26 April 2015

World Day for Animals in Laboratories 2015



Today is world day for animals in laboratories, a day we think of all those who are being tortured in laboratories in the name of science. In the UK we also use this day to bring together all animal rights activists in one location and take over the chosen town for a day.

Today we met in the town where I do most of my activist work, Europe's vivisection capital, Cambridge. Cambridge University houses numerous laboratories with many different species including primates and sheep who are tortured every second of their lives. Just recentlyAstra Zeneca was granted building permission for their new headquarters which will also imprisons animals. Behind most walls in this town there is a screaming soul that needs rescuing.

If you know the UK animal rights scene, you will know that the Cambridge AR chapter is probably the most (in)famous one. We are the longest-standing AR group, running since the 70s. But recently we have been struggling to identify our own politics, this being the reason for me almost not participating in this wonderful day. I am glad I did, and only because of my amazing Anti-Speciesist Women's Group. 

And because I feel that today, as during most days in animal rights, we celebrate the wrong people and create the wrong heroes, I want to use this space to honour the people who did not get acknowledged today, be it through applause, laughter, words of gratitude or encouragement. 

This is for all the women and non-binary folk (not just in Cambridge, but everywhere), who were present today. Who baked cakes. Who volunteered at stalls. Who marched along in a crowd of people they didn't know or didn't like. Who introduced themselves. Who made themselves vulnerable. Who screamed their lungs out to let everybody know that 'there's no excuse for animal abuse'. For those who held a megaphone and those who messed up the easiest chant on the planet time and time again. For those who exposed their bare faces to the police. And especially for those who held the most thoughtful and intelligent speeches and did not receive the time and recognition their male comrades did.

This is for Sophie Hill, who if I had heroines, would be one of them. A woman who singlehandedly took on Cambridge University and the vivisection industry as a student, and a veterinarian who knows the true value of science.
Watch and spread her speech here (it contains the most poignant last sentence).



I am so proud to have been able to march and scream along with some of the strongest women on this planet, to listen to their speeches and to bear witness to the atrocities hidden behind Cambridge's walls together with them.

We won't let the kyriarchs of this world feed off our solidarity!

Until all are free.



01 January 2015

Happy 2015

Happy new year to all of us. One year closer to the end!

We spent New Year's at my home in Germany, where we are a completely vegan household, most recently also including Figaro, the dog. The only thing that reminds us of our guilt are the massive leather couches in the living room.

This was so until the fireworks started to penetrate the walls of our flat. Just before midnight, as is tradition in Germany, the fireworks went off. This was not a contained firework display. Here, regular supermarkets sell all sorts of explosives a few days before the new year, which means that a few days before and a few days after we constantly hear explosions in fairly regular intervals from one corner of the neighbourhood or the other.

Of course, Figaro was scared, as he is every year. We were here, though, to assure him that everything was fine. The squirrels, fish, foxes, rabbits, owls, geese, swans, ducks and moorhens in the park outside our door, did not have anybody to let them know that it will be fine in a couple of hours (Yes we had constant explosions between midnight and 2AM - and this was not an explosion here or there at a time, this was numerous fireworks all at the same time over the course of two hours!).

I started picturing the invasion of their homes, by all kinds of rockets and fire crackers. I cannot begin imagining how amplified the sound must have been for them if it was already invasive for me in the safe space of my flat.

How many animal parents were not able to protect their children from humans who thought it would be funny to tie a fire cracker to their child? How many rabbit families were ripped apart because humans threw a rocket into their burrows? How many birds went deaf and disorientated or lost their nests from the unbearable noise? And how many fish died from the poison that humans threw into their water yesterday?

This gave me a massive reality check and burst my vegan bubble immediately.
Of course, we went out to check for injured or confused animals and to our relieve we only met one bunny who luckily ran away from us and hid when we approached slowly.

The trees, the grass and the water were full of trash, the remnants of the weapons that destroyed homes, injured and killed countless of animals. I couldn't suppress the feeling of war, nor the feeling of gratification every time I heard ambulance sirens.

08 December 2014

The Happy Cow Myth

Happy - The only emotion cows feel.

Not even scientists or philosophers deny anymore that cows are sentient beings. They can feel pain and they suffer but they also experience joy and happiness.

Not even the dairy and meat industry is denying anymore that cows can suffer, but in fact, so the myth goes, they don't. Instead they are happy, free-range, organic, and many of them even laugh.

