High blood pressure, heart problems? Other diseases? Do you want the solution? End of wars?
I am convinced that as long as we sow suffering and death to our fellow
animals, our culture will reap suffering, death and wars. As we sow, so
shall we reap
More about this in this lecture: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvZpF1R6GUo
We need to extend our love and compassion to everyone. Everyone wants
to live. If we hurt another being, we hurt ourselves. In order to kill
someone, we have to violate this individual's love and wants, we have to
crush hopes, destroy a family and friend relationships; We have to
sacrifice part of our inner love and compassion; we have to say to
ourselves that 'I don't care' in order to take someone's purpose and
life. And this has destroyed us, destroyed our society. The reason why
people inflict violence and suffering upon others is the lack of empathy
and love to others. If we instead would reinforce love and empathy at
each meal by living a vegan lifestyle, instead of destroying parts of
our love and empathy at each meal by hurting and killing someone for
'convenience' or taste, we would surely attain world peace. As long as
we sow violence and wars by our eating choices, our society and culture
will be absorbed in violence and wars.
We should stop hurting
our family. We should treat everyone with love, compassion and
nonviolence, i.e. go vegan . More information at www.vegankit.com
Regarding high blood pressure and heart problems:
The solution is not medication:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wsgt1DJQucc , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqKNfyUPzoU
The solution is a plant-based diet without any animal products, which are detrimental to human health. See also: http://www.adelicatebalance.com.au/
It is the animal products in the diet that causes most diseases.
Peace, love and light to everyone!
söndag 5 maj 2013
Djurrätt, djur skydd, djur kan inte skyddas av lagar i en icke-vegansk värld
Hej,
Lagar om djur fungerar oftast inte eftersom att de betraktas som egendom. Och de lagar som stiftas, kommer alltid att göras för att gynna producenterna och för att maximera deras vinst.
Djur kan aldrig bli skyddade så länge som de har en laglig status som 'egendom', vilket de kommer att ha så länge vi lever i en icke-vegansk värld - så länge som en majoritet betraktar sin "smakupplevelse", "nöje" eller "tradition", som viktigare än en annan individs liv. Det här är en väldigt bra artikel om detta: http://
Om vi vill se förbättringar för djur, färre djur dödade, etc, så måste vi sluta orsaka djur onödigt lidande och död för en smakupplevelse, nöje, eller bekvämlighet; vi måste ta avstånd till allt djurförtryck och sluta skada, utnyttja och döda djur genom vår val (detta kallas veganism). Ingenting annat kommer att ändra hur djuren har det, och kommer att de dem rättigheter.
Begrunda gärna: Djur älskar sin familj. Alla djur älskar sina vänner. Alla djur vill leva. Alla djur vill ha det bra. Inget djur vill bli dödat av människan. Alla djur är lika värda. Alla djur vill vara trygga. Alla djur vill uppleva kärlek. Djur är nyfikna. De har ett syfte precis som vi har ett syfte. Precis som en hunds syfte inte är att bli någons mat, så är inte heller syftet för en gris och en ko och alla andra djur att bli någons mat. Alla djur finns här, precis som oss, för att sprida kärlek, barmhärtighet och glädje till andra, att vara ett ljus i vår värld, att stödja andra och hjälpa personer i deras lidande och problem.
Alla djur är medvetenhet precis som oss. Vi har olika kroppar, men vi har alla de grundläggande karaktärsdragen som individer har. Vårt samhälle vill göra en skillnad mellan oss för att rättfärdiga vårt användande, utnyttjande och dödande för smak, njutning eller bekvämlighet, baserat på denna skillnad.
Vi måste sluta skada vår familj - alla djuren. Vi ska behandla alla med kärlek, barmhärtighet och ickevåld – alltså bli veganer. Mer information finns på http://bloganders.blogspot.com (på svenska och engelska), www.vegankit.com och World Peace Diet av Will Tuttle (www.worldpeacediet.org , som även finns på Spotify) och http://www.facebook.com/abolitionistapproach
---
Version 2:
Lagar om djur fungerar oftast inte eftersom att de betraktas som egendom. Och de lagar som stiftas, kommer alltid att göras för att gynna producenterna och för att maximera deras vinst.
