A thought about what ‘better’ means

animal-1845413_960_720All of us are sentient individuals, the majority of whom have never been confined, never been tortured, never been mutilated deliberately and without anaesthesia, never been forcibly impregnated, never had our babies taken from us, never been hooked up to milk pumping machines or egg conveyors, never been starved and loaded onto trucks that take us to a place that smells of blood and fear, where we will hear the screams of our friends alongside the sounds of saws and machinery and know that our own death is coming.

With absolutely no personal experience of the horrors that we inflict on our sentient and desperate victims, who are we to decide how our ‘treatment’ of them while all this is happening, can be improved and better regulated? Yet this is exactly what we are presuming to do when we petition and protest for what we think are ‘better’ conditions in which to use our victims.

The only way we could ever even come close to making such an evaluation would be if we accepted that our victims are sufficiently like us for our own human preferences to apply to them.  And if we accept that our victims are sufficiently like us for our own human preferences to apply to them, then our next thought must surely be to ask by what right we use these vulnerable, thinking, feeling individuals who are just like us, as if they were objects that exist solely for our indulgence.  When we accept that our victims are sufficiently like us for our own human preferences to apply to them, we realise that we must re-cast ourselves, not in the role of ‘conscientious animal lovers’ which many of us favour, but rather in the role of extremely violent predators whose every victim is an unnecessary one who desperately wanted to live.

Given that this line of thought is so horrific that we are taught from our earliest childhood to suppress it, it is no surprise to find that the majority of us find it difficult to face the reality of what we do to our victims in order to use them as nonvegan resources. Nevertheless, we need to face the consequences of our actions if we are to be the people we already like to think we are.

The problem is not how or where we use our victims. The problem is that we HAVE victims. It’s just plain wrong in every sense. Be vegan.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Abolition vs Welfare, Single Issue Campaigns and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to A thought about what ‘better’ means

  1. AWeird LilCritter (Susanne) says:

    *sarcasm ON*
    If we are so sure, that we are able to tell what a “good way” to die is for other species, then surely we must know even better for our own species. So how come we cry out in horror, each time some human shoots or kills other humans? Surely, we can trust that the killer was able to tell the right way to kill someone else. Can’t we?
    *sarcasm OFF*

    Thanks for your clear, yet empathetic, words. I so appreciate and cherish your blog. It keeps me sane in an insane world.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Nancy Camille says:

    You put this so eloquently. I hope your message spreads and spreads.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. Graeme M says:

    Reblogged this on Sparkling Whines and commented:
    I wrote about the matter of welfare policies for farmed animals being something of a red herring. In outlining my position on this matter, I responded to arguments put forward by Temple Grandin. I pointed out that Temple’s claims rest on the proposition that we MUST eat animals, a proposition I regard as flawed. It seems to me that while better welfare policies and practices do confer some improvements for the experiences of farmed animals, this is something of a salve to conscience that legitimises the very fact that we farm them with all the harm this entails.

    The following post reblogged here from There’s An Elephant In The Room succinctly captures a similar view…

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Graeme M says:

    I like your thoughts on this. Coincidentally I just blogged about this very issue of “better” welfare for farmed animals. It seems to me that while better welfare policies and practices do confer some improvements for the experiences of farmed animals, this is something of a salve to conscience that legitimises the very fact that we farm them with all the harm this entails.

    https://gm136.wordpress.com/2017/01/05/pragmatic-welfare-policies-for-farmed-animals-important-but-is-the-very-idea-a-red-herring/

    Liked by 3 people

  5. proudwomon says:

    thank you for your so very articulate words… always you speak for and of our sentient kin so very respectfully… i wish i was the wordsmith that you are,…

    Liked by 4 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s