Vegan Gary Francione: Why I'm Against 'Meatless Mondays'
Happy New Year. I certainly disagree with the idea of a “Meatless Monday.” But I wanted to offer a brief thought about this matter.
As you all know, I advocate veganism and I think that animal activism should consist primarily of nonviolent, creative vegan education. We ought to emphasize that veganism is easy and that anyone can go vegan today, right now, if they want to do so.
Having said that, if someone says to me, “I want to go vegan but I really cannot do it immediately,” I make clear that I think that the consumption of any animal products is not morally justifiable but I often suggest that such people go vegan for breakfast for some time period, then for lunch for some time period, then for dinner. I never advise that that they eat “cage-free” eggs or eat “happy” meat.
Similarly, I have suggested that people who are intransigent about going vegan immediately but who want to go vegan try going vegan for a day, and the try doing that a few days later, etc., until all 7 days are vegan.
In this sense, I would have no objection to “Vegan Mondays” (or whatever day) if it were made clear that this was: (1) in recognition of the ethical imperative that we cannot justify animal use; and (2) just one step toward complete veganism.
“Meatless Mondays” reinforces the idea that animal flesh is morally distinguishable from other animal foods. It is also promoted by many as an end in itself to reduce the environmental consequences of flesh consumption or as a health measure similar to reducing alcohol consumption. For these reasons, I do not support “Meatless Mondays.”
But I would support a “Vegan [Day]” if it were clear that this was a matter of our moral obligations to nonhuman animals and if it were explicitly portrayed as intended to be an incremental step toward complete veganism. I certainly am not opposed to making it clear that animal products are injurious to health and have deleterious environmental consequences. But I think that the central focus of such a day should be a moral reflection about animal use and a message that we ought to be moving to full-time veganism.
We should, however, never stop emphasizing that veganism is easy and is something that anyone can do right now to take a positive and significant step in the direction of nonviolence.
“Vegan [Day]” would at least have the virtue of reinforcing the notion that there is no morally significant distinction between flesh and other animal products, a fantasy that is continually promoted by many animal advocates.
And remember: THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it.
Gary L. Francione
Related posts:
Vegan Education Made Easy—Part 2
Making a Vegan Education Kiosk
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
I don't necessarily disagree with Mr. Francione on the reasons for veganism or even that having a vegan day would be a good idea.
My problem is that instead of doing the work involved in putting together a vegan day campaign he'd rather sit back and criticize the efforts of others who are probably for the most part on his side - they just for whatever reason (likely through experience in running public awareness and education campaigns) know that a "Meatless Monday" approach would be more far reaching and serve as a more effective vehicle for opening the door to the benefits of plant-based diets and the issues - both ethical and environmental.
That said I think there is room for a "Vegan Thursday" doesn't quite have the same ring to it as "Meatless Monday." So I'll wait for Mr. Francione to launch his campaign and I'll support it.
Isn't there a saying about those that can't do or don't do become critics ?
There is SO MUCH convincing information out there that eating meat , the way it is currently 'produced' in our country, is not good for you, and in fact, could be dangerous. We ARE at the top of the food chain, but we can THINK and thinking people/intelligent people should chose a vegetarian or vegan diet . It is better for you, the planet, and the animals . Those who try to make those of us who chose a 'kinder' diet out to be 'crazy,' are really doing themselves a disservice. Do some research. Get smart about this. Insulting vegans or vegetarians is a pathetic way to make an argument.
Drag out your pseudoscience. That will convince people for sure
People have been eating meat since the days when cave men beat each other over the head with clubs
Mostly, I suspect, to make other people change their viewpoint
The wacky people, like the enviro mental "movement," are just absurd and I am sick of the media paying attention to them.
These groups spend their existence trying to make people act and think like they do,
what a damned poor excuse for nothing to do, than try to eliminate carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and not eat meat .
A freaking joke and it's not funny any more
Not all people who advocate a vegan or vegetarian diet are 'wacky.' This is what makes those of you opposed to this choice look so foolish.
I have not bought in to the global warming craziness, although I would certainly advocate for keeping the environment clean and reserving open spaces for future generations, but I don't consider this 'wacky,' just sane and thoughful.
Everyone has a right to their own beliefs, no matter how absurd, so long as those beliefs don't interfere with other people's right to existence, and what they believe.
