This post expresses in words and photographs the difference between Goodness and Beauty versus Evil and Ugliness, the difference between Hope and Despair. As ethical individuals, we make our choice at every meal whether to embody (literally embody) Justice or Injustice, Happiness or Misery. For an informed person committed to Ethics and endowed with Empathy for our fellow creatures, it isn't even a choice. It's a given. Thank you, Unparalleled Suffering, for making this clear.
Thank you Karen for your comment, I wholeheartedly agree. Too many people are living as if we don't have choices, but it is crystal clear that we do, and the difference between the choices are profound.
As always... clear, consise, truthful and artfully written and photographed. Humans easily accept that the use of other sentient individuals, when done with significant "purpose", (as determined by the users), is moraly acceptable. Welfareism supports such use as long as 'users' can say that they are attempting to mitigate suffering. It is an ugly, unforgivable belief that allows us to churn out victims by the billions. We need to choose freedom for others, not slavery and death. We must end this horrific cycle of use.
These photos are well chosen, illustrating the radical differences in animals' lives that are consequences of human choices. I was especially taken by the tranquil shot of the reclining cow with her calf. It reminded me of a troubling movie I saw recently, the biopic of 2010 "Temple Grandin," with a magnificent performance by Claire Danes in the title role. There is of course much beauty in this story of a misunderstood genius, who with the help of a small number of people who love her manages to overcome the obstacles resulting from her autism, then sexism as she enters a male-dominated world. But it's impossible to overlook the hideous conflict in Grandin's life: she is so extraordinarily attentive and observant of cows, full of sympathy for them, and wanting them to be at peace, on the one hand; on the other, she always worked for the beef industry, and somehow has found no moral problem in that. The highlight of the movie, and of her biography in general apparently, is that she has designed a complicated labyrinth through which cattle can easily pass without fear or stress, at the end of which they are shot with a stun gun and slaughtered: what a remarkably weird marriage of profound sympathy and deadly exploitation! Unfortunately, Grandinism, as I call it, has become the ethical "choice" of a great number of otherwise thoughtful Americans: they know they want to eat meat, feel entitled to do so, and cannot envision a world in which that does not happen; so the ethical consideration is restricted to making sure the captive exploited animals do not at any point suffer. And so at the end the movie assures viewers that over half the slaughterhouses for cattle in the US are based on Grandin's designs. Aside from the well-documented fact that there are no captive, farmed animals who are not subjected to ill treatment at some point in their lives -- and for the great majority it's every single moment of their lives -- , thanks to capitalism and the profit motive, Grandinism is obviously a huge error in moral choice-making.
I've spoken to Temple Grandin live over video on the internet and I asked her what she thought of animal sanctuaries. and she got really uncomfortable right away and tried to talk about how great exploiting animals is for the animals. It was really bizarre. I saw that movie you mentioned too. I'd like to read her books as well, one of her most recent ones focuses on "humane" slaughter. She was also featured in the wonderful vegan-related documentary Speciesism: The Movie. Thank you for your comment.
This post expresses in words and photographs the difference between Goodness and Beauty versus Evil and Ugliness, the difference between Hope and Despair. As ethical individuals, we make our choice at every meal whether to embody (literally embody) Justice or Injustice, Happiness or Misery. For an informed person committed to Ethics and endowed with Empathy for our fellow creatures, it isn't even a choice. It's a given. Thank you, Unparalleled Suffering, for making this clear.
Thank you Karen for your comment, I wholeheartedly agree. Too many people are living as if we don't have choices, but it is crystal clear that we do, and the difference between the choices are profound.
As always... clear, consise, truthful and artfully written and photographed. Humans easily accept that the use of other sentient individuals, when done with significant "purpose", (as determined by the users), is moraly acceptable. Welfareism supports such use as long as 'users' can say that they are attempting to mitigate suffering. It is an ugly, unforgivable belief that allows us to churn out victims by the billions. We need to choose freedom for others, not slavery and death. We must end this horrific cycle of use.
From commodities to the individuals they always were and are. Really enjoyed this thoughtful and well-written post.
These photos are well chosen, illustrating the radical differences in animals' lives that are consequences of human choices. I was especially taken by the tranquil shot of the reclining cow with her calf. It reminded me of a troubling movie I saw recently, the biopic of 2010 "Temple Grandin," with a magnificent performance by Claire Danes in the title role. There is of course much beauty in this story of a misunderstood genius, who with the help of a small number of people who love her manages to overcome the obstacles resulting from her autism, then sexism as she enters a male-dominated world. But it's impossible to overlook the hideous conflict in Grandin's life: she is so extraordinarily attentive and observant of cows, full of sympathy for them, and wanting them to be at peace, on the one hand; on the other, she always worked for the beef industry, and somehow has found no moral problem in that. The highlight of the movie, and of her biography in general apparently, is that she has designed a complicated labyrinth through which cattle can easily pass without fear or stress, at the end of which they are shot with a stun gun and slaughtered: what a remarkably weird marriage of profound sympathy and deadly exploitation! Unfortunately, Grandinism, as I call it, has become the ethical "choice" of a great number of otherwise thoughtful Americans: they know they want to eat meat, feel entitled to do so, and cannot envision a world in which that does not happen; so the ethical consideration is restricted to making sure the captive exploited animals do not at any point suffer. And so at the end the movie assures viewers that over half the slaughterhouses for cattle in the US are based on Grandin's designs. Aside from the well-documented fact that there are no captive, farmed animals who are not subjected to ill treatment at some point in their lives -- and for the great majority it's every single moment of their lives -- , thanks to capitalism and the profit motive, Grandinism is obviously a huge error in moral choice-making.
I've spoken to Temple Grandin live over video on the internet and I asked her what she thought of animal sanctuaries. and she got really uncomfortable right away and tried to talk about how great exploiting animals is for the animals. It was really bizarre. I saw that movie you mentioned too. I'd like to read her books as well, one of her most recent ones focuses on "humane" slaughter. She was also featured in the wonderful vegan-related documentary Speciesism: The Movie. Thank you for your comment.
That photo of the chicken staring directly at the camara seconds before she's killed really got to me.