Djur kan aldrig bli skyddade så länge som de har en laglig status som 'egendom', vilket de kommer att ha så länge vi lever i en icke-vegansk värld - så länge som en majoritet betraktar sin "smakupplevelse", "nöje" eller "tradition", som viktigare än en annan individs liv. Det här är en väldigt bra artikel om detta: http://
Om vi vill se förbättringar för djur, färre djur dödade, etc, så måste vi sluta orsaka djur onödigt lidande och död för en smakupplevelse, nöje, eller bekvämlighet; vi måste ta avstånd till allt djurförtryck och sluta skada, utnyttja och döda djur genom vår val (detta kallas veganism). Ingenting annat kommer att ändra hur djuren har det, och kommer att de dem rättigheter.
Vårt tänkande om djur är väldigt förvirrat. Å ena sidan så betraktar vi djur som medlemmar i vår moraliska gemenskap. Vi hävdar att vi står för det moraliska och bindande kravet att inte utsätta djur för 'onödigt' lidande. Vi kan självklart diskutera vad betydelsen är av "nödvändighet", men vad än det betyder, så måste det betyda att det inte är acceptabelt att orsaka andra individer smärta, lidande och död för mänsklig njutning, nöje, eller bekvämlighet. Om det gjorde det, så skulle undantaget av denna regel helt och hållet omkullkasta denna moraliska regel.
Problemet är att 99,99% av vårt användande av djur inte kan rättfärdiggöras av någonting annat än mänsklig njutning, nöje, eller bekvämlighet. T.ex., så dödar vi cirka 100 miljoner landlevande djur varje år i Sverige endast för mat. Ingen hävdar att det är nödvändigt att äta djurprodukter för en optimal hälsosam livsstil och det är mer och mer forskning som påvisar att djurprodukter är skadligt för människan (se t.ex. denna dokumentär: http://
[Översatt citat från http://cup.columbia.edu/
Rekommenderar även https://www.facebook.com/
Vi måste sluta skada vår familj - alla djuren. Vi ska behandla alla med kärlek, barmhärtighet och ickevåld – alltså bli veganer. Mer information finns på http://
Lagar om djur fungerar oftast inte eftersom att de betraktas som egendom. Och de lagar som stiftas, kommer alltid att göras för att gynna producenterna och för att maximera deras vinst.
Djur kan aldrig bli skyddade så länge som de har en laglig status som 'egendom', vilket de kommer att ha så länge vi lever i en icke-vegansk värld - så länge som en majoritet betraktar sin "smakupplevelse", "nöje" eller "tradition", som viktigare än en annan individs liv. Det här är en väldigt bra artikel om detta: http://
Om vi vill se förbättringar för djur, färre djur dödade, etc, så måste vi sluta orsaka djur onödigt lidande och död för en smakupplevelse, nöje, eller bekvämlighet; vi måste ta avstånd till allt djurförtryck och sluta skada, utnyttja och döda djur genom vår val (detta kallas veganism). Ingenting annat kommer att ändra hur djuren har det, och kommer att de dem rättigheter.
Begrunda gärna: Djur älskar sin familj. Alla djur älskar sina vänner. Alla djur vill leva. Alla djur vill ha det bra. Inget djur vill bli dödat av människan. Alla djur är lika värda. Alla djur vill vara trygga. Alla djur vill uppleva kärlek. Djur är nyfikna. De har ett syfte precis som vi har ett syfte. Precis som en hunds syfte inte är att bli någons mat, så är inte heller syftet för en gris och en ko och alla andra djur att bli någons mat. Alla djur finns här, precis som oss, för att sprida kärlek, barmhärtighet och glädje till andra, att vara ett ljus i vår värld, att stödja andra och hjälpa personer i deras lidande och problem.
Alla djur är medvetenhet precis som oss. Vi har olika kroppar, men vi har alla de grundläggande karaktärsdragen som individer har. Vårt samhälle vill göra en skillnad mellan oss för att rättfärdiga vårt användande, utnyttjande och dödande för smak, njutning eller bekvämlighet, baserat på denna skillnad.