I oppose people attempting to convert other people to their own (religious) system, and this becomes really nauseating when people try to add some "scientific" flavor to it.
As far as future generations and what they want - well, if they don't like what they see, and they own the property, then let 'em tear down what they don't like and put what they want in its place. There is absolutely nothing "permanent" in this world, except, evidently, the belief that people can change other people to make them be what they want them to be or become
I say look at it this way... It's not about converting people but inspiring them to extend as you say "interfering with other peoples rights to existence" to non-human animals as well -- as these animals too have an interest in their lives and avoiding pain and suffering. If someone chooses to inflict pain on their dog for pleasure, for the most part the public sees this as wrong and we've passed laws against some of the more heinous treatments. In the past " pets " could openly be treated down right cruel but collectively, thanks to animal rights outreach, we as a public we are growing to agree there should be some rights protected. We even get outraged when someone like Vick is caught dog fighting and killing dogs, yet we exhibit classic cognitive dissonance in this regard because we sit down and stick a fork in an animal just as sentient from a dog. Years ago, or in some countries today, if someone was beating their cat, wouldn't we find it odd if they said to us, "you shouldn't impede on my rights to do as I please, your belief of this animal having rights is a religious dogma".
Just a few generations ago our own general public did not extend certain rights to children , women and other races and still today other nations have not yet made this progress. It will probably take many more generations before we respect and collectively take action to protect all that have an in interest in their own lives and bodies. With animals it will take a paradigm shift in the way society thinks about those who look so different from us.
I wanted to mention something that might come up. I've been vegan for just a couple years and I used to say "well animals kill other animals and we're omnivores so...". It sounds logical at first but consider that animals (and man) also force themselves on each other, sometimes kill their young, settle disputes to the death, etc. Yet this doesn't make it right for us to do because unlike other animals and unlike young children and those with dementia , we are capable of moral reasoning. If they are attempting to harm us, we have a obligation to not harm them to the best of our ability. They still have nervous systems and can feel pain and suffering and therefore we should protect their rights. If we bred a hybrid subspecies of less intelligent humans into existence, or if they evolved along side us, would it be ok if they didn't know life outside the world we give them? Just exacly how close do our genes have to be? Would it be ok if we pampered them and played relaxing music while we gassed them? All for the sake of seasoning their flesh? Cannibals by the way report that cooked humans taste and smell like pigs, probably because we're so closely genetically related. It's also irrelevant if we needed to eat animals or evolved eating them just as it's irrelevant to defend slavery or conquests because without we would have accomplished a lot less. We are where we are today and today is all that matters.
It all boils down to 99% of the billions of the animals raised and killed every year are for the pleasure of taste. Animals as feeling as the dogs and cats we have relationships with are commodified and used for our trivial ends.
would give thanks to the bison for keeping them alive, as during the winter, and I think that's about right.
My little cat in the picture is my companion, I wouldn't eat him, I suppose that if I had a steer or beef cattle as my companion I wouldn't feel like eating him either, but i think that is pretty absurd to contemplate.
I'm not about converting anyone, but I sure know what you mean about how it can become contentious when you feel an opposing view is being 'forced' on you. The beauty of living in a free country (well, at least for now) is we can co-exist with these differing beliefs and, if nothing else, at least accept and respect our right to hold those views, without hostility. Once hostility and anger enter the equation, true dialogue ceases IMO.
Brian, how true about the native Americans and the bison. In certain parts of Australia, the act of catching a fish is sacred. And your point about not eating your own cat tells me that you understand what I am thinking, but I do understand the differentiation you make between ' pets ' and ' food .'
I would recommend this flick "Food, Inc." It is not a PETA manifesto or anything so extreme....although it does allude to some of the cruelties of factory farming and such. It might help you consider, or re-consider, purchasing meat and such from local farmers, so at the very least you are 'close' to the food you consume and know how it is processed, etc. And to clarify, this film just reinforced things I already knew, but for myself, needed to be reminded of.
I respect your choice to nourish yourself however you see fit. And I do wish you health and longevity! Thanks for sharing your thoughts here.....
I appreciate and admire your idealism and commitment to humane ideals.
Vegetarianism just does not work for me, and it doesn't work for a lot of other people either, and the concept just isn't going to work for a lot of people.
In my view there are simply too many starving people in the world for me to get real fussy about what I will eat and what I won't. I get real tired of people with snobby attitudes about eating and criticizing other people about what they eat