On vegetarians/vegans who date meat eaters

Is it alright for vegetarians/vegans to date (or marry) someone who eats meat? Can a relationship made up of someone who eats meat and someone who doesn't last?

It all depends on how serious someone is about their vegetariansm/veganism and how connected he or she is to the reality of animal suffering. I personally would never date someone who eats meat. Why? Because I believe that eating meat is ethically wrong. This belief is not something superficial for me. It permeates my whole being. A lot of my time is spent on helping other animals and improving our relationship with them. The last thing I'd want is to share my life with someone who engages in something that for me and many other true animal lovers, is simply not acceptable. This would be like the parent of a molested child going out with a child molester, or an anti-abortion crusader going out with an abortion doctor.

"But relationships are all about respecting the choices that your partner makes." Now I realize that not all vegetarians/vegans choose their diet for ethical reasons, and not all of them feel as strongly or deeply as I do about animal rights. Anyone who does feel this strongly would never use the "choice" argument. If I like the color green, but my girlfriend likes red, that's her choice, and I can respect that. If she likes Paris, but I prefer Madrid, I can respect that too. I like tattoos, she doesn't - we can work something out. If, however, she believes that murdering animals for food is alright, or "necessary", then we’d have a problem. Those like me feel that killing animals (and condoning this killing by consuming their meat) is closer, on an ethical scale, to killing other people, than it is to choosing the color of a dress, a travel destination, etc.

A vegetarian friend of mine once said that she was OK with dating an "open minded omnivore". Being open-minded is great, but this should not be used to justify causing suffering or killing, whatever species we're talking about. Hypothetically, someone like this would accept that his partner is a vegetarian, but would still continue to be part of the whole death-cycle of the meat industry. No thanks. People like me, those with a deep-seated empathy for other animals look for someone who is willing to say no to violence, to stop taking part in the death cycle of eating meat; someone who actively looks for a better way to interact with the rest of the animal world.

Is it OK to eat cats and dogs?

Generally speaking, articles about eating dogs or cats get people from "Western" countries pretty upset. People in countries like Great Britain, the USA, or Germany are accustomed to thinking of these animals as "pets" and, as such, they are often loved and considered part of the family. The fact that someone would eat these animals is seen as barbaric and disgusting. To counter these accusations, supporters of eating these animals state that this is a "cultural difference", one that should be accepted even if we don't agree with it.

So who's right? Is it OK to eat cats and dogs, or is it indeed barbaric?

First of all, "cultural differences" simply doesn't cut it as an argument. Violence and murder should be seen for what they are, no matter where they happen in the world. In the same way that we wouldn't support forced female circumcision, or sex with minors just because they happen to be part of some "culture", we should not turn a blind eye to violence when it comes to our interaction with the rest of the animal world, no matter where it happens. Some things should transcend borders and cultures. I believe that it is not OK to eat any animal, - cat, dog, pig, cow, chicken, fish, or whatever. It is true, however, that many of the people who are appalled by the fact that some Asians eat dog meat are the same ones who think it's OK to eat pigs, cows, etc., despite the fact that there is growing evidence that the animals that we farm for food are no less intelligent than many of our pets, and that they can build equally meaningful relationships with us. So, does this mean that we should just dismiss "selective" carnivores?

Not really.

While we should strive to keep hypocrisy at a minimum, we should remember that any step that eliminates violence and suffering is a good step. I am personally very thankful that I live in a society that values the life of many kinds of animals, including dogs and cats. The best way to improve our relationship with other animals is by developing a personal bond with them. This is what has happened in our culture with our relationship with dogs and cats (as well as other animals we consider pets). These animals fill many of our lives with joy, and help alleviate loneliness and other negative emotions. They motivate us to become more compassionate, more empathetic. Many of us use our love for our pets as a springboard to start respecting (and possibly loving) other animals as well, including ones our society considers "food". This is a very important phenomenon, and we believe that the more love we show for selected animals, the bigger the chance of an awakening to the suffering of other animals in general, and to the unfair way our world treats them.

Whenever we see the animals that are (or are not) eaten around the world, we should learn from this, - and the lesson here is not that "all animals are fair game", but that it is indeed possible to start with respecting the life of one species, and then, hopefully, expanding that respect to include others.