Vi måste sluta skada vår familj - alla djuren. Vi ska behandla alla med kärlek, barmhärtighet och ickevåld – alltså bli veganer. Mer information finns på http://bloganders.blogspot.com (på svenska och engelska), www.vegankit.com och World Peace Diet av Will Tuttle (www.worldpeacediet.org , som även finns på Spotify) och http://www.facebook.com/abolitionistapproach
---
Version 2:
Lagar om djur fungerar oftast inte eftersom att de betraktas som egendom. Och de lagar som stiftas, kommer alltid att göras för att gynna producenterna och för att maximera deras vinst.
Djur kan aldrig bli skyddade så länge som de har en laglig status som 'egendom', vilket de kommer att ha så länge vi lever i en icke-vegansk värld - så länge som en majoritet betraktar sin "smakupplevelse", "nöje" eller "tradition", som viktigare än en annan individs liv. Det här är en väldigt bra artikel om detta: http://
Om vi vill se förbättringar för djur, färre djur dödade, etc, så måste vi sluta orsaka djur onödigt lidande och död för en smakupplevelse, nöje, eller bekvämlighet; vi måste ta avstånd till allt djurförtryck och sluta skada, utnyttja och döda djur genom vår val (detta kallas veganism). Ingenting annat kommer att ändra hur djuren har det, och kommer att de dem rättigheter.
Vårt tänkande om djur är väldigt förvirrat. Å ena sidan så betraktar vi djur som medlemmar i vår moraliska gemenskap. Vi hävdar att vi står för det moraliska och bindande kravet att inte utsätta djur för 'onödigt' lidande. Vi kan självklart diskutera vad betydelsen är av "nödvändighet", men vad än det betyder, så måste det betyda att det inte är acceptabelt att orsaka andra individer smärta, lidande och död för mänsklig njutning, nöje, eller bekvämlighet. Om det gjorde det, så skulle undantaget av denna regel helt och hållet omkullkasta denna moraliska regel.
Problemet är att 99,99% av vårt användande av djur inte kan rättfärdiggöras av någonting annat än mänsklig njutning, nöje, eller bekvämlighet. T.ex., så dödar vi cirka 100 miljoner landlevande djur varje år i Sverige endast för mat. Ingen hävdar att det är nödvändigt att äta djurprodukter för en optimal hälsosam livsstil och det är mer och mer forskning som påvisar att djurprodukter är skadligt för människan (se t.ex. denna dokumentär: http://
[Översatt citat från http://cup.columbia.edu/
Rekommenderar även https://www.facebook.com/
Vi måste sluta skada vår familj - alla djuren. Vi ska behandla alla med kärlek, barmhärtighet och ickevåld – alltså bli veganer. Mer information finns på http://
lördag 4 maj 2013
A vegan diet treats colon cancer
In this short and powerful testimony Chris Ward shares his story of how he refused chemotherapy and cured himself with a raw vegan diet.
-----
Colon cancer arises from polyps—35 percent of people consuming the typical Western diet are found to have colon polyps. Meat, fat, and the lack of fruits, vegetables, and dietary fiber are the primary causes of polyps and subsequent colon cancer.
http://pcrm.org/kickstartHome/celebrity/mcdougall/index.cfm
Quote: John A. McDougall, M.D., is a physician and nutrition expert
A vegan diet is best for our physical health ( See the research in http://www.adelicatebalance.com.au/ ) and our spiritual health, see World Peace Diet by Will Tuttle (see this lecture: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvZpF1R6GUo and www.worldpeacediet.org)
Please consider this:
"
Gary Francione: I mean that our thinking about animals is very confused. On one hand, we claim to regard animals as members of the moral community. We claim to embrace a moral and legal obligation not to inflict “unnecessary” suffering or death on animals. We can, of course, debate the meaning of “necessity,” but whatever it means, it must rule out suffering and death imposed for reasons of human pleasure, amusement, or convenience. If it does not do so, then the exception would completely swallow the moral rule.