There is a whole brand of cheese called 'The Laughing Cow' and the chocolate company 'Milka' is working hard on sustaining the myth of happy cows everywhere. They have even named one kind of chocolate bar 'Milka Happy Cows'. Whilst many advertisers revert to idyllic images of healthy and complete cow families as well as friendly farmers on a pasture, these two dominant players in the dairy industry also use comical anthropomorphised imagery of a cow with human traits.

Part of the Milka Campaign. The photo shoot for
this included a real cow in the studio. 
The combination of those opposable characteristics of human and animal in one persona has three functions:

1. It arouses humour as a cow wearing jewellery and having a good time laughing her ass off, is just funny.

2. A cow displaying human traits,  participating in human activities makes the cow very relatable to our human experience. We identify with her joy because she is shown to express joy in the same way we do (by visiting a massage parlour or by simply smiling in satisfaction and enjoyment)

3. A humanised cow also serves the function of convincing us that her life must be great, because human lives are more enjoyable than animal lives anyway, given the fact that we are sheltered from many risks that wild animals live with every day. So a humanised cow, is in fact a very lucky cow who is cared for and protected by her human community of farmers and consumers.

These images create an individual character for a cow. Whereas in reality all cows or even all animals are massified, that is grouped into one large mass, indistinguishable from one another (as Adams states in Sexual Politics of Meat) the dairy industry creates a characteristic happy cow, who we as the viewers of these adverts get to know. We begin to see her personality with all her quirks. The more we get to know her and the more we are exposed to her carefree lifestyle we want to become part of her happiness and bliss. We buy the product and we can rest assured that the milk in it came from the happy cow that we know, she is our friend and we want to support her.

Obviously not all of these factors play a role in our decision making when buying a product, at least not consciously. But the happy cow narrative is a very good strategies of eradicating any concept of a sad or suffering cow.

Luckily enough there are organisations that resist the invention of  a relatable character to give cows a personality and return dignity as well as intrinsic value to their person. Instead, they fight both the massifying of all cows as well as the construction of an absurd individuality for a specific member of the cow community. They expose the machine that is behind the oppression of cows whilst at the same time showing how diverse their community is and how each and every cow is affected in a different way by the dairy and meat industry's lies, depending on their sex, sexual orientation, age and physical ability.

To find out how you can combat the happy cow myth click here and visit White Lies.




07 December 2014

The Sexual Politics of Meat in Action

*****TRIGGER WARNING: mention of sexual and carnist violence.*****

The picture below ahows an advert for a food truck in Cambridge (near the train station), depicting a male chef hugging a sausage in a seemingly flirty way. The sausage is given seductive traits such as long eyelashes and red lips. At first glance the image looks harmless, jokey and perhaps ironic. If we dig a little deeper with our understanding of what carol Adams calls 'the sexual politics of meat', we soon realise the danger of this image.

The animal whose body was butchered to become a sausage has become an absent referent, deprived of their identity and individuality. Further the sexualisation of the reappropriated animal body and her flesh implies femininity through the use of anthropomorphic -and specifically feminised- symbols. The end result portrays femininity as readiness to be consumed by the (hu)man. This depicts perfectly how eating meat is perpetuating masculinity as well as rape culture.

An Attempt at an Anarchafeminist Pedagogy in a Neoliberal School Environment

Within the past two years my politics have become more radical, less compromising and less apologetic. This has been reflected in my curriculum and class room facilitation. I have learned new words to describe different parts of my ideology and I have met people who also subscribe to these aspects of my beliefs, which makes me more confident and more capable to enunciate my ideas properly to others. This does sound as if I am saying: 'I acquired new tools to push my agenda more effectively'. I guess to a certain extent this is right, considering that my agenda is total liberation. I just want everybody to be free and happy. Nothing wrong with that, right? I am not claiming though, that I have the one and only solution to emancipating everybody. In fact, this is what I hope my students will take out of my course: there is no one way of making the world a better place.

Two weeks ago I started facilitating an International Relations module at a private school that prepares international students for a university education in the UK. This is the third time I am facilitating this course. Both, as an activist and as a learning facilitator, I try my best to empower people to make informed decisions, act autonomously and resist.

Laying the Groundwork



Introductions

The first thing we did was introduce ourselves to one another. I asked them to tell us their names, their preferred pronouns and why they picked International Relations or what they want to study at university level. I made sure to write this on the board, so that they wouldn't forget what I am asking for:

Name, Preferred Pronoun, Why are you here?

