FROM THE COMMUNITY: Rethinking Veganism Beyond the Lives of Animals {by Julie Gannon}

Hi there, folks! Today, I’m more than thrilled to share with ya’ll the first “From the Community” piece published here on Chickpeas & Change. Penned by Dubliner-turned-Londoner Julie Gannon of the blog Pint Sized Vegan and founder of the London Freethinkers for Animals Meetup group, this piece encourages self-identified animal rights activists to think and act beyond non-human animals, to understand the urgent need to work in solidarity with activists of all stripes.

If I may add my own two cents, interpreting “our struggle” as separate from those of our fellow working-class folk is exactly what the ruling class of the capitalist system wants. In doing so, we prevent ourselves from understanding the interconnectedness of oppression under capitalism, and diminish our chances of uniting in revolutionary uprising. But, if we work in solidarity with one another, we have the best possible odds of dismantling the systems and structures that keep us from living in a free and equitable world.

Got your own piece to submit to C&C? Check out this page for submission guidelines.

This piece originally appeared on the Pint Sized Vegan blog.


Rethinking Veganism Beyond the Lives of Animals
by Julie Gannon

Take Courage (Credit Hannah Nicklin)

Take Courage (Credit Hannah Nicklin)

When I walk by these lights in New Cross, I think about the type of person I want to be. I imagine a brave and beautiful woman: a red-haired Celtic warrior, ready to stand up for herself — and for others — when it matters. To show solidarity for animals, vegans choose to step outside of the social norms that cause animals harm, and boycott the industries involved in their exploitation. But does a similar mindset frame our choices where human exploitation is concerned? And if not, are we not then denying humans the same considerations we afford to animals? Does it even matter, anyway?

Animal Liberation • Human Liberation (Credit The Sparrow Project)

Animal Liberation • Human Liberation (Credit The Sparrow Project)

I’ve participated in enough vegan-led events to see the slogan “Animal Liberation • Human Liberation” faithfully woven into campaign manifestos and sewn onto flags. And while I don’t doubt the sentiment, at times I’m not wholly convinced of our ability to manifest it—and I leave feeling disheartened and empty. Perhaps this feeling is more a sober recognition of the part I’ve played in side-stepping issues around human exploitation, or maybe it’s a manifestation of my wavering belief that the vegan movement alone can challenge the societal values that commodify life, and the institutions that gamble with it.

Take the world’s largest corporation, for example (Dullforce). Apple’s commitment to human rights has come under fire amidst allegations of exploitative working conditions at its supplier factories in China (China Labor Watch, SSACM). The poetry of former Foxconn employee Xu Lizhi (1990-2014) provides a glimpse of what life is like for workers on iPhone assembly lines at the factory’s facilities in Shenzhen, China. Problems linked to suppliers in Indonesia have also surfaced, with reports claiming that tin used to manufacture iPhones is being sourced from unregulated mines rife with dangerous working conditions, child labor, habitat destruction and environmental pollution (Friends of the Earth).

While conditions such as these are not atypical within the electronics industry, senior Apple representatives insist that the company is doing more than its rivals “to ensure fair and safe working conditions” (Williams). To further the perception of the company’s “corporate conscience” and its commitment to sustainability, Tim Cook (CEO) launched Apple’s “Better” campaign on Earth Day in April, 2014. Manufactured in Silicon Valley, California, this brave new world seems light years away from the daily reality of factory life experienced by workers further down Apple’s supply chain—and Xu’s story is a testament to how easily the most vulnerable individuals become invisible in a system that safeguards profit over people. If Tim Cook’s shoulders feel heavy, however, I don’t think he is solely to blame. (I know I can’t claim immunity as I sit here typing on my Apple Mac…).

Xu Lizhi 许立志 (Credit London Review of Books)

Xu Lizhi 许立志 (Credit London Review of Books)

So what’s this got to do with veganism?

The Apple case — and Xu’s story in particular — has led me to question whether we’re justified in flying the cruelty-free flag of veganism if we financially support or remain silent about companies or industries that we know contribute to the harm of others—beyond our dinner plates. At the risk of getting tied up in ethical knots over every single thing we do, this raises the thorny question of what it really means to be vegan: is it enough to remove animal products from our lives and to shop ‘cruelty-free’, or is veganism something more than a zeitgeist consumer lifestyle with health benefits?