The problem is that 99.99% of our animal use cannot be justified by anything but human pleasure, amusement, or convenience. For example, we kill more than 12 billion land animals every year in the United States alone for food. No one maintains that it is necessary to eat animals to lead an optimally healthy lifestyle and an increasing number of mainstream health care professionals tell us that animal foods are detrimental to our health. Animal agriculture is a disaster for the environment because it involves a most inefficient use of natural resources and creates water pollution, soil erosion, and greenhouse gasses. The only justification that we have for the pain, suffering, and death that we impose on these billions of animals is that we enjoy eating animal foods, or that it is convenient to do so, or that it is just plain habit.
We regard some animals—our “pets”—as members of our families. We see them as nonhuman persons. We love them and they love us back. We are not in any way speaking or thinking anthropomorphically when we say that dogs and cats are sentient beings with distinct personalities. That is simply a matter of fact. We have no doubt that they have an interest in avoiding pain, suffering, and death. We grieve when they die. But our dogs and cats are no different from the animals whose bodies we eat or who are used to produce dairy and eggs. We love some animals; we stick forks into others. That is what I mean by “moral schizophrenia.”"
http://cup.columbia.edu/static/interview-gary-francione
-----
Colon cancer arises from polyps—35 percent of people consuming the typical Western diet are found to have colon polyps. Meat, fat, and the lack of fruits, vegetables, and dietary fiber are the primary causes of polyps and subsequent colon cancer.
http://pcrm.org/kickstartHome/celebrity/mcdougall/index.cfm
Quote: John A. McDougall, M.D., is a physician and nutrition expert
A vegan diet is best for our physical health ( See the research in http://www.adelicatebalance.com.au/ ) and our spiritual health, see World Peace Diet by Will Tuttle (see this lecture: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvZpF1R6GUo and www.worldpeacediet.org)
Please consider this:
"
Gary Francione: I mean that our thinking about animals is very confused. On one hand, we claim to regard animals as members of the moral community. We claim to embrace a moral and legal obligation not to inflict “unnecessary” suffering or death on animals. We can, of course, debate the meaning of “necessity,” but whatever it means, it must rule out suffering and death imposed for reasons of human pleasure, amusement, or convenience. If it does not do so, then the exception would completely swallow the moral rule.
The problem is that 99.99% of our animal use cannot be justified by anything but human pleasure, amusement, or convenience. For example, we kill more than 12 billion land animals every year in the United States alone for food. No one maintains that it is necessary to eat animals to lead an optimally healthy lifestyle and an increasing number of mainstream health care professionals tell us that animal foods are detrimental to our health. Animal agriculture is a disaster for the environment because it involves a most inefficient use of natural resources and creates water pollution, soil erosion, and greenhouse gasses. The only justification that we have for the pain, suffering, and death that we impose on these billions of animals is that we enjoy eating animal foods, or that it is convenient to do so, or that it is just plain habit.
We regard some animals—our “pets”—as members of our families. We see them as nonhuman persons. We love them and they love us back. We are not in any way speaking or thinking anthropomorphically when we say that dogs and cats are sentient beings with distinct personalities. That is simply a matter of fact. We have no doubt that they have an interest in avoiding pain, suffering, and death. We grieve when they die. But our dogs and cats are no different from the animals whose bodies we eat or who are used to produce dairy and eggs. We love some animals; we stick forks into others. That is what I mean by “moral schizophrenia.”"
http://cup.columbia.edu/static/interview-gary-francione
Humans don't eat meat for survival
Lorr Aine,
Thank you! So glad that it gave you alot to think of and that you will look into it.
It is so wonderful with love, compassion and peace, and the more we extend it to other beings - regardless of whether it is a human, dog, cow, or other animal - the more we also transform the world, and we transform ourselves.
You asked me: "Can I ask a question? If the chips were down, the world was invaded, and the way we live our lives now was a thing of the past.......and the only way for us to survive was to eat animal, would that still be wrong??"
Would you think it was wrong to eat humans in order to survive?