I also made sure to clarify what a pronoun is and I introduced myself first, so as to lead by example. I did anticipate that typically some people would just skip the pronoun bit (this could be simply due to their cis-privileged inexperience of stating pronouns, or perhaps also due to previous experiences of discrimination against their personal choice of pronouns). What happened this time however, was that two people stated: 'I don't mind how you refer to me', 'Anything is fine'. I quietly smiled and continued to listen to their introductions, but inside I was angry with myself for not being able to deal with the situation properly, and failing to point out the injustice and what I assumed to be cis-privilege inherent in their statement. I had no idea how to even begin explaining what happened in that instance, especially considering that most, if not all of them, have never consciously considered any sort of privilege. I am really bad at spontaneous witty reactions, but later on, a friend of mine advised me to simply refer to them with a different pronoun to the one I would guess they actually preferred. I will definitely try this at the next best opportunity.

Safer Space Agreement

The school I work at is for international students and the module I am facilitating examines political, non-governmental, charity and grassroots work. This means that most of the students who pick my module voluntarily, have an interest in social justice of some sort. They are all very liberal, open minded, tolerant and respectful many times to the extent that they don't see race or gender! This has proven difficult with my previous classes, but this time I was going to make it clear from the start that our class room won't have space for post-race, post-gender nonsense.

Everything I say is aimed at making them talk, telling us their opinions, experiences and feelings. More often than not, it is a very intimate class environment (we are only 12 people, which makes it easier to facilitate a very personal dialogue). To create an environment where sharing, contributing, asking and questioning is possible we all need to agree on which modes of expression are OK and which ones aren't. Before drafting an agreement, I first wanted them to think about the different factors that might influence the way we perceive others and are perceived by others in the class room and outside. This was going to make it easier for them to come up with a set of guidelines for all of us.

To start thinking about difference I encouraged them to tell me what Identity means. What are the dimensions that make up our identities?

The board work for that looked something like this:

Identity

  • Culture
  • Religion
  • Ability/Disability
  • Language, accent and dialect
  • Education
  • Appearance
  • Socio-economic background
  • Class
  • Family
  • Sex
  • Gender
  • Sexual orientation
  • Species
  • Name
  • Race
  • Ethnicity
  • Nationality
  • Citizenship
There was a lot of confusion about the distinctions between many of these identity dimensions, so it was up to me to clarify and talk about overlaps and intersections. Most of the items were named by the class, but when I felt that something essential was missing (like species) I tried to lead them towards it with questions.

The next task we undertook was 7 minutes silent work with a sheet of paper in front of us divided into three parts:

Myself                    My Classmates               Class Facilitator

What am I prepared to bring to the class?
What do I expect of my classmates?
What do I expect of the facilitator?

After 7 minutes we fed back to the class, whilst I wrote their comments on the board. The most basic tasks came first, e.g. coming on time, being prepared for the class, explaining vocabulary. Every time a suggestion was made, I asked why it is important. I want it to be pronounced that being late is disruptive to my lecture and that it distracts other students. Being prepared for class is essential for smaller group work where if one person hasn't read the text it can not only impair that persons quality of dialogue but of course, also diminished the group's experience. I always make sure to actively listen when someone contributes, by which I mean that I keep an open body language with eye contact and when they finish their thought, I make sure to repeat their statement in my words and ask if I understood correctly. I make sure to value all contributions, even if they are placed inappropriately, perhaps better fitted to a different topic, which I make sure to point out. This is also something I tried to convey to the students.

A big key word they kept throwing at me was RESPECT.
I had to ask many times what respect actually means before we came up with a deeper understanding of how to interact respectfully with one another. Here are some of the things we noted on the board:


  • We will only speak for ourselves and not for anybody else.


  • We will not make assumptions about anybody else's identity dimensions (for example, introducing ourselves with our preferred pronouns and asking for people's pronouns instead of assuming).


  • If we are uncertain about somebody's view point we will ask them about it.


  • We will not use any derogatory language that could offend anybody based on their identity.


  • We will become aware of how much space we take up with our voices and bodies.


  • If we are being made aware of being insensitive, we will learn how to apologise.


  • If we see that we are taking up a lot of space, we will take a step back and try to give a platform to others, who might have not had the possibility to voice their opinions.


  • We will learn to give trigger warnings.



