1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,800
As animal activists, we do not have 
to fear presenting the bare facts.

2
00:00:04,800 --> 00:00:12,330
We don't have to try to sensationalize 
or exaggerate: the truth is bad enough.

3
00:00:21,247 --> 00:00:26,720
Hope Bohanec (conference organizer): 
So happy to have Emily Moran Barwick. She is an animal-liberation activist, educator,

4
00:00:26,720 --> 00:00:31,520
writer, artist, and international speaker. 
And after completing her Masters of Fine Arts,

5
00:00:31,520 --> 00:00:36,080
Emily founded Bite Size Vegan. 
Emily, it's all you. Thank you.

6
00:00:36,080 --> 00:00:39,920
Thank you so much for having me. It is such 
an honor to be a part of this conference.

7
00:00:39,920 --> 00:00:43,120
Today I wanted to talk about the importance of language in

8
00:00:43,120 --> 00:00:48,320
activism; specifically covering some of the potential pitfalls, distractions, diversions,

9
00:00:48,320 --> 00:00:52,240
and counterproductive “traps" that we can fall into as activists.

10
00:00:52,240 --> 00:00:58,720
The most dangerous of these are often wrapped in 
the guise of making veganism more approachable.

11
00:00:58,720 --> 00:01:02,720
In our effort to increase the accessibility of veganism,

12
00:01:02,720 --> 00:01:10,000
we may inadvertently compromise our convictions 
and soften our ethics—offering gradations of

13
00:01:10,000 --> 00:01:16,640
change, or incremental reductions in animal 
product consumption, or "humane" alternatives.

14
00:01:16,640 --> 00:01:21,600
Now, this is often born from the belief that we must take either a firm—even

15
00:01:21,600 --> 00:01:28,720
militant and polarizing—or a soft, conciliatory approach to our outreach.

16
00:01:28,720 --> 00:01:33,600
But, this is a this false dichotomy. The real challenge is walking the line

17
00:01:33,600 --> 00:01:39,360
of staying firm in our convictions and uncompromising in our message while still

18
00:01:39,360 --> 00:01:45,120
helping people lower their guard enough to listen, hear, and make the connection.

19
00:01:45,120 --> 00:01:50,640
So, within the vegan movement, a major approach 
activists take is the social normalization of veganism.

20
00:01:50,640 --> 00:01:57,440
What I mean by this is making a vegan lifestyle accessible, affordable,

21
00:01:57,440 --> 00:02:04,320
easy—even mainstream. And this is a very logical 
tactic, especially when considering that one of

22
00:02:04,320 --> 00:02:10,560
the strongest deterrents to going vegan is social 
ostracism and rejection from friends and family.

23
00:02:10,560 --> 00:02:18,240
I am the last person to decry increasing the 
accessibility of veganism—it is something about

24
00:02:18,240 --> 00:02:24,480
which I am intensely passionate, and is one of 
the foundational aspects of Bite Size Vegan.

25
00:02:24,480 --> 00:02:29,680
However, in attempting to “bridge the gap” 
and meet the general public where they’re at,

26
00:02:29,680 --> 00:02:38,320
there exists the risk of reducing the ethical 
imperative of veganism to a socially acceptable

27
00:02:38,320 --> 00:02:43,840
lifestyle choice. This is why it’s so vital that we be mindful of our language

28
00:02:43,840 --> 00:02:50,960
choices as activist, lest we end up advocating 
the very things we are fighting against.

29
00:02:51,600 --> 00:02:57,200
So, a very common approach activists take 
to provide an "entry point" to veganism

30
00:02:57,200 --> 00:03:01,120
is encouraging people to reduce their intake of animal products,

31
00:03:01,120 --> 00:03:07,680
like "Meat-Free Mondays." Such an incremental 
option is obviously more palatable to non-vegans;

32
00:03:07,680 --> 00:03:12,080
it allows them to make a minor change while still providing the emotional

33
00:03:12,080 --> 00:03:17,440
benefit of doing something good. But it's equally alluring for us activists.

34
00:03:17,440 --> 00:03:22,720
Perhaps we're afraid of coming across as extreme and want to provide a less

35
00:03:22,720 --> 00:03:29,120
intimidating suggestion. Perhaps we ourselves 
are intimidated to ask for something "so big"

36
00:03:29,120 --> 00:03:35,680
as going fully vegan. Perhaps we believe that 
any change is better than no change at all.

37
00:03:36,240 --> 00:03:41,120
And while it's understandable for 
such fears and beliefs to arise,

38
00:03:41,120 --> 00:03:48,080
we must take a step back and recognize their 
implications. Believing that going fully vegan

39
00:03:48,080 --> 00:03:56,160
is too much to ask simply reinforces that very 
misconception. Offering gradations of change,

40
00:03:56,160 --> 00:04:02,080
in essence, endorses the idea that there are "acceptable" levels of cruelty.