I believe in nonviolence. I wouldn't kill and eat human animals, nor kill and eat nonhuman animals. This is an article I recommend on the topic of nonviolence: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/a-comment-on-violence/#.UYUj9cqiFI0
But in any instance, even persons who don't believe in this: Our current violence and slavery towards animals is inflicting unnecessary suffering and death upon them; and 99% of our population understand that inflicting unneccessary suffering and death upon animals is morally wrong. I recommend this article discussing this: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/what-michael-vick-taught-us/
Thank you! So glad that it gave you alot to think of and that you will look into it.
It is so wonderful with love, compassion and peace, and the more we extend it to other beings - regardless of whether it is a human, dog, cow, or other animal - the more we also transform the world, and we transform ourselves.
You asked me: "Can I ask a question? If the chips were down, the world was invaded, and the way we live our lives now was a thing of the past.......and the only way for us to survive was to eat animal, would that still be wrong??"
Would you think it was wrong to eat humans in order to survive?
I believe in nonviolence. I wouldn't kill and eat human animals, nor kill and eat nonhuman animals. This is an article I recommend on the topic of nonviolence: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/a-comment-on-violence/#.UYUj9cqiFI0
But in any instance, even persons who don't believe in this: Our current violence and slavery towards animals is inflicting unnecessary suffering and death upon them; and 99% of our population understand that inflicting unneccessary suffering and death upon animals is morally wrong. I recommend this article discussing this: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/what-michael-vick-taught-us/
The reason of wars and injustices in our society, is the suffering, death and injustices we cause non-human animals
Lorr Aine,
We are all trying to do our best to live ethical and peaceful lives. And I really value that you love peace!!!
However, our cultural indoctrintion since we were children, has made us lose the understanding of why it is wrong to take another sentient being's life for a taste experience.
If you understood the connection between us inflicting suffering, death, injustices and war against the other non-human animals, also causes war, injustices, and suffering among human animals, you wouldn't eat animal products - since you would understand that it goes against your moral understanding of what is right and wrong.
Cows, dogs, chickens, and other animals they all value their lifes as much as we do.
I have written this before, but I am not sure whether you read it or not:
We are all one, we are all consciousness, we all love, we all feel, we are. If we sow suffering, we reap suffering. We all have a purpose, to serve, to be a light, not to hurt or use (all animal products and the treatment of animals as commodities are hurting animals). I highly recommend World Peace Diet by Will Tuttle, www.worldpeacediet.org . It is a really transformative book!
We need to extend our love and compassion to everyone. Everyone wants to live. If we hurt another being, we hurt ourselves. In order to kill someone, we have to violate this individual's love and wants, we have to crush hopes, destroy a family and friend relationships; We have to sacrifice part of our inner love and compassion; we have to say to ourselves that 'I don't care' in order to take someone's purpose and life. And this has destroyed us, destroyed our society. The reason why people inflict violence and suffering upon others is the lack of empathy and love to others. If we instead would reinforce love and empathy at each meal by living a vegan lifestyle, instead of destroying parts of our love and empathy at each meal by hurting and killing someone for 'convenience' or taste, we would surely attain world peace. As long as we sow violence and wars, our culture will be inflicted with violence, wars and injustice.
Have a wonderful day!! :)
X
We are all trying to do our best to live ethical and peaceful lives. And I really value that you love peace!!!
However, our cultural indoctrintion since we were children, has made us lose the understanding of why it is wrong to take another sentient being's life for a taste experience.
If you understood the connection between us inflicting suffering, death, injustices and war against the other non-human animals, also causes war, injustices, and suffering among human animals, you wouldn't eat animal products - since you would understand that it goes against your moral understanding of what is right and wrong.
Cows, dogs, chickens, and other animals they all value their lifes as much as we do.
I have written this before, but I am not sure whether you read it or not:
We are all one, we are all consciousness, we all love, we all feel, we are. If we sow suffering, we reap suffering. We all have a purpose, to serve, to be a light, not to hurt or use (all animal products and the treatment of animals as commodities are hurting animals). I highly recommend World Peace Diet by Will Tuttle, www.worldpeacediet.org . It is a really transformative book!