  • One thing in particular needed a lot of work during the draft of this agreement. Two of the more confident masculine students, brought up that we should 'not get too emotional' when discussing controversial topics. The phrase 'suppressing emotions' was also dropped as a favourable method for class conversations. I am glad they did bring this up because it gave me a chance to dismantle this myth, or misconception surrounding emotions and rationality.

    So I gave them space to express their thoughts, however I said that I found that very problematic. I agreed that it will inhibit our dialogue in class if we all get really angry and start screaming at each other. I also said that of course, it is not beneficial to anybody if I came in crying my eyes out, hardly able to speak, as nobody would understand anything I would say. So in that respect, I said, we need to come to an agreement what to do about those emotions. I made it clear, that there is nothing wrong with being angry, being upset or very happy. All emotions are legitimate and valid and instead of suppressing them, we must express them (I did get a few nods from some of the girls for that). So this is what we added about emotions to our safer space agreement.


  • We will learn to express our emotions by speaking about how things make us feel, without pointing a finger and placing blame.


  • We won't discredit others' opinion for being emotional, and we will learn to accept emotional expressions as valid forms of expression.


  • Understanding Privilege

    Understanding privilege is the most important thing we can teach anybody and it is relevant to any and all classes, even -or perhaps, especially- in the sciences. In my class, where I have the most privileged bunch of young people sitting in front of me, who all want to go into positions of leadership and political power, it is very important to me that they critically engage with the opportunities they are given in life, as well as with the opportunities they are denied.

    Before going into much depth on the concept of privilege we did a little exercise (including a short definition of privilege and a trigger warning). I read out (and explained) one statement after another. Every time one statement applied a person, that person would stand up. I made it clear that this is not a test, that there are no right or wrong answers, that nobody should judge anybody else for standing up or not standing up and that you should only stand up or stay seated if you feel safe to do so. (below is the visualisation of the statements).



    After the exercise we discussed how some of the questions made us feel, whether anything made us upset or happy or whether anything was surprising. It was productive and also served as a really good ice breaker! Last year I introduced the concept of privilege by showing my class a privilege circle that depicted categories of identity that indicate privilege at the top half of the circle and their direct opposites that depict oppression on the bottom half.

    Unfortunately, beginning by explaining privilege through this dualistic and very simplified chart had the opposite effect of what I wanted to achieve. The three white male students in my class immediately got their defences up and were almost unreachable for me. On top of that everybody else aided them by confirming that they are very lovely people and could never oppress anybody! Last year it took me much longer to familiarise them with the concept. This year I feel they have already taken out much more, with regards to privilege, in three weeks of class than throughout the whole term last year. From my mistakes last year I realised that I need to create a community in which all of us first understand that identity is not a dichotomous concept but actually carries a lot of facets within it and then acknowledge that we are all in some ways oppressed and in others privileged, often involuntarily. This year, I only handed out this privilege circle (with the addition of speciesism, humans - animals, plants) after this first workshop. This way it makes it much easier for me to refer back to privilege and oppression in the sessions that follow.

    I would love to hear from other educators, what their classrooms look like and how they create safer spaces! I still have a long way to come, in fact I believe as knowledge facilitators we must never stop learning and experimenting together with our students.

    08 November 2014

    The epitomisation of everything that is wrong with the world - And the Story of Marie Françoise Bernard.

    ***Trigger Warning: Portrayal of animal cruelty***

    Claude Bernard was amongst the most prominent proponents of vivisection in 19th century Europe. He was celebrated as 'one of the greatest of all men of science' by science historian I. Bernard Cohen. Claude Bernard was a physiologist, a scientist who opens up the body to learn about its inner workings. It even seems as if in Bernard's work there was no greater purpose, such as for example helping those who want help. Rather, it looks as if he was doing science for science's sake, so to speak. His writing reflects this sentiment:

    The physiologist is no ordinary man. He is a learned man, a man possessed and absorbed by a scientific idea. He does not hear the animals' cries of pain. He is blind to the blood that flows. He sees nothing but his idea, and organisms which conceal from him the secrets he is resolved to discover.(Thanks Wiki)

    I don't think I have ever encountered all principles of patriarchy, perfectly exemplified in five short sentences. But there we go, that's exactly what this quote is, the epitomisation of the patriarchal mode of expression - or Phallogocentrism, a horribly bloated word which basically means that everyone who has/is a massive dick is seen as the best (people without penises can also be dicks). 