Rethinking veganism in this way does not mean losing sight of the billions of animals exploited on farms, locked in labs, or caged in circuses and zoos, but it does mean examining how our own attitudes and behaviors affect individuals other than animals, and questioning whether we’re committed to standing up against all forms of oppression and violence. If we say veganism is “for the benefit of people, too” then it’s incumbent on us to consider our footprint beyond the lives of animals, and to understand how our work intersects with other social justice causes–whether we’re helping or hindering. Otherwise, we run the risk of losing credibility as a legitimate movement, being dismissed as a disconnected social club or, worse still, tokenizing issues such as workers’ rights and environmental sustainability for our own agenda, with manifestos that amount to little more than empty rhetoric—in a similar vein to Apple.

Recognizing the shortcomings in our movement starts with recognizing those in ourselves, and realizing that being vegan is a means, not an end. We don’t lay sole claim on trying to create a “better” world: whether it’s childbirth (Suzanne Arms), chocolate (Lauren Ornelas), or corporate finance (Brett Scott), there are lion-hearted individuals far beyond our movement working hard to shake the structures of society that prop up and perpetuate unjust divisions and exploitative relations between us. Despite differences in our thinking about animals, recognizing the good in other social movements can provide a starting point for opening up conversations about potential ways of working together in our capacities as activists, artists, educators, citizens, community workers, or political campaigners, toward a shared goal of cultivating a non-violent world, where everyone is counted and everyone is loved. In his message about standing up to injustice, Henry David Thoreau said, “For it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be: what is once well done is done forever.” The challenge, as I see it, is to face those conversations and new beginnings with grace, with guts, and with our eyes wide open.

Julie Gannon is an animal advocate based in London trying to challenge conventional ways of thinking about human-animal relations. She gives talks on animal ethics and vegan cookery demonstrations in schools across London. She first started thinking about animal liberation after seeing the 1987 film Project X. She went on to study environmental science at Trinity College Dublin and has postgraduate qualifications in sustainable development and third level learning and teaching. She created the London-based network #freethinkers4animals to examine how animals are represented in philosophy, literature, art, science, religion and popular culture. When not campaigning for animals, she’s out exploring South East London on her bike, eating dates and listening to electronic music.

You can get in touch with Julie at pintsizedvegan [at] hotmail [dot] com, or connect with her on Twitter.

DISCLAIMER: Chickpeas & Change publishes submissions whose overarching political message I support, not necessarily those whose every word and idea I agree with wholeheartedly. I welcome all submissions created with a goal of contributing in some way– large or small — to dismantling dominant structures of violence and oppression, and that include non-human animals among the beings whom we need to include in a struggle for collective liberation.


Dullforce, Annebritt. “FT 500 2014.” 27 June 2014. Web. 1 April 2015.

China Labor Watch. “Beyond Foxconn: Deplorable Working Conditions Characterize Apple’s Entire Supply Chain.” 27 June 2012. Web. 1 April 2015.

Students and Scholars Against Corporate Misbehaviour. “Workers as Machines: Military Management in Foxconn.” 12 October 2010. Web. 1 April 2015.

Friends of the Earth. “Mining for Smartphones: the True Cost of Tin.” 24 November 2012. Web. 1 April 2015.

Williams, Rhiannon. “Apple’s Letter to UK Staff over Chinese Factory Conditions.” 19 December 2014. Web. 1 April 2015.

Thoreau, Henry David. “Civil Disobedience.” 1849. Web. 1 April 2015.

Where Can Animals Fit Into Revolutionary Socialism?

Hi, folks, and happy Labor Day! I took a Monday hiatus last week as I settled back into Vassar campus life here in Poughkeepsie, NY (my last time doing so…), but I’ve returned today to discuss a topic that has become increasingly important to me over the past few weeks: revolutionary socialism. I’m still working out my thoughts and feelings on whether or not I believe that this particular political stance is our best hope in bringing about collective liberation, but after attending a meeting of the International Socialist Organization (ISO) back in my hometown and consuming a whole lot of resources, I’ve gotten pretty jazzed about it.