We need to extend our love and compassion to everyone. Everyone wants to live. If we hurt another being, we hurt ourselves. In order to kill someone, we have to violate this individual's love and wants, we have to crush hopes, destroy a family and friend relationships; We have to sacrifice part of our inner love and compassion; we have to say to ourselves that 'I don't care' in order to take someone's purpose and life. And this has destroyed us, destroyed our society. The reason why people inflict violence and suffering upon others is the lack of empathy and love to others. If we instead would reinforce love and empathy at each meal by living a vegan lifestyle, instead of destroying parts of our love and empathy at each meal by hurting and killing someone for 'convenience' or taste, we would surely attain world peace. As long as we sow violence and wars, our culture will be inflicted with violence, wars and injustice.
Have a wonderful day!! :)
X
Milk industry hurts and kills animals, and is taking calves away from their mothers
Did you know this about milk products:
They are bad for our health, just like all animal products: see: http://www.adelicatebalance.com.au/ . Drinking milk and eating milk products hurts and kills other conscious beings who love and value their life as much as we value our life.
The milk industry and all other animal industry is causing so much suffering and death to these wonderful cows: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcQ6yBEE5N0&feature=player_embedded
Families are divided, 5-year old milk cows and male calves are killed, mother cows and their babies are separted for always after some hours, or at most after some days, it destroys families and peer relations. Learn more about what they go through here: http://www.vegankit.com/why
I recommend this wonderful lecture: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLgGnP0pWzM
They are bad for our health, just like all animal products: see: http://www.adelicatebalance.com.au/ . Drinking milk and eating milk products hurts and kills other conscious beings who love and value their life as much as we value our life.
The milk industry and all other animal industry is causing so much suffering and death to these wonderful cows: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcQ6yBEE5N0&feature=player_embedded
Families are divided, 5-year old milk cows and male calves are killed, mother cows and their babies are separted for always after some hours, or at most after some days, it destroys families and peer relations. Learn more about what they go through here: http://www.vegankit.com/why
I recommend this wonderful lecture: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLgGnP0pWzM
fredag 3 maj 2013
Pornography and sexism is morally wrong and hurts women
Good quote by Gary Francione:
A question I received from another academic:
"You argue that pornography is bad and should be abolished. Surely, then, you support censorship?"
My reply:
"I do not support censorship as governments have a bad track record of censoring the wrong things. Moreover, censorship will never change anyone's thinking; it just makes whatever is censored more difficult to get. Having said this, I did, some years ago, support the efforts of people like the late Andrea Dworkin, and others, to make illegal certain sorts of violent pornography (rape porn, torture porn, etc.). I still believe that the world would be *way* better off without that garbage.
My present view is that we need to educate men about why they should not consume pornography. My argument is straightforward and analogous to my position about animal exploitation: If we regard animals as having moral value (as most of us claim we do), then we cannot justify consuming them. Period. Similarly, if we think, as many of us claim to think, that women really are equal to men and that patriarchy is both unjust and unjustifiable, then we cannot justify consuming pornography. Period. Pornography is a primary propaganda tool used by patriarchy to perpetuate the objectification of women and reinforce their second-class citizenship. So if we mean what we say about equality and justice for women, pornography is no longer something we *can* choose to consume. It is no longer a morally defensible option.
Two further points:
First, I anticipate that you will reply and say that I am focused only on pornography depicting women and I am, therefore, using a double standard. That would be wrong. Although I think that all pornography is problematic in that commodifies others, I regard porn depicting women as more problematic and qualitatively so. In a patriarchal society, porn depicting men simply *cannot*, as a matter of social structure, have the same meaning or effect. This situation is similar (although not identical) to racism. In a racist society, racist views held by a minority are not the same as racist views held by the majority in terms of meaning or effect.
Second, I get a great deal of mail--often hostile and angry--from people who claim that participation in the "sex industry," including the production of pornography, can "empower" women. Frankly, I don't think that the "sex industry" does anything to "empower" anyone and I think we need to focus on how patriarchy harms and destroys women, and not on how patriarchy can "benefit" them. I also think that we must recognize that in a patriarchal society, *all* women are commodified to a greater or lesser degree and are offered choices that require that they self-commodify. That is a very great tragedy and a serious injustice."