41
00:04:02,640 --> 00:04:08,080
When I spoke in Dublin, I met Sandra Higgins, 
the founder of Eden Farmed Animal Sanctuary

42
00:04:08,080 --> 00:04:13,440
in Ireland, who is also a psychologist. 
I remember her making the rather apt analogy,

43
00:04:13,440 --> 00:04:18,640
saying something along the lines of that if 
she had a patient who was beating his wife or children,

44
00:04:18,640 --> 00:04:25,120
she would never advise him to try to reduce the frequency of his violence

45
00:04:25,120 --> 00:04:28,615
or stop beating his wife and children on Fridays.

46
00:04:28,960 --> 00:04:36,640
The message has to be that violence is 
always unacceptable and has to be eradicated.

47
00:04:36,640 --> 00:04:43,040
When we take this approach of "reductionism," 
we're not only doing a disservice to the animals,

48
00:04:43,600 --> 00:04:50,960
but also to the non-vegans. We're deciding for 
them that they can't handle the full truth.

49
00:04:50,960 --> 00:04:57,120
We're deciding for them that they can't 
or won't make the decision to go vegan.

50
00:04:57,120 --> 00:05:03,280
This is similar to the way in which the American 
Heart Association approached its official dietary

51
00:05:03,280 --> 00:05:09,200
recommendations: the DASH diet, which stands 
for “Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension."

52
00:05:09,200 --> 00:05:15,280
While decades of research have demonstrated that 
consuming animal products is "highly significantly associated"

53
00:05:15,280 --> 00:05:21,200
with elevated blood pressure, the DASH diet still includes dairy and meat.

54
00:05:21,200 --> 00:05:27,520
In his book "How Not to Die" Dr. Michael Greger 
explains why this is the case, stating:

55
00:05:27,520 --> 00:05:32,800
"“The reason that the DASH diet was modeled 
explicitly after vegetarian diets but was not

56
00:05:32,800 --> 00:05:38,560
meat-free itself might surprise you. 
The primary design goal of the DASH diet was to explicitly

57
00:05:38,560 --> 00:05:43,920
create eating patterns “that would have the blood 
pressure lowering benefits of a vegetarian diet

58
00:05:43,920 --> 00:05:49,600
yet contain enough animal products to 
make them palatable to nonvegetarians.…”

59
00:05:49,600 --> 00:05:54,000
[The doctor who chaired the DASH diet 
committee] had even shown that the more

60
00:05:54,000 --> 00:05:59,680
dairy vegetarians consumed, the higher their blood 
pressure appeared to rise. But he figured there

61
00:05:59,680 --> 00:06:05,120
was no point in calling for a diet he believed 
few would follow. This is a recurring theme

62
00:06:05,120 --> 00:06:10,480
in official dietary recommendations. Instead 
of simply telling you what the science shows

63
00:06:10,480 --> 00:06:15,520
and then letting you make up your own 
mind, experts patronize the population

64
00:06:15,520 --> 00:06:20,880
by advocating what they think is practical rather 
than ideal. By making the decision for you,

65
00:06:20,880 --> 00:06:25,600
they undermine those willing to make 
even greater changes for optimal health.”

66
00:06:25,600 --> 00:06:31,680
In the same way, when we preemptively offer 
non-vegans gradations of change rather than

67
00:06:31,680 --> 00:06:37,680
the entirety of the truth, we are depriving them of the opportunity—and I believe,

68
00:06:37,680 --> 00:06:42,480
the right—to have all of the facts and make a decision for themselves.

69
00:06:42,480 --> 00:06:47,280
The same holds true for what I believe to be the most insidious pitfall for

70
00:06:47,280 --> 00:06:52,640
activists and non-vegans alike: humane 
labels and animal welfare regulations.

71
00:06:52,640 --> 00:06:59,200
Humane language and concepts have easily gained 
a stronghold by appealing to all sides

72
00:06:59,200 --> 00:07:06,560
—for the vegan afraid as coming across as militant, 
they provide an approachable suggestion to offer;

73
00:07:06,560 --> 00:07:12,480
for activists fighting for animal liberation, 
they give the possibility of better conditions,

74
00:07:12,480 --> 00:07:17,760
progress towards the ultimate goal; 
and certainly for the non-vegan, who

75
00:07:17,760 --> 00:07:22,480
now has a way to keep doing what they want to do, but feel good about it.

76
00:07:22,480 --> 00:07:26,080
I've been told it can sound odd coming from an animal rights activist,

77
00:07:26,080 --> 00:07:32,240
but I find that humane labels and animal 
welfare regulations are often detrimental

78
00:07:32,240 --> 00:07:39,920
to animals. In fact, the entire concept of 
animal welfare is antithetical to animal rights.

79
00:07:39,920 --> 00:07:47,120
Welfare regulations are designed to spare 
animals any “unnecessary” suffering—the unspoken

80
00:07:47,120 --> 00:07:52,960
implication being that some suffering is necessary when it benefits humans.