Just to give you a brief overview before I launch into today’s discussion, the ISO’s political philosophy operates around six principles, as laid out in their Socialist Worker newspaper:

1.) Socialism, not capitalism. Standing in the Marxist tradition — founded by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, and continued by V.I. Lenin, Rosa Luxembourg and Leon Trotsky — the ISO understands war, poverty, exploitation, oppression, and worldwide environmental destruction to stem from the capitalist system in which a minority ruling class profits from the labor of the majority working class. They advocate instead for a socialist society based on workers’ collective ownership of their own labor and wealth.

2.) Workers’ power. Workers play a central role in the capitalist system of production — without them it cannot function — so they also have the power to shut the system down. When workers collectively take control of the wealth they create instead of having it stolen by the ruling class, they can plan that wealth’s production and distribution according to the needs of the planet and all of its inhabitants.

3.) Revolution. While economic, political and social reforms can improve working-class conditions, they cannot in and of themselves bring an end to the oppression that capitalism perpetuates. Our present state was built on capitalism and designed to protect that very system, so we need an entirely different kind of state — one based on a democracy of workers. To achieve this, we must dismantle capitalism.

4.) Internationalism. Since capitalism pervades the globe, the socialist struggle must unite workers worldwide. As such, the ISO opposes imperialism, U.S. military intervention, and immigration controls while supporting struggles for self-determination among oppressed nations.

5.) Full equality and liberation. To ensure that the working class cannot rise up in revolution, the capitalist ruling class divides workers along sexual, gender, racial, national and other lines. This is why the ISO opposes racism in all its forms, supports the struggles for immigrant rights and Black liberation, fights for real equality for women, and advocates an end to discrimination against LGBTQ people.

6.) The revolutionary party. The ISO aims to build an independent socialist organization rooted in workplaces, schools and neighborhoods that unites the most militant workers in order to achieve socialist revolution.

Sounds good, no? Again, I’m still trying to gather more information on the Marxist tradition and the ISO’s activism — critiques of both, in particular — before I commit to focusing my full energies on this revolutionary socialism stuff (“commie shit,” as my housemates affectionately call it). Today, though, I want to explore the question of non-human animals in regards to socialism, especially because most of the socialist literature I’ve read (see the reference list below) seems hostile to integrating anti-speciesism into a socialist politics.

And honestly, I think this hostility is, in many ways, deserved. The most visible animal rights activists and proponents of veganism tend to equate speciesism with racism, sexism, and other forms of oppression; insist that animal agriculture is akin to the Holocaust and U.S. plantation slavery; and take inexcusable stances on issues of oppression worldwide, such as by diminishing police brutality against Black people in the U.S., or by claiming that Palestinians deserve the genocide they face at the hands of Israel because they eat animals. Indeed, most if not all of the socialist literature I found regarding non-human animals heavily cited Peter Singer and his deeply troubling brand of utilitarian, racist, ableist animal rights philosophy.

If we understand speciesism in such a way, then no, I don’t think that we should include anti-speciesism in our collective struggle toward a socialist society. However, if we conceive of speciesism as an ideology that conditions humans to understand non-human animals as commodities that exist purely for human use, and to insist upon the superiority of that use over alternatives that do not involve infringement upon the bodily autonomy of non-human animals, then I think that anti-speciesism falls well in line with a revolutionary socialist politics.

It is capitalism that has conditioned us to think of other beings — human and non — and the earth as commodities, and it is capitalism that has rendered plant-based foods inaccessible to many (with the exception of those like Inuit peoples whose geographical location and climate dictates the animal basis of their diet). With this in mind, I would encourage socialist decriers of anti-speciesism to reconsider speciesism’s basis in capitalism, and to look to those who integrate a more nuanced, kyriarchy-based approach to anti-speciesism into their much broader activism (such as A. Breeze Harper, and Aph and Syl Ko).

Let me be clear: I am not asking for revolutionary socialists to take up anti-speciesism as the driving force behind revolutionary struggle. Far from it. It makes perfect sense to me that, under a politics that depends upon the mass organization of the working class into a united cadre of radicals, we would not focus our energies on a group of beings that literally cannot be organized (save for on an Orwellian Animal Farm).