------
A question I received from another academic:
"You argue that pornography is bad and should be abolished. Surely, then, you support censorship?"
My reply:
"I do not support censorship as governments have a bad track record of censoring the wrong things. Moreover, censorship will never change anyone's thinking; it just makes whatever is censored more difficult to get. Having said this, I did, some years ago, support the efforts of people like the late Andrea Dworkin, and others, to make illegal certain sorts of violent pornography (rape porn, torture porn, etc.). I still believe that the world would be *way* better off without that garbage.
My present view is that we need to educate men about why they should not consume pornography. My argument is straightforward and analogous to my position about animal exploitation: If we regard animals as having moral value (as most of us claim we do), then we cannot justify consuming them. Period. Similarly, if we think, as many of us claim to think, that women really are equal to men and that patriarchy is both unjust and unjustifiable, then we cannot justify consuming pornography. Period. Pornography is a primary propaganda tool used by patriarchy to perpetuate the objectification of women and reinforce their second-class citizenship. So if we mean what we say about equality and justice for women, pornography is no longer something we *can* choose to consume. It is no longer a morally defensible option.
Two further points:
First, I anticipate that you will reply and say that I am focused only on pornography depicting women and I am, therefore, using a double standard. That would be wrong. Although I think that all pornography is problematic in that commodifies others, I regard porn depicting women as more problematic and qualitatively so. In a patriarchal society, porn depicting men simply *cannot*, as a matter of social structure, have the same meaning or effect. This situation is similar (although not identical) to racism. In a racist society, racist views held by a minority are not the same as racist views held by the majority in terms of meaning or effect.
Second, I get a great deal of mail--often hostile and angry--from people who claim that participation in the "sex industry," including the production of pornography, can "empower" women. Frankly, I don't think that the "sex industry" does anything to "empower" anyone and I think we need to focus on how patriarchy harms and destroys women, and not on how patriarchy can "benefit" them. I also think that we must recognize that in a patriarchal society, *all* women are commodified to a greater or lesser degree and are offered choices that require that they self-commodify. That is a very great tragedy and a serious injustice."
------
Gary L. Francione: The Abolitionist Approach to Animal Rights Ervin Phillips:
I would suggest that in a patriarchal society, particularly one that is
also racist and classist, the notion of "consent" is far from the
simple idea that you seem to think it is. Let me ask you: do you think a
poor woman of color in Newark or Detroit who engages in prostitution is
"consenting" in any meaningful sense? I sure as hell don't.
----
Gary L. Francione: The Abolitionist Approach to Animal Rights Linda McKenzie:
My view is that is somewhat similar to asking about where I draw the
line on sentience. There may be unclear cases but let's worry about the
cases where there is no doubt about sentience. In the porn context, in
discussing these issues with men, I have never had a man ask, "well,
does this mean that I shouldn't read D.H. Lawrence?" There's
soooooooooooooooo much that is clearly porn, let's worry about where
porn ends and where literature begins later, especially since we are
*not* talking about government censorship but only about voluntary
behavior. I am not sure what you mean by "erotica," but one of my
concerns is that in a patriarchal society, almost everything we find
arousing is linked to hierarchy and that concerns me.
Sarah K. Woodcock Gary,
I agree with your views on pornography. After all, if we reject the
commodification of sentient beings, we can't directly participate in
their blatant objectification and say we are being morally consistent.
Being vegan and being a feminist both necessitate rejecting the products
of exploitive systems neither of which deserve our funding.
Nicole Monaghan I
agree with your views on pornography. I am friends with a "sex worker"
who does not comprehend the reality of internalized sexism and coercion.
It's very sad that self-proclaimed feminists uphold to the belief that
selling oneself for sex is empowering.
I think a lot this confusion stems from current Women's Studies
programs in universities, which have entire courses on "sex work" and
how we should make the practices safer, etc, rather than abolishing the
industries. I think more campaigns need to exist to help young women and
men understand how they've internalized sexism, and how it harms them.
It's unbelievable how we can get through our entire lives without
realizing harmful social forces.
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)