites here, even a plant that uses wind
socks to show which way the deadly chlorine is blowing. my husband has
come home from work at sites where the trucks needed to be hosed down at
the dump and everything immediately buried. yes, three nuclear reactors
on artificial island and two others within meltdown range. no more than
8oz of fish per month is allowable out of the delaware river because of
pcb s and possible other pollutants from star oil. etc, etc.
my childhood experience of picking and foraging for wild fruits has
sensitized me to the rampant ecological depradation. wildlife is losing
ground. a bald eagle fishes along I95 in water too polluted for a
reservoir. development is slowly desertifying a lush garden of a
system.
in addition to this the earth is a system, we are rocking and reeling
with prevented care during the mining of the healthcare system by
private interests, but all of us are exposed to mutagens and new toxic
dangers too recent for genetic protection. as a tall "white" woman i am
familiar with objectification and occaisionally vehement discrimination
and obstruction by threatened but powerful males. i deeply admire the
work of women in the third world. i would like to recognize the
creative agency and intelligence of our ecosystem with reciprocity,
respect, and conscious attention to the possible. in resonance with
something said here earlier i perceive plants as awarenesses and fauna
also. so i believe our collective intelligence is diminished by
needless loss. maybe that's a clue.
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Sep 17 22:04:05 1996
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 23:11:52 -0400
From: Charlotte Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Environment?
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
G.GARRARD wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> The abuses you document are a mixed bunch, and would pay
> disentangling. You are wrong, I'm afraid, to say that there are no
> controls on animal slaughter in either of our countries - just go to
> Asia if you want to see what 'no controls' really looks like.
Perhaps I was a bit boisterous here... but simply having legislation
that outlines the transport of animals and the fact that they cannot be
butchered once dead, does not add up to much in the way of "controls."
And, you are right, countries like Asia are much more lacking in
legislation protecting animals raised for slaughter, but shouldn't a
country as rich/powerful/educated as ours be a bit more responsible?
Just a thought... sometimes I expect too much of the U.S.
> The question for a welfarist (like myself) is whether abuses are endemic,
> intrinsic or exceptional. There's a difference between the obvious
> cruelty of veal crating (which is intrinsic to the practice, so the
> practice must cease- though by no means all veal is produced in this
> way, and none is in Britain), the widespread - but not necessary -
> cruelty of debeaking or inhumane husbandry (eg inadequate /
> inappropriate vet care) which can be tackled by humane legislation
> and careful monitoring, and the exceptional cases of cruelty in
> ordinary slaughter. In both the US and the UK, laws exist which
> demand stunning of animals in abbatoirs (although not Halal for
> Muslims - an unfortunate exception), so that although cows being
> lifted by their ankles to have their throats cut sounds pretty
> gruesome (it is - I've watched it) it happens to animals that are
> unconscious.
Yes, I too have seen animals slaughtered. And I have seen men take
sledge hammers and hit a steer -many- times in the head trying to kill
him. The process is not always so merciless, as you make it sound. And,
let's not forget, slaughterhouses do not always follow USDA regulations...
there aren't nearly enough inspectors to ensure such things... and there
really isn't enough sentiment in this country to require the enforcement
of such laws. And, by the way, I have seen many animals slaughtered who
are still fully alive... sheep who are hanging and fighting as their throats
are slit... and pigs who are still moving and fighting as their limbs are
being removed from their bodies.
Unconscious, you say?? Maybe a lucky batch are.
> You wouldn't try to save someone under the surgeon's
> knife because all that slicing -looked- painful, would you ? Cases of
> inadequate stunning do occur, and these should be prosecuted.
> So intrinsically cruel practices should be stopped, endemically cruel
> practices sharply curbed and occasional abuses identified and
> prosecuted.
"Occasional" abuses?? You don't really believe they are "occasional," do you?
But, then again, an abuse can only be called an abuse if it defies a law
written to guard against such things... and the laws are very very lacking.
> As for 'ducks having their bellies overfilled to produce
> foie gras', I think this proves my point. You really need to look at
> some info on animal production that is not produced by veggie
> pressure groups (unless you assume that everyone who does not agree
> with you is by definition a cruel liar). Ducks don't produce foie
> gras pate, geese do, and it isn't their bellies that are filled, but
> their livers were injected to swell them up. This practice - once
> common in France, where the stuff is made - is now illegal under EU
> laws. Old, inaccurate and violently biased info is no basis for any
> sensible view.
You are right: It is geese who are used in the production of foie gras. My
mistake. And my reference to their "bellies" was simplistic... it -is-
the liver that is filled. And this product is still served in the U.S. and
can be ordered through gourmet catalogs.
> In Britain, veggies and welfarists are starting to realise that the
> real campaign is not to 'set animals free' (as if anyone ever really
> thinks through such a ludicrous idea) but to ensure their humane
> treatment under our care. Sure their lives would be much nastier in
> the wild condition, but while they are our responsibility we must
> look after them properly. There are now products - sponsored and
> monitored by the RSPCA and Soil Association - made from animals
> reared and slaughtered under controlled conditions. Again, you have
> to make the effort to find out what is really going on. Go and see
> an organic pig farm and you might - just might - moderate your views.
> I'm sorry to go on in this way, but really your ignorance is just as
> great as that of the happy consumers of cruelly-produced meat you
> rightly despise.
Ignorance? Thank you.
--
- Charlotte Sullivan
Executive Director
Protect Animal Life
"PEACE AND FREEDOM FOR ALL WHO LIVE"