81
00:07:53,600 --> 00:07:58,080
Still, even if animal liberation is the ultimate goal, isn't there value in

82
00:07:58,080 --> 00:08:03,600
improving the conditions for those currently 
in our systems of exploitation?

83
00:08:03,600 --> 00:08:10,160
While this thought process is understandable, we must again 
take an honest look at what welfare regulations

84
00:08:10,160 --> 00:08:14,480
actually mean for the beings they are designed to protect.

85
00:08:14,480 --> 00:08:22,394
A striking example of the true impotence of welfare regulations
is the battery cage ban within the European Union.

86
00:08:22,394 --> 00:08:25,280
So, in 1999, The Council of the European Union

87
00:08:25,280 --> 00:08:31,200
set a directive that banned all “barren battery cages” by 2012. And while media

88
00:08:31,200 --> 00:08:36,400
coverage at the time focused on the end of 
battery cages in the EU, what the directive

89
00:08:36,400 --> 00:08:43,600
actually did was replace barren battery cages 
with “enriched" battery cages—meaning "furnished."

90
00:08:43,600 --> 00:08:48,400
So yes, hens would now be provided 
more space and given furnishings like

91
00:08:48,400 --> 00:08:53,440
perches and laying nests—certainly an 
improvement over barren cages. However,

92
00:08:53,440 --> 00:08:59,600
while media reports extolled that hens 
would now each be afforded 750cm²,

93
00:08:59,600 --> 00:09:05,600
they neglected to clarify that—due to the 
new furnishings—only 600cm² would be usable.

94
00:09:05,600 --> 00:09:11,280
Now I know it's a lot of numbers, and it's 
hard to visualize what that means. So,

95
00:09:11,280 --> 00:09:15,760
in the end, that this revolutionary step forward for the rights of

96
00:09:15,760 --> 00:09:21,840
laying hens granted them less than a single playing card of additional space.

97
00:09:22,640 --> 00:09:27,680
Even more maddening: in 2012, over twelve years

98
00:09:27,680 --> 00:09:35,040
after the directive, thirteen Member States 
had still failed to comply with the ban.

99
00:09:35,040 --> 00:09:44,165
But as the media celebrated the victory for animal welfare, 
the public ate even more eggs —reassured by their higher standards

100
00:09:44,400 --> 00:09:52,000
—and the individuals this entire charade was 
supposed to be for remained just as exploited.

101
00:09:52,000 --> 00:09:58,480
The execution of the barren battery cage ban 
is far from a single failing. In 2001, the EU

102
00:09:58,480 --> 00:10:04,720
outlawed gestation crates. If you're unfamiliar, 
these are single-sow enclosures constructed of

103
00:10:04,720 --> 00:10:09,760
metal bars and hard flooring, in which mother 
pigs are confined during their pregnancies.

104
00:10:09,760 --> 00:10:16,720
As always, the ban came with ample fine-print 
exceptions, and over a decade for implementation.

105
00:10:16,720 --> 00:10:22,480
Twelve years later, nine member states 
had still failed to comply with the ban.

106
00:10:22,480 --> 00:10:24,720
The most amazing thing about all of this is that

107
00:10:24,720 --> 00:10:31,040
several of the Member States that failed to 
implement the battery cage and/or the gestation

108
00:10:31,040 --> 00:10:37,680
crate bans are rated amongst the best 
countries in the world for animal welfare.

109
00:10:37,680 --> 00:10:42,560
So, as alluring as the idea of better conditions for animals may be,

110
00:10:42,560 --> 00:10:49,600
animal welfare legislation is based upon the 
presumption that we have a right to use non-human

111
00:10:49,600 --> 00:10:55,280
animals for our own purposes. Rather than 
condemn the breeding, enslavement, mutilation,

112
00:10:55,280 --> 00:11:02,800
and slaughter of sentient beings, welfare 
legislation simply codifies precisely how

113
00:11:02,800 --> 00:11:06,571
we may breed, enslave, mutilate, and slaughter them.

114
00:11:06,800 --> 00:11:10,560
In 2007, the European Union historically declared

115
00:11:10,560 --> 00:11:17,280
non-human animals legally sentient—deserving 
freedom from hunger, thirst, discomfort, pain,

116
00:11:17,280 --> 00:11:20,560
injury, disease, fear, distress and mental suffering.

117
00:11:20,560 --> 00:11:26,880
Having recognized their capacity to feel 
the same emotions and sensations as we do,

118
00:11:26,880 --> 00:11:32,240
the EU proceeded to draft landmark 
legislation for their humane treatment.

119
00:11:32,240 --> 00:11:37,440
The resulting Council Regulation was—and 
is—viewed as a victory for animals.