    Phal - from the phallic, the masculine, potent, able-bodied, knowledgable
      |
    logo -  from logos, the systematic, logical, rational, not emotional nor intuitive
      |
    centr - from the centre, in the middle, surrounded by everything else, the main and only point of attention
      |
    ism -    indicating an ideological conviction, a constructed -not natural- truth to subscribe to

    All patriarchal ideologies operate under the phallogical principle. Patriarchy implies that there is someone - a patriarch- hierarchically above you, who you must please so as to justify your existence. This can be a god, a king, a lord, a master, a judge, a father, brother or son...any figure to look up to. If we subscribe to patriarchy we communicate through phallogocentism (the mode of expression or language of patriarchy) and we make it our purpose in life to become more like that figure, so as to please him. The more we are opposed to becoming like our patriarchs, the more we suffer, as our existence will not be validated and legitimised because we don't speak a language that is understood by him.
    This painting of Claude Bernard -who, following his teacher, often operated on dogs without anaesthetic - portrays the reality of this systematic production of privilege (and by extension oppression). The painting shows a room filled with 13 humans who are portrayed as male, mostly wearing dark attire. We gaze directly upon the centre where we find a man - Bernard - wearing a white shirt and yellow vest, covered by a white apron (the mostly white outfit resonates very much with contemporary perceptions of the lab coat as a symbol of knowledge and understanding). He is pointing towards a bloody opening in a dog's chest/stomach (the dog is lying in front of him) whilst most men around him are looking intrigued towards him and the dog. The dog Is lying on their back, shackled by chains attached to their neck and paws, seemingly screaming in agony with their mouth wide open. Their right paw seems to be dislocated or broken by force as it is portrayed in a way that dog's paws don't bend. In the left corner of the painting we find another dog with a chain around their neck, bearing their teeth towards Bernard and tensing their body as if moving rapidly. This dog is ignored by the humans, none of which show any emotional expression, except perhaps attentiveness and contemplative curiosity. Behind the group of men we find a shelf with two skeletons, presumably from previous experiments, allowing us to imagine the upcoming death of the two dogs in the painting. The right bottom side of the image bears a book, behind which we see a curtain, that has been moved aside, thus no longer concealing much. The book in combination with this curtain might indicate to us that the scientist here is revealing knowledge to his spectators. He is unveiling a secret, a mystical, previously unexplored truth that he penetrated and can now expose to other. The top left side of the painting shows the only window in this room, which is placed at an angle and thus indicates the men's location in an attic, above other rooms of the house (that perhaps are attended to by women - if there are any in the building). The attic is also closest to heaven and god.
    So there we go, two small examples of Claude Bernard's legacy (the quote and the painting) show us everything that is wrong with the world. There is one very exciting aspect in Claude Bernard's life however. The fact that his scientific career was only made possible through his arranged marriage to Marie Françoise Bernard (née Martin). This gave him the space - metaphorically, physically and financially - to validate his torture chambers and build his career upon vivisection.

    Marie Françoise Martin - One Awesome Lady


    For catholics divorce is seen as a sin, and imagine the gravity of the sin when a woman wants to divorce a man in their marriage - today this still poses a huge moral dilemma for many women in abusive relationships so imagine this situation in the 19th century! Nevertheless Marie Françoise Martin separated from her husband and established an anti-vivisection society (thanks wiki). She had two daughters (and a son who died in infancy) with him. Wikipedia states that not only Marie Françoise, but also the older daughter Jeanne-Henriette actively campaigned against vivisection. They took a stand against the patriarch(y) and broke out of social convention. They spoke their own language and refused to give Claude and everything he stood for any platform to voice his ideas from. Of course, Marie Françoise came from a position of privilege with her wealthy upbringing but that also meant that she might have had a lot to lose when refusing to use phallological language. In this context she surely is one awesome lady!
     

    02 November 2014

    World Vegan Day

    Happy belated world vegan day and a very happy vegan month to all of you!

    Yesterday was world vegan day and the 70th anniversary of the Vegan Society. A day to celebrate ourselves, to take a break from the daily burden of bearing witness to the most horrendous suffering and a day to relieve ourselves from having to justify every single thing we put on our plates. We should use this day to regain some of the energy we put into being animal witnesses every single day of our vegan lives.

    And for the spiritually inclined amongst us, seeing that this day also marks the day of the dead and all saints, let us not forget the countless souls we kill every day, just so we can exist. Let us remember that even as vegans we are not exempt from this truth and let us mourn together and find new ways to reduce our impact upon the world.

    Let us also forgive ourselves for just one moment on this special day.