However, for the socialists listed in the references below — who are truly amazing activists and scholars, to be sure — non-human animals’ inability to “possess the biological and physical attributes that would allow them to engage in the activities and behaviors we associate with ‘liberation'” (D’Amato) seems to preclude us from considering non-human animals among those who will be liberated through working-class revolution. No, non-human animals will not liberate themselves or even be able to engage in working-class struggle, but I certainly don’t think that this “failure” of theirs to function within an anthropocentric framework of social movements should mean that we can just forget about them altogether.

It seems to me that, given the capitalist roots of speciesism, it would make sense to bring non-human animals along in socialist revolution. This doesn’t mean that we dedicate our energies to the impossible task of organizing non-human animals in working-class struggle, just as we don’t dedicate our energies to the similarly impossible task of organizing the physical earth in struggle against the capitalist-induced ecological crisis. What it does mean, at least in my opinion, is that we recognize how oppressive power structures, ideologies and institutions affect non-human animals, and make sure that in a future socialist society, we — as humans — do not re-enact the speciesist aspects of those entities.

In solidarity, Ali.


D’Amato, Paul. “Socialism and ‘animal rights.’” 26 October 2009. Web. 5 September 2015.

Gilbreath, Paul, Doug Burkhart, Doug Harvey, Roger Yates, and Den. “Views in brief.” 29 October 2009. Web. 5 September 2015.

Grey, Sarah and Joe Cleffie. “Peter Singer’s Race Problem.” Jacobin Magazine. 6 August 2015. Web. 6 September 2015.

Muldoon, Amy. “Socialism and the lives of animals.” 6 November 2009. Web. 5 September 2015.

World Socialist Movement. “What is Socialism?” World Socialist Movement. n.d. Web. 5 September 2015.

Why I Don’t Share Many Animal-Related Articles on Social Media

Hello, all! I apologize for the whole “no-post” thing last Monday; the social construct of time (wink) got the best of me. I hope y’all had great weeks, though!

First off, I’m thrilled to let ya’ll know that the second issue of the feminist, vegan, intersectional zine known as Project Intersect will be hot off the presses in early September, and I’ll have an edited version of my piece on veganism & consumerism published alongside a diverse array of critiques of structures of oppression. I’m honored and humbled to have my work included alongside so many other writer-activists. Check out this Facebook post to see the full list of contributors. Huge shout-out to Jacqueline Morr and Ashley Jo Maier for editing the issue. Be sure to follow Project Intersect to get your hands on their first two issues!

 Second, I wanted to talk a bit about why I don’t share very many animal/vegan-related articles on Chickpeas & Change’s various media outlets. If you follow the Chickpeas & Change Facebook and Twitter accounts, you’ll notice that not much stuff about animal agriculture, vivisection, wildlife, cute animal videos, etc. pops up in there. My reasoning for this is twofold:

1.) Most articles from the progressive news sources I follow tend to condemn large-scale animal agriculture for its detrimental impact on the environment, as well as its violent treatment of non-human animals. Great! However, I’m kind of sick of perpetuating the narrative that we need to include non-human animals in our realm of moral consideration only because the method in which we exploit them for food contributes hugely to environmental devastation, and/or because they’re suffering from unbelievable violence.

Implicit in these narratives is the belief that, if we can figure out an environmentally sustainable, “humane” method by which to violate the bodies of non-human animals for our own gustatory pleasure, then we humans have every right to use those bodies as we see fit. And that belief is inherently speciesist, as it depends upon the assumption that non-human animals exist purely for human use.

So, because there isn’t much media out there written from an anti-speciesist perspective, and because I’m continually striving in my activism to challenge the discrepancies between veganism and anti-speciesism, I don’t share much about animals and veganism. That stuff is written on my own blog, and from the pens of fellow radical anti-speciesist activists.