120
00:11:37,440 --> 00:11:40,720
Now, for those of us in countries without regulations,

121
00:11:40,720 --> 00:11:46,480
it's natural to think that the systematic 
abuse of farmed animals results—at least

122
00:11:46,480 --> 00:11:49,840
in large part—from the total lack of oversight.

123
00:11:49,840 --> 00:11:55,440
In the United States, for example, there are no 
federal laws governing the treatment of animals in

124
00:11:55,440 --> 00:12:02,240
our food industry. We do have the Animal Welfare 
Act of 1966, but, like so many welfare acts around

125
00:12:02,240 --> 00:12:09,120
the world, it excludes animals raised for food—as 
do the majority of state anti-cruelty regulations.

126
00:12:09,120 --> 00:12:15,920
Many US activists and organizations stress the 
need for regulations to end such atrocities as

127
00:12:15,920 --> 00:12:22,045
routine mutilations without anesthetic, the aceration (meaning the grinding up)

128
00:12:22,045 --> 00:12:25,040
of male chicks in the egg industry, and the blunt-force "euthanasia" of piglets

129
00:12:25,040 --> 00:12:30,640
—often pointing to the European Union as a shining example.

130
00:12:30,640 --> 00:12:35,120
However, within the EU legislation and supplemental documents, those

131
00:12:35,120 --> 00:12:44,000
very same atrocities are not decried, but 
codified. So, instead of male baby chicks being

132
00:12:44,000 --> 00:12:49,600
ground up alive because there are no regulations 
to stop it, they are ground up alive because

133
00:12:49,600 --> 00:12:55,920
regulations declare it as the preferred method 
for male chick disposal. There are even detailed

134
00:12:55,920 --> 00:13:01,840
specifications for blade speed and sharpness 
to avoid "gumming up" the works of the machine.

135
00:13:01,840 --> 00:13:07,600
We'd like to think that humane regulations 
are driven by what's best for the animals.

136
00:13:07,600 --> 00:13:13,360
But the animal products industries are—after 
all—industries; they are profit-driven.

137
00:13:13,360 --> 00:13:19,760
A preliminary report for the European Union's 
legislation found that while gassing the estimated

138
00:13:19,760 --> 00:13:28,080
"335 million day old male chicks" killed in the 
EU annually would cost 1.6/1.7 million Euros,

139
00:13:28,080 --> 00:13:35,373
the cost of using "rotating or whirling knives which 
are mincing the chicks in a split second

140
00:13:35,373 --> 00:13:37,938
...can be considered not to be substantial."

141
00:13:37,938 --> 00:13:40,400
So, the decision had nothing

142
00:13:40,400 --> 00:13:46,000
to do with what was most humane—it was 
simply a matter of what was cheapest.

143
00:13:46,000 --> 00:13:50,880
The maceration of baby chicks has been 
exposed time and again in undercover footage,

144
00:13:50,880 --> 00:13:54,240
which brings me to another pitfall I wanted to address:

145
00:13:54,240 --> 00:14:02,160
the presentation of undercover exposes. 
While I do believe that undercover footage is of vital

146
00:14:02,160 --> 00:14:08,880
importance in the fight for animal liberation, we 
must be mindful of the framing and presentation.

147
00:14:08,880 --> 00:14:15,200
When it comes to undercover exposes, it’s 
often what’s not said that’s the most damaging.

148
00:14:15,200 --> 00:14:20,640
Every time undercover footage has captured 
workers—from one country or another—tossing

149
00:14:20,640 --> 00:14:26,960
live baby chicks into a grinder, news outlets 
dramatically recount the unbelievable cruelty.

150
00:14:26,960 --> 00:14:30,560
And every time, the public is appalled, outraged,

151
00:14:30,560 --> 00:14:36,960
and disgusted. And every time, they assume that 
it's an isolated incident of extreme cruelty;

152
00:14:36,960 --> 00:14:42,480
and they continue to eat eggs, confident 
they're not supporting such brutality.

153
00:14:42,480 --> 00:14:48,000
The most important message of 
all is left unsaid: that this is

154
00:14:48,000 --> 00:14:55,440
not a barbaric practice isolated to corrupt, 
abusive facilities or industrialized farms;

155
00:14:56,160 --> 00:15:05,680
that grinding up live babies is a welfare 
regulation; a worldwide "standard practice."

156
00:15:05,680 --> 00:15:10,800
The fact that the lines between overt 
abuse and standard industry practice are

157
00:15:10,800 --> 00:15:15,040
so indistinguishable highlights the absurdity

158
00:15:15,040 --> 00:15:20,000
of animal welfarism and human concepts. 
In my essay "The Harm of Humane" from the

159
00:15:20,000 --> 00:15:26,080
book Vegan Voices, I opened with a specific 
example of this from my home state in Iowa.