Do vegetarians and vegans feed their pets meat?

Most people would agree that cats are carnivores, and need meat to survive. Dogs are omnivores. They can survive on a carefully planned, nutritious plant-based diet, though many vegetarians still feed their dogs at least some meat or meat-based dog food. Not that this matters much, but dog food generally has much less meat as a percentage than cat food does. (PS: If you have a dog, and would and would like to find out more about a vegetarian diet for dogs, check out this article, or this one.)

So isn't it hypocritical for someone to not eat meat, while still feeding meat to their pet(s)? This is a dilemma many vegetarians and vegans continue to struggle with, and understandably so. The question itself seems to require a "black or white" answer, but reality can be a lot more gray. I have four cats, and, like I stated above, cats are carnivores, so I do feed them meat-based cat food. I don't like doing this, but it was a choice that I made when I decided to take them in. All of my cats were either saved from shelters, or found sick on the streets. Was it wrong to save the lives of these animals knowing that they would need to consume meat? I personally don't think so. As I have written many times before, I’m not a big fan of the "saint or sinner", "black or white" approach to these issues, but like to see the big picture, - how one lives, what one eats, what one wears, etc. Let's take a couple who eats meat, eats dairy, wears leather, and feeds their dog meat. If they eliminate the first three things from the list, and only feed their dog meat, they will have eliminated 75% of the harm that they do, from the perspective of interacting with other animals. 75% is not 100%, but it's a lot closer to 100% than it is to 0%. At times like this, it's important to be supportive and praise someone for the progress they have made, than to mire them in guilt and call them a hypocrite for what they haven't.

An important thing to remember here is that humans (at least most of us) have a choice when it comes to eating meat or not eating meat. Animals don't have this choice. While we should respect the lives of all sentient beings, we should not mimic the behavior of these animals, such as the carnivorous diet of cats for example. I believe that were given freedom of choice so as to be able to choose a compassionate path, and that, for humans, vegetarianism and especially veganism represent progress. That said, helping carnivorous animals survive is not a bad thing. Look at the organizations that work so hard to preserve species of birds and wild animals around the world. More often than not, the animals in these refuges require fresh meat for survival. On a more local level, like many people, I care about our shelter pets. I have done what I can to help encourage people to adopt, and to spay and neuter their dogs and cats. Encouraging the spaying and neutering of pets is something that I believe everyone who cares about farm animals should get involved in, since humanely cutting down on the population of unwanted pets will go a long way to minimize the amount of meat that is used to feed these animals, thereby saving many lives.

When all's said and done, it all boils down to how comfortable you are with having a pet that requires meat to survive. Like I said, for people who truly empathize with the plight of all animals, it's often a very hard choice to make. Some vegetarians/vegans will not have pets for this reason alone, and I can respect that. I also respect and understand the other side of the argument, one that recognizes that carnivorous animals sometimes also need to be saved.

Zoos, revisited

I was going to write a short entry about the killing of Marius the giraffe at the Copenhagen zoo last week, but I came a great article by Karen Dawn that pretty much sums up my position on this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karen-dawn/they-shoot-giraffes-dont-_b_4763335.html

As the article points out, what happened to Marius is fairly widespread, though most of the cases aren't as public. It's time we took a long hard look at zoos. The model is outdated, and, contrary to popular belief, there is a lot of animal suffering that goes on there.

The archaic belief that not eating meat is unhealthy

(En español abajo)

A couple of days ago, I posted a funny image about never hearing a valid argument against vegetarianism. One of my Facebook friends, a psychiatrist, took this to heart, and decided to prove to me that a plant-based diet is, in fact, dangerous to one's health.

Now, this type of reaction is not that uncommon. People have long used the "vegetarianism/veganism is unhealthy" argument. This belief generally stems back to a long time ago, when many people still didn't think much about the unethical aspects of eating meat, so they didn't really look into alternatives to meat as much as they do now. The medical world did not really delve too deeply into vegetarianism or veganism, so a lot of the textbooks were pretty conservative in this respect. Even now, some doctors around the world are still taught somewhat archaic nutritional information, so they unfortunately still end up thinking that eating meat is the only way to go. This is the case with my psychiatrist friend. Many modern doctors have thankfully come to the realization that it is indeed possible to be healthy getting one's protein, iron, and other elements from a plant-based diet. Some have even published their findings in order to encourage others to cast aside outdated information.

