Animals Should Be Off The Menu

Add a Comment

Comment by Billy L on April 21, 2012 at 21:52

It was also interesting that a man who raises, was it rare breed or heritage cattle, sold in Fiona's shop had to be the one to call out Veronica about promoting dairy! We can argue that we don't know what direction people will go whether we say go vegan or "humane" animal products are promoted, but this example shows that even animal exploiters get it sometimes, more so than some animal advocates!

How interesting that when the chef was asked what was natural about various animal farming and slaughter techniques, he basically said not to buy it if you don't like it and it will stop - an author of a book about meat.

I agree about what Lisa brought up. Derrick Jensen and Lierre Keith have a very similar take on viewing the entire ecology, and the interdependency of all organisms. It's something that animal rights (whatever approach it's based on) does not explicitly address (I'll be curious to see if Fiona is refuted in any way when I finish the last 40 minutes of the debate).

Phil Wollen made an excellent speech. There are so many humans that simply dismiss everything he says, as much as we all agree with it - they can watch Earthlings and still have the attitude of the opposition's chef, that they love to kill and eat animals, and what is important is to do it the humane way.

Comment by Lisa V on April 17, 2012 at 14:57

In watching this (and I'm not even halfway through, so ...), I had to at least initially conclude that it really doesn't matter if Peter Singer says he's vegan or vegetarian.

What concerns me is that Fiona Chambers is making some compelling and attractive points, especially for those who are already concerned about what they eat, the environment, and animals. I think her arguments are factually wrong. But she, and others like her, are quite convincing ... and on quite a massive scale. I think, if creating more vegans is the goal, that effectively countering the "but we MUST have animals in sustainable agriculture!" argument might be more effective than nitpicking one vegetarian (or vegan, or whatever he is).

Comment by Jordan Wyatt on April 16, 2012 at 9:31

Fair point Carolyn, just being my over the top self :-)

I do think it would have been as easy to say Vegan as Vegetarian - easier in fact, it's shorter! I can see how the topic is directly about flesh, "meat", but if they are all vegan or the dreaded "vegan-ish", surely they could mention it? My friend Carl Scott put himself into a cage for a month to protest caged Hens kept alive to take their eggs. I asked Carl how he felt about having one focus, on one example of harm, getting egg laying Hens out of cages when he himself is Vegan, and said while I do think a campaign for up front Veganism seems to me like our best route to Veganism, I couldn't thank him enough for saying on live prime time television "...well I'm vegan, but I don't see everyone going Vegan overnight, so I'm focusing on caged Hens....."

Of all the times the group he became affiliated with has been on television, in newspapers, on the radio, I can't ever really remember them saying the mere word "Vegan" when they had a chance to really do some good. Just getting the word and a brief understanding of what it means to be Vegan out there in the mainstream is so very important to me. Five years ago, I'd been out killing Other Animals myself, asking for "Meat Lovers pizza", I'd never even seen or heard of the word Vegan.

The chef in particular who is FOR "meat on the menu" is interesting, I have many clips of him basically pointing out why vegetarians should be vegan. It's amazing to hear "the other side" realise and publicly state the vegan truth when our own representatives seem to shy from it! ie, "cheese is just as bad, and its something a lot of vegetarians rely on (that's actually said!), cheese kills animals too....", as though cheese is something we couldn't possibly give up, that we "vegetarians" have to accept we are just as responsible for deaths!

I apologise for the word I used, they all made a better case than I would have in the same situation! I'd just like if we could all be up front about who we are and what we are really asking for.

Imagine if politicians felt that way too! :-P

Comment by Carolyn Bailey on April 16, 2012 at 9:01

I think it was a mistake to quote food obtained from other animals too, but, in a debate titled "Should Animals be off the Menu", I can understand the focus on vegetarianism, rather then veganism, from a tactical point. I don't understand how that can be classed as "cowardly". 

I think that Phil Wollen's talk was excellent. He does some amazing work in Australia, and across the globe, and his passion was obvious in this debate. 

One thing I'm curious about; if Professor Singer claims to be vegan, he is criticised, but if he claims to be vegetarian, he is criticised. Is there a label he should place on himself to avoid such criticism in future? 

Comment by Kerry Baker on April 16, 2012 at 8:12

That was obvious to us and I was disappointed too.  But I suspect that the majority of people attending were not that informed and perhaps they were trying to take a generalist view that people would understand and not feel threatened by.  In my experience most people do feel strongly threatened when exposed to why one would be vegan, ad I think they were trying to make points without making it threatening.  Having said that, I think it would have been entirely appropriate to choose vegan food to illustrate how delicious vegan cuisine can be.

Comment by Jordan Wyatt on April 15, 2012 at 19:25

heres the full video link, 400MB to download


http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/tv/bigideas/iq2_animalsoffthemenu_full.mp4 

 

Comment by Jordan Wyatt on April 15, 2012 at 19:22

sounds pretty cowardly to me Roger, although I havnt listened to it yet (I'll try and get the audio)

To "slip up" and mention Veganism, and then have to explain "oh yeah, I'm actually Vegan, not Vegetarian" sounds pretty bad.