160
00:15:26,080 --> 00:15:31,600
In September 2008, an undercover video 
documenting routine abuse at an Iowa pig

161
00:15:31,600 --> 00:15:37,200
breeding facility made international news. The 
footage and investigators' notes captured workers

162
00:15:37,200 --> 00:15:42,160
kicking and beating pregnant pigs with metal 
objects, sexually violating them with rods;

163
00:15:42,160 --> 00:15:46,000
and they were also shown cutting off 
the tails and tearing out the testicles

164
00:15:46,000 --> 00:15:51,280
of piglets without anesthetic, and slamming 
sick or deformed piglets against the ground,

165
00:15:51,280 --> 00:15:55,280
leaving them to die slowly, piled 
on top of one another in giant bins.

166
00:15:55,280 --> 00:16:01,040
Now, while these acts of cruelty were 
exposed by vegan activists, the egregiousness

167
00:16:01,040 --> 00:16:06,160
of the abuse rightfully sparked outrage from 
meat-eating consumers. And the food company

168
00:16:06,160 --> 00:16:12,000
supplied by the farm, Hormel, received over 
10,000 calls in two days. In the wire report

169
00:16:12,000 --> 00:16:17,440
issued by the Associated Press, they quoted 
a Hormel spokesperson who called the abuses

170
00:16:17,440 --> 00:16:21,040
"completely unacceptable"; and they also quoted the farmer,

171
00:16:21,040 --> 00:16:26,240
who emphasized "We condemn these types of 
acts," and called them "completely intolerable,

172
00:16:26,240 --> 00:16:31,360
reprehensible" vowing to "investigate and 
initiate corrective action immediately."

173
00:16:31,360 --> 00:16:36,800
So, anyone reading the report would be left with 
the impression that this was an isolated incident

174
00:16:36,800 --> 00:16:44,320
of overt cruelty, or—at the very worst—a regular 
occurrence isolated to large "factory farms."

175
00:16:44,320 --> 00:16:50,640
But amidst the catalogued horrors in this article, 
the troubling implication of a single sentence

176
00:16:50,640 --> 00:16:54,000
was easily overlooked. So, of course, that's what I focused on.

177
00:16:54,000 --> 00:16:58,320
Following the description of the workers' 
treatment of piglets, the report stated:

178
00:16:58,320 --> 00:17:05,448
"Temple Grandin, a leading animal welfare expert 
who serves as a consultant to the livestock industry,

179
00:17:05,448 --> 00:17:09,280
said that while those are standard industry practices, the treatment of

180
00:17:09,280 --> 00:17:14,960
the sows on the video was far from it. 'This is atrocious animal abuse,' 
Grandin said..." (The Associated Press 2008; emphasis added)

181
00:17:14,960 --> 00:17:22,145
To be clear, the treatment of the mother pigs was 
what Grandin deemed "atrocious animal abuse";

182
00:17:22,145 --> 00:17:30,320
the acts she waved away as "standard industry practices" were the 
unanaesthetized mutilation of newborn piglets,

183
00:17:30,320 --> 00:17:36,480
and the brutal—and ineffective—slamming of 
"defective" piglets against the concrete floor.

184
00:17:36,480 --> 00:17:41,760
She was not wrong; not only are these practices 
legal, they are government-sanctioned methods

185
00:17:41,760 --> 00:17:46,320
within—but not limited to—the United 
States, Canada, and the European Union.

186
00:17:46,320 --> 00:17:53,806
Within my essay, I implore the reader to ask themself: 
were you to have watched that video,

187
00:17:54,051 --> 00:17:59,760
heard the piercing screams of the 
mother pigs and their babies, would you have

188
00:17:59,760 --> 00:18:06,560
spotted the difference between the "atrocious 
animal abuse" and "standard industry practices"?"

189
00:18:07,520 --> 00:18:11,680
When we fail to explain and emphasize that the horrors depicted

190
00:18:11,680 --> 00:18:19,360
in these videos are not only legal, but actually 
government-sanctioned, humane-legislation-dictated

191
00:18:19,360 --> 00:18:23,600
practices, we leave the public with the 
impression that this was the result of

192
00:18:23,600 --> 00:18:30,640
a few malicious, sociopathic workers or poorly 
regulated facilities. Just a few "bad apples. "

193
00:18:30,640 --> 00:18:35,600
Far from considering veganism, the public is left thinking that

194
00:18:35,600 --> 00:18:40,800
“well, luckily, the perpetrators were exposed and will surely 
be punished. Thank goodness the eggs, meat,

195
00:18:40,800 --> 00:18:45,840
or dairy that we eat isn't contributing to that kind of abusive behavior.”

196
00:18:45,840 --> 00:18:51,120
Invariably, when horrific acts are exposed 
to the public, there is a call for stronger

197
00:18:51,120 --> 00:18:56,560
regulations and higher welfare standards. 
As activists, we can become caught in this

198
00:18:56,560 --> 00:19:02,400
self-perpetuating cycle—believing we're fighting 
for progress when we're simply running in place.