2.) As a proponent of veganism with racial, class, and ability privilege, I feel it necessary in my activism to emphasize my solidarity with those who do not live with such privileges. I aim to work against the mainstream, consumerist face of veganism that remains ignorant of systems of oppression beyond the exploitation of non-human animals. As such, the vast majority of the articles I share report on/discuss such issues as Black Lives Matter, Israel and Palestine, queer organizing, gender liberation, body acceptance, anti-capitalism, and the like. I do this in the hopes that my audience — many of whom are attracted to my blog for the vegan recipes and from my position as Media Coordinator for Our Hen House — will begin/continue to understand veganism as merely a logical extension of anti-speciesism, which in turn is a necessary aspect of collective liberation for all beings.

Soooo…yeah! I’m sorry if you’ve been confused as to the small amount of animal/vegan-related articles shared on my social media outlets, and I hope my reasoning makes sense. I would love for y’all to send me any articles that you think promote an anti-speciesist perspective, and I’d be happy to share them on the C&C pages.

In solidarity, Ali.

Problems with Focusing on Convenience and Taste in Animal Justice Work

Hi, folks! Today I want to expand upon a point that I made fairly briefly in my “Veganism & Consumerism” post way back in December–a point critiquing animal activism that focuses on increasing the availability of vegan products:

“[Vegan consumerism re-centers] the human experience; in other words, vegan consumerism becomes a project to benefit humans who eat a vegan diet rather than other animals oppressed by speciesism, and thereby proves completely ineffective in manifesting a world in which humans no longer view other animals (including other human animals) as commodities for our use. Kelly Atlas of the fantastic anti-speciesist organization Direct Action Everywhere explains that actively advocating for humans to engage in vegan consumer behavior – i.e., to demand vegan products over animals products, and to encourage others to do the same – focuses attention on the comfort and convenience of humans, while upholding a framing of other animals as commodities (undesirable ones, but still…).”

To directly quote Atlas: “We can’t make not hurting innocent animals a matter of how convenient and pleasurable it is for the human to abstain from that violence […]. We have to demand liberation for the nonhuman victims, not plant-based options for the human oppressors.”

Sure, I love me some Chaos cheese and Vegenaise as much as the next vegan consumer, but if my animal justice work stops at making such products more widely available, I’m merely making the world more comfortable for myself, not less speciesist against non-human animals. I mean, certainly no one is going to stop eating animals for the long-term simply by seeing vegan convenience products in the grocery store. And even if they did, without an understanding of anti-speciesism, they would almost definitely continue to perpetuate oppressive ideologies against non-human animals.

Heck, I know plenty of people who eat only vegan food but — from what I can discern — still understand non-human animals to exist on this planet for the sole purpose of human use, or think of themselves as “saviors” of (and therefore superior to) non-human animals. They might refer to themselves as the “owners” of their companion animals, they might dress up those companion animals, they might support wildlife culls in the name of “biodiversity,” they might eat the eggs that come from chickens, geese, ducks, and turkeys who life on sanctuaries, etc.

And we all engage in similar behaviors to a certain extent, right? Because we don’t act in these harmful ways out of individual biases or shortcomings, but rather because virtually all of us have been indoctrinated into a speciesist system. That’s why vegan eating must exist as a manifestation of a radical anti-speciesist politics, rather than as an end goal in and of itself.

In my view, telling people that “eating vegan is so easy!,” or “vegan food is everywhere nowadays!” — focusing on the consumer aspect of why someone would adopt a vegan diet — as an argument for why we should stop eating animals upholds that speciesist system, not to mention dismisses people in circumstances where, shocker, eating vegan actually isn’t easy, convenient, or readily available/accessible.

Those arguments uphold a speciesist system by making someone’s consideration of animals conditional upon how comfortable they are eating vegan food, and how tasty that vegan food is. So what happens if vegan convenience products disappear? What happens if vegan cheese goes back to tasting like squishy cardboard? Do we stop advocating for a shift in humans’ moral consideration of non-human animals? Anti-speciesism must be our priority, while our ability to eat yummy food can come later.

Additionally, those arguments discount those who don’t live in a consumer paradise, or don’t have financial or cultural access to that consumer paradise. A position of more inclusive anti-oppression work is accessible to everyone, while a position of specialized consumption is not.

So let’s put vegan eating where it deserves to be in importance: behind radical anti-speciesism. Because I don’t care about soy ice cream nearly as much as I care about folks like Tyrion, Sansa, Amy, Gracie and the rest of the residents of Heartland Farm Sanctuary being able to enact their complex life-worlds free of exploitation by humans.