People get upset when their deep-rooted dietary habits are challenged. They take this personally. Now, before you go saying that vegetarians can be closedminded too (true), let me say that I've always maintained that whether you're a carnivore, a vegetarian, or a vegan, a well-balanced diet is key, and that it is, indeed, possible to eat healthy, even if one consumes meat. My psychiatrist friend, however, is one of those people that have a hard time opening their mind to different beliefs, so he proceeded to post about six articles about the dangers of a plant-based diet, some of which were as inconsequential as individual case studies that were too specific to prove anything. I assume that he fails to acknowledge the obvious truth that both vegetarians and carnivores can have vitamin and mineral deficiencies, sometimes due to bad diet, genetics, etc., but that (once again) a well-balanced diet in both cases can ensure that we remain healthy. It always makes me smile when someone posts articles from the medical world, since, of course, two can play at that game, and one can easily post other articles citing studies that prove the exact opposite. If someone argues that vegetarianism is unhealthy, they are, in fact, saying that eating meat is healthy. This, in itself, is a very dangerous assumption, especially with the growing evidence that eating meat can, in fact, lead to all kinds of problems. A simple Google search reveals many articles which conclude that the consumption of meat can in fact bad for one's health. But, again, getting into an "article war" isn't the point. Detractors of vegetarianism will always find proof, no matter how unconvincing, to make themselves feel better about their beliefs, as will its supporters. So, as is often the case in life, it comes down to a choice. Which do you prefer, the compassionate path that seeks to save the lives of animals and prevent their suffering, or the status quo, which leads to the slaughter and suffering of millions of these animals? For me, the choice is pretty clear.

A final point, and one that's possibly most important, is that there are millions of vegetarians and vegans (like myself) out there that prove that it's possible to live a healthy life without meat. Many of us lead active lives, go to the gym, play sports, etc. We are living proof that vegetarianism/veganism is healthy, and living proof is pretty hard to argue against.

----------------------------

La creencia anticuada de que hay que comer carne para ser saludable

Hace unos días, posteé una imagen graciosa en Facebook sobre la falta de buenos argumentos en contra del vegetarianismo. Uno de mis amigos, un tal psiquiatra, se lo tomó a pecho, y decidió de comprobarme que el vegetarianismo es, de hecho, peligroso para la salud.

Esta reacción es bastante común. La gente desde hace mucho tiempo usa el argumento que "el vegetarianismo es poco saludable". Esta creencia se remonta desde hace muchos años, cuando todavía no pensábamos mucho en el aspecto inmoral de comer carne, y por lo tanto, no buscábamos alternativas como lo hacemos actualmente. Ya que en aquellos tiempos el mundo médico no investigó mucho el vegetarianismo/veganismo, muchos de sus libros de texto eran muy conservadores en este respeto. Hasta hoy en algunos países a los doctores se les enseña un enfoque nutricional anticuado, y por lo tanto muchos doctores desafortunadamente todavía creen que comer carne es absolutamente necesario. Tal es el caso de mi amigo el psiquiatra. Por suerte, muchos doctores modernos ya han llegado a la realización de que sí es posible ser saludable sin comer carne, y obtener su proteína, hierro, y otros elementos de una dieta vegetal. (Aquí es uno de ellos). Algunos de esos doctores modernos hasta conducen estudios y publican sus conclusiones para animar a los demás compañeros de desechar la información anticuada.