199
00:19:03,120 --> 00:19:09,029
An example of this cycle is the rise of cage-free 
eggs. I recently published an article, video and

200
00:19:09,029 --> 00:19:15,360
eCourse on cage-free eggs, which you can find 
at BiteSizeVegan.org/CageFree.

201
00:19:15,360 --> 00:19:21,840
As always happens when I dive into researching a topic—even one 
I've previously covered—I find so much new information.

202
00:19:21,840 --> 00:19:26,400
I've stated in several videos and speeches 
that cage-free hens have been shown to have

203
00:19:26,400 --> 00:19:31,920
twice the mortality rate of battery caged 
hens. This is a seemingly damning inditement

204
00:19:31,920 --> 00:19:36,880
of the idea that such humane labels as 
"cage-free" are improvements for animals.

205
00:19:36,880 --> 00:19:42,240
When I began re-researching this statistic, 
I found that it's far more complicated. After

206
00:19:42,240 --> 00:19:47,120
coming across a meta-analysis that seemed 
to indicate mortality rates have been on the

207
00:19:47,120 --> 00:19:54,240
decline worldwide in cage-free systems, such that 
the difference between caged and non-caged hens

208
00:19:54,240 --> 00:20:01,200
is nearly non-existent, I worried that this worked 
against the point I'd been making in the past.

209
00:20:01,200 --> 00:20:07,680
Something I find so incredibly important 
in my activism, though, is never

210
00:20:07,680 --> 00:20:13,360
shying away from new information. 
Even it if seems like it may go against what I’m aiming to say,

211
00:20:13,360 --> 00:20:20,080
it's so important to evaluate and present 
what's true. And invariably, once I go deeper

212
00:20:20,080 --> 00:20:24,640
into research I find that what may initially seem to be a contradiction,

213
00:20:24,640 --> 00:20:28,400
or even something in support of an agricultural practice

214
00:20:29,280 --> 00:20:38,080
—the underlying reality of anything within the animal 
products industry cannot help but be problematic.

215
00:20:39,040 --> 00:20:42,880
So, I'd like to take you through my own journey with researching the question

216
00:20:42,880 --> 00:20:46,880
of hen mortality rates in different housing systems—at least in brief.

217
00:20:47,520 --> 00:20:52,480
Laying hens were originally moved into 
battery cages for a number of reasons,

218
00:20:52,480 --> 00:20:57,760
including profit and management-oriented 
benefits such as: reduced labor requirements,

219
00:20:57,760 --> 00:21:02,240
greater efficiency of space (meaning more birds housed in the same area),

220
00:21:02,240 --> 00:21:07,760
and lower feed requirements. However, there 
were also perceived benefits to the hens

221
00:21:07,760 --> 00:21:14,160
themselves, including: a reduction in disease 
transference, injurious pecking, and cannibalism.

222
00:21:14,160 --> 00:21:22,720
As demand rose for cage-free systems, multiple 
studies found that the mortality rate in non-cage

223
00:21:22,720 --> 00:21:27,360
systems was higher than in battery cage systems due to those very issues.

224
00:21:27,360 --> 00:21:32,400
Meaning there was an increase in injurious 
pecking, cannibalism and disease transference.

225
00:21:32,400 --> 00:21:36,080
One of the more comprehensive studies 
that I'd quoted in the past found that

226
00:21:36,080 --> 00:21:42,400
cage-free hens had 2.5 times higher 
mortality rates than battery-caged hens.

227
00:21:42,400 --> 00:21:48,080
But, to be clear, that finding was not 
isolated to that study or even one country.

228
00:21:48,080 --> 00:21:53,680
So, it would seem that cage-free eggs actually 
result in more deaths than conventional battery cages.

229
00:21:53,680 --> 00:21:59,200
However, in more recent years, 
researches have pointed out that the reason

230
00:21:59,200 --> 00:22:04,640
for higher mortality rates may not have 
anything to do with the housing system per se.

231
00:22:04,640 --> 00:22:10,960
Instead, the rates appear more reliably tied to 
the genetic strain of hens within the facilities,

232
00:22:10,960 --> 00:22:16,528
the experience level of managing 
staff, and whether flocks are debeaked.

233
00:22:16,720 --> 00:22:23,040
Researchers argue that as producers have become 
more familiar with managing non-cage systems,

234
00:22:23,040 --> 00:22:28,240
and have started using more "appropriate" breeds, 
the mortality rates have been on the decline;

235
00:22:28,240 --> 00:22:30,800
and they believe this decline will continue.

236
00:22:30,800 --> 00:22:35,520
Now, at first glance, I was worried 
I'd been conveying faulty data.

237
00:22:35,520 --> 00:22:42,160
That perhaps decline in mortality rates in 
non-cage systems was a promising trend in

238
00:22:42,160 --> 00:22:48,240
support of such humane labels as "cage-free." 
But the more I read, the more I found that,

239
00:22:48,240 --> 00:22:54,400
rather than pointing to reasons for hope, the 
causes of mortality decline actually highlighted

240
00:22:54,400 --> 00:23:02,400
the reality that within the animal products 
industries, the solutions are the problems.