In solidarity, Ali.

Intersectional Vegan Activism Highlighted on Ep285 of the Our Hen House Podcast

Hi, folks! Thanks for all of the feedback on the (very inexpert) short story that I published last week. This week, instead of penning a full post, I want to point ya’ll toward the most recent episode of the Our Hen House podcast–which I hosted!

Photo via Our Hen House.

Photo via Our Hen House.

I’m thrilled to have been able to highlight radical, intersectional vegan activism and animal justice work on Episode 285 of the podcast, in large part by welcoming onto the show three incredible activists: queer activist and prison abolitionist Hana Low of the Colorado Anti-Violence Program; the Black Feminist Blogger herself Aph Ko; and Jacqueline Morr, founder and editor of the feminist vegan zineProject Intersect. Also  joining me to introduce our interviewees is my fellow vegan activist, classmate, and good friend Kaden Maguire, who works at both Catskill Animal Sanctuary and Treeline Cheese.

I hope that you listen, learn, and take to heart the episode.

In solidarity, Ali.

The Confused Robin: A Never-Ending Journey of De-Colonizing the Mind

Welcome to the week, everyone! Today I wanted to post something a tad different than my usual socio-political commentaries on veganism and animal justice. Lately I’ve really been trying to move through the world guided primarily by my heart, while letting my head take more of a backseat (since for most of my 20 years on this planet I’ve allowed the latter to make most of my decisions, to the detriment of my holistic well-being).

In the middle of this past spring semester, I came up against a metaphorical wall in my ability to work through tough issues and ideas–once a staunch enthusiast of the analytical essay, I realized that intellectualizing without  feeling the immense reality of those issues and ideas, I would only be able to get so far in terms of doing meaningful life work.  So I wrote my first poem. Then I wrote a short story. And those two small acts opened up a whole new way of feeling my way through the world, instead of just thinking my way through it.

In the short story I’m sharing below, I’m trying to (in a very small way) work though the (multifaceted, gargantuan, frustrating, confounding) task of decolonizing a Western mind indoctrinated by arrogance, capitalism, white supremacy, and The Enlightenment. I hope it brings some joy to your day.

Once and forever there was a young robin who moved about the woodlands with two miniature snakes living on each of her shoulders.

The snakes whispered into her ears, “You are a perfect snowflake! You deserve all the world has to offer! You will rule the skies one day!”

The robin wasn’t entirely certain where these whisperings were coming from, for the snakes were invisible to her. Nonetheless, she enjoyed their words and thought about them especially when she interacted with the other animals in the woodlands.

Then one day, the robin left the woodlands for the forest. There, the snakes were devoured piece-by-piece by the owls who lived high up in the trees.

The robin didn’t like the silence that existed in her ears without the snakes. She decided to search through the forest for more niceties to fill her ears.

First the robin came upon a swarm of dragonflies. She asked, “I don’t know what to think of myself without the whisperings! Will you help me?” But the dragonflies only whizzed beyond and through one another, creating a mass of wings and thoraxes indiscernible to the robin. She moved on.

Next the robin met a colony of ants. She once again asked, “I need the whisperings to define my place in the forest! Will you help me?” But the ants merely continued working with one another to form an entrance to their underground home by collecting individual grains of sand. So the robin moved on.

The robin next encountered a web of spiders. She asked them, “I’m lost without the whisperings! Won’t you help me?” But the spiders went on visiting each other’s spots on the web, crawling contentedly toward the next spider after conversing with the previous one. So the robin continued her search.

Finally the robin came upon a group of otters. She asked one last time, “The whisperings gave meaning to my life! Please, please help me.” But the otters persisted in their playful swimming, laughing at themselves as they knocked sea urchins against their heads. So the robin left them.

The robin was in despair. She sat in a forest clearing and began to cry. “Why do I even exist in the forest at all?” she wailed.

Soon, an owl began to slowly descend from the forest canopy and landed next to the robin. The owl advised the robin: “Think of the animals you’ve met in your journeys. Then do something with it. The first something you can do involves yourself.” And the owl soared into the sky.