Mucha gente suele enojarse cuando sus costumbres alimentarias son cuestionados. Se lo toman personal. Reconozco que los vegetarianos igual pueden ser de mente estrecha, aunque yo, personalmente, siempre he creído que sin importar si eres vegetariano, vegano, carnívoro, etc., lo que importa es que tu dieta sea balanceada, y que uno puede comer relativamente sano, incluso comiendo carne. El amigo psiquiatra es una persona a quien le cuesta trabajo abrir la mente y aceptar otras creencias, así que empezó a postear varios artículos, - estudios médicos, casos prácticos, etc. sobre lo "peligrosa" que es la dieta vegetariana. Primero, los casos prácticos eran demasiados específicos para comprobar cualquier cosa. Segundo, posteando cosas así, él olvida una verdad bastante obvia - que los carnívoros tanto como los vegetarianos pueden tener deficiencias de vitaminas o minerales debido a una dieta poco balanceada, la genética, etc., pero (lo repito otra vez) con una dieta balanceada, uno suele evitar estas problemas y ser saludable (en ambos casos). Siempre me hace sonreír cuando alguien saca artículos del mundo médico, porque, obviamente, puedo pagar con la misma moneda, posteando artículos como éste o éste (de un fuente "parcial", pero con varias referencias a estudios independientes) que comprueban lo opuesto.

Si alguien argumenta que el vegetarianismo es poco saludable, de hecho está diciendo que comer carne sí lo es. Esto en si es una suposición bastante peligrosa, tomando en cuenta que actualmente hay cada vez más pruebas de que comer carne puede llevar a varios problemas de salud. Una simple búsqueda en Google nos devolverá muchos artículos como éste que concluyen que comer carne es de hecho malo para la salud. Pero, como ya he dicho, una "guerra de artículos" no es el punto. Los críticos del vegetarianismo siempre encontrarán pruebas, sin importar lo poco creíble que sean, igual que sus partidarios. Entonces, como suele pasar en la vida, es esencialmente cuestión de elección - si prefieres elegir un camino de compasión, en el cual buscas salvar vidas de animales y parar su sufrimiento, o el statu quo, que lleva a la matanza y sufrimiento de millones de estos animales. Para mi la elección es muy fácil.

Un punto final que quiero mencionar, y posiblemente el punto más importante, es que la existencia de millones de vegetarianos y veganos como yo, en si comprueba que es posible vivir una vida sana sin comer carne. Muchos llevamos una vida activa - vamos al gimnasio, hacemos deporte, etc., igual que cualquier persona que come carne. Somos la prueba viviente de que el vegetarianismo y el veganismo son saludables, y es bastante difícil argumentar contra la prueba viviente.

Biking for Animals, in hindsight

Yesterday was the official end of my Biking for Animals fundraising campaign. For those of you who aren't familiar with this campaign, it was a cross-USA bike tour that I did in 2013 to raise awareness about the estimated four million homeless pets that are killed every year in shelters across the United States, and to raise money and awareness for no-kill animal shelters (ones that don't euthanize because of time and space limitations) as well as other animal rescue organizations. The concept was to do one long bike ride in each of the 48 continental states (except for Alaska). Unfortunately, while my intentions were good, the pressure of organizing and doing everything myself eventually began to affect me physically and psychologically, and I had to end the tour in California, almost a whole month before I had planned to.

So what did I learn from this? I learned that there are a lot of good people out there who devote their whole lives to helping the animals that many of us prefer not to think about. I learned that lack of money is the biggest obstacle to allowing these people to do even more to help these animals (which is why it's so important to donate!). I learned that it's not easy to raise money! (I ended up raising very little, although I did try my best.) Some organizations on my list supported my fundraising efforts, others ignored me completely, but I hold no grudges, as all of them do great work to save the lives of innocent animals. On a personal note, I learned about my own limitations and that while it's important to help as much as we can, we have to pay attention to what our bodies are telling us, - that it's important to stay healthy, both physically and mentally, while we help. I wish everyone a very happy New Year, and hope that my words and my actions will inspire you to help animals this year, in any way you can.

(PHOTO: Me and Michelle at Philly PAWS)

Polish campaign encouraging people to stop buying live carp at Christmas

Polish tradition dictates that carp (and other fish dishes) be served on Christmas Eve. Unfortunately, many people also have the custom of buying live carp, which are often kept in the bathtub until they are killed for Christmas Eve dinner.

The goal of Polish environmental organization Klub Gaja's campaign is to minimize the suffering of these sentient animals. The campaign basically asks people not to buy live carp, - noting that the way these animals are transported, kept, and later killed all cause a lot of needless suffering to these animals.

(All of the resources are in Polish only)

https://www.facebook.com/Klub.Gaja