241
00:23:03,200 --> 00:23:08,400
What I mean by this is that every time 
our breeding, confinement, mutilation and

242
00:23:08,400 --> 00:23:15,840
slaughter of non-human animals invariably cause 
ethical, environmental and health problems,

243
00:23:15,840 --> 00:23:23,360
we strive to solve them with different variations of 
breeding, confinement, mutilation and slaughter.

244
00:23:23,360 --> 00:23:28,320
We continue this cycle over and over again—addressing

245
00:23:28,320 --> 00:23:36,640
problems of our own creation with solutions that 
will eventually become our next problem—rather

246
00:23:37,360 --> 00:23:43,680
than stepping back and questioning 
our use of animals in the first place.

247
00:23:44,480 --> 00:23:51,360
When hens injure and kill one another due to 
their breeding and living conditions—both of which

248
00:23:51,360 --> 00:23:59,440
have been imposed upon them—the solution is to cut 
off their beaks and further alter their breeding.

249
00:23:59,440 --> 00:24:06,443
This has happened before in the reverse. 
In Denmark, laying hens were not moved into cages until 1980.

250
00:24:06,443 --> 00:24:12,047
At the time, the dominant breed of hens was adapted 
specifically for non-cage systems.

251
00:24:12,047 --> 00:24:15,840
When moved into cages, their mortality rate increased

252
00:24:15,840 --> 00:24:24,655
five times over—the same trend observed when 
moving hens bred for battery cages into non-cage environments.

253
00:24:24,655 --> 00:24:28,720
The problem isn't really the housing, the label, the stocking density,

254
00:24:28,720 --> 00:24:35,680
or whatever we want to point to: the problem is 
us and the way in which we relate to these beings.

255
00:24:36,320 --> 00:24:40,480
I also want to note that in all the 
research I came across about mortality

256
00:24:40,480 --> 00:24:46,160
rates not being down to the housing system, 
the importance of debeaking hens to reduce

257
00:24:46,160 --> 00:24:50,255
injurious and cannibalistic behavior was strongly emphasized.

258
00:24:50,255 --> 00:24:56,960
Even if using the "appropriate" breed of hen and having more 
experienced management, whether a flock

259
00:24:56,960 --> 00:25:04,160
was debeaked or not was often the deciding factor 
in mortality rates. Of course, debeaking is a

260
00:25:04,160 --> 00:25:10,640
painful mutilation in which a portion of a 
bird's sensitive beaks is cut or burned off.

261
00:25:10,640 --> 00:25:15,920
I found a statement from Ian J.H. Duncan, 
Professor Emeritus and Emeritus Chair in

262
00:25:15,920 --> 00:25:20,880
Animal Welfare at the University of Guelph, Canada, 
that illustrates this predicament.

263
00:25:20,880 --> 00:25:25,120
He said: "If [producers] do not trim beaks, then feather pecking

264
00:25:25,120 --> 00:25:30,960
and cannibalism may cause enormous suffering. 
If they do trim beaks by conventional methods,

265
00:25:30,960 --> 00:25:35,680
the birds will suffer from acute and chronic pain...

266
00:25:35,680 --> 00:25:42,080
Chopping off parts of young animals in order to prevent 
future welfare problems is a very crude solution."

267
00:25:42,080 --> 00:25:47,040
And he proposed instead that "likely...the 
long-term solution to this problem will

268
00:25:47,040 --> 00:25:54,000
be a genetic one..." And while certainly less 
objectionable than debeaking on a visceral level,

269
00:25:54,000 --> 00:26:01,760
genetic manipulation of sentient beings to 
serve our purposes is not only extremely

270
00:26:01,760 --> 00:26:09,120
ethically problematic, but—once again—what 
got us into this position in the first place.

271
00:26:09,120 --> 00:26:15,712
When we as activists push for welfare reform, 
higher standards, better regulations

272
00:26:15,712 --> 00:26:24,160
—we are participating in this cycle. We are participating 
in a system built upon a faulty and unethical

273
00:26:24,160 --> 00:26:31,680
premise: that animals are ours to use. 
That there is a right and acceptable way to use them.

274
00:26:31,680 --> 00:26:38,640
That the solution to their suffering is to 
further control and manipulate their very beings.

275
00:26:39,440 --> 00:26:43,920
So, after covering examples of what not to say in our activism,

276
00:26:43,920 --> 00:26:48,640
I wanted to touch on some approaches of 
what to say—and how to say it as well as

277
00:26:48,640 --> 00:26:52,800
ways to remove common barriers that 
arise when speaking with non-vegans.