Though the robin was still thoroughly confused about her place in the forest, she felt called to create something from her confusion. Hesitantly, with only a few notes at first, the robin began to chirp a song. Another robin swooped down next to her and began to chirp along in a different key and to a different tune, yet together their chirps formed an even more beautiful song. The more they chirped, the more animals gathered around them, contributing to an inspired cacophony that rang through the forest.

In solidarity, Ali.

Veganism & Bodily Autonomy

Can we talk about bodily autonomy for a hot sec? Because it’s a big reason why I advocate veganism.

Diana (Image via Heartland Farm Sanctuary)

Diana (Image via Heartland Farm Sanctuary)

So you and I and everyone around us each live in a body, and we all have different levels of comfort, safety, and ability that determine what we can do — both in the sense of being physically able to do it, and being emotionally okay with doing it — based on our different life experiences. And, if we hope to embody radical humility, then we have to understand others’ life experiences as legitimate and deserving of respect. Put two-and-two together: we as humans who strive for radical humility must respect the comfort, safety, and ability levels of the bodies of the people whose life experiences are different from our own.

That’s respecting bodily autonomy: each person’s ability to determine what they do or don’t do with their own body, as long as it does not infringe upon the bodily autonomy of others. It’s a pretty major feminist tenet. And although I would argue that it’s damn near impossible to enjoy full bodily autonomy under capitalism and state governance, I think that we can work together to ensure that we as a community contribute as little as possible to the social controls that infringe upon our ability to feel safe and comfortable in our own bodies.

Mister (Image via Heartland Farm Sanctuary)

Mister (Image via Heartland Farm Sanctuary)

That’s why consent is great and necessary, that’s why asking people before you hug them is super important, that’s why commenting on people’s size and shape is unacceptable…and that’s why I don’t eat other animals or their secretions. The body of a pig, cow, chicken, duck, lizard, or what-have-you does not belong to me, nor do any of the things that come out of their bodies (eggs, milk, etc.).

In some situations with other animals, it’s pretty clear whether or not they want me to be doing something with their bodies. For example, if Diana moseys up to me in the goat pasture at the sanctuary where I’m working this summer and starts nuzzling her head against my hand, I’m fairly confident that she’s asking me to pet her. Or if I enter Mister’s duck enclosure and he starts nipping at my legs, I’m definitely not going to bother him any more than necessary (like to stick his bowl of salad in there at dinnertime).

Sweet Pea (Image via Heartland Farm Sanctuary)

Sweet Pea (Image via Heartland Farm Sanctuary)

So unless Sweet Pea lays her egg, picks it up with her beak, and sets it in my hand, I’m not going to claim it as my own. Unless Beatrice rips off a piece of her own flesh, trots up to me and sets it at my feet, I’m sure as hell not going to take it. Otherwise, the lines of communication between me and other animals are not clear enough to ensure informed consent among all parties involved, so I’ll air on the side of caution and assume that they do not want me doing something with their bodies…including consuming it or what comes from it.

Moral of the story: please don’t do things to other people’s bodies unless they explicitly ask you to. That includes other animals. By taking this request to heart, we can work to support each other in feeling comfortable and safe in our own bodies, even when we cannot in the rest of the world.

Beatrice (Image via Heartland Farm Sanctuary)

Beatrice (Image via Heartland Farm Sanctuary)

In solidarity, Ali.


“I’ve been thinking about….” No, That’s not how Abortion is. 13 March 2014. Web. 6 June 2015.

Kate. “Bodily autonomy….” Vegan-Vulcan. 23 May 2014. Web. 6 June 2015.

Low, Hana. “Pro-choice is not anti-vegan.” Hana Low: Opening the Cages for Collective Liberation. 15 January 2015. Web. 6 June 2015.

Miss Pixie and Stuntiverse. “Consent culture (Vegan BDSM pt 2).” Ethical Kink. 23 March 2014. 6 June 2015.

—. “Power and privilege (Vegan BDSM pt 3).” Ethical Kink. 28 March 2014. 6 June 2015.

—. “Vegan BDSM.” Ethical Kink. 18 March 2014. Web. 6 June 2015.