278
00:26:52,800 --> 00:26:58,720
As activists, we must stay focused on the 
universal truth underlying any use of sentient

279
00:26:58,720 --> 00:27:05,040
beings: that even if we imagine an idealized 
small farm, where animals are given ample space

280
00:27:05,040 --> 00:27:10,960
outdoors, their every need cared for—there will 
still come a time when their life is cut short.

281
00:27:10,960 --> 00:27:17,399
Their entire existence is still based upon 
an owner-product framework;

282
00:27:17,399 --> 00:27:23,040
their value not viewed as inherent, but rather 
calculated down to the dollar.

283
00:27:23,680 --> 00:27:28,480
One way of effectively cutting to this core 
truth for non-vegans is to place it within

284
00:27:28,480 --> 00:27:36,800
a familiar emotional framework. We may have them 
envision this idealized small farm, but, imagine,

285
00:27:36,800 --> 00:27:41,797
in place of the happy farmed animals, a beloved family pet.

286
00:27:41,797 --> 00:27:44,994
Would it be acceptable to end their pets life?

287
00:27:44,994 --> 00:27:50,000
What if it was guaranteed they wouldn't 
feel a thing; that it would be quick and humane?

288
00:27:50,960 --> 00:27:56,528
Instantly the unacceptability is clear at a visceral level.

289
00:27:56,715 --> 00:28:03,040
From that connection, we can explore with them 
what the difference is between a pet and the

290
00:28:03,040 --> 00:28:08,000
sentient beings in the food industry? 
Do they not also feel pain and fear?

291
00:28:08,560 --> 00:28:14,160
We can even give a specific example: when a 
mother cow in the dairy industry cries out for

292
00:28:14,160 --> 00:28:21,360
her calf—taken from her so she will produce more 
milk for humans—is that not a mother grieving?

293
00:28:21,360 --> 00:28:26,720
When she is sexually violated yet again 
to induce yet another pregnancy and give

294
00:28:26,720 --> 00:28:35,353
birth to yet another child who will yet again be taken
—how can that not take an emotional and physical toll?

295
00:28:35,353 --> 00:28:39,120
There's a reason dairy cows' bodies generally give out around age four to five,

296
00:28:39,120 --> 00:28:44,240
despite a natural life span of twenty years or more.

297
00:28:44,240 --> 00:28:50,290
Applying such emotionality to non-human animals 
is often criticized as anthropomorphic

298
00:28:50,290 --> 00:28:55,760
—an objection that illustrates the contradiction of humane concepts.

299
00:28:55,760 --> 00:29:02,640
Humane regulations are an inherent admission 
of animals’ ability to suffer and feel pain.

300
00:29:03,200 --> 00:29:08,800
How can we claim that our animals are 
healthy and happy—then deny they possess

301
00:29:08,800 --> 00:29:14,480
these capacities when asked to see from their perspective? 
We cannot have it both ways.

302
00:29:14,480 --> 00:29:19,200
This is how profoundly illogical our 
thinking is when it comes to animals.

303
00:29:19,200 --> 00:29:26,320
Knowing better but doing wrong anyway is worse 
than having no knowledge. Yet we have the audacity

304
00:29:26,320 --> 00:29:33,440
to hold the legislative recognition of non-human 
sentience on high as a giant step forward

305
00:29:33,440 --> 00:29:38,480
for the rights of animals, as if 
systematically exploiting individuals with

306
00:29:38,480 --> 00:29:45,680
fully admitted knowledge and comprehension of 
their capacity to suffer is something to commend.

307
00:29:46,560 --> 00:29:50,720
Highlighting this faulty logic and 
focusing on the fundamental truth

308
00:29:50,720 --> 00:29:56,959
we’ve all known since childhood—that it's not okay 
to hurt others—

309
00:29:56,959 --> 00:30:04,800
cuts through all the convoluted justifications and diversions, 
allowing people to re-connect with their own values.

310
00:30:04,800 --> 00:30:06,720
As I stated in the opening of this speech,

311
00:30:06,720 --> 00:30:10,800
activists often fall into the trap of offering gradations of change

312
00:30:10,800 --> 00:30:16,480
or "humane" alternatives when seeking a more 
approachable "entry point" to offer non-vegans.

313
00:30:16,480 --> 00:30:20,320
I’ve long believed that one of the main reasons people don’t go vegan

314
00:30:20,320 --> 00:30:25,680
is the immense pain and guilt of 
accepting our part in horrific atrocities.

315
00:30:25,680 --> 00:30:32,640
Confronting the true impact of our choices is 
incredibly daunting, so instead we shut down,

316
00:30:32,640 --> 00:30:38,408
attack, or throw out any number of the standard objections 
you’ve no doubt heard countless times:

317
00:30:38,408 --> 00:30:41,520
lions, desert islands, what about protein.

318
00:30:41,643 --> 00:30:47,600
It’s human nature to raise our guards when we’re 
on the defensive—we close off and shut down.

319
00:30:47,600 --> 00:30:54,524
And it would seem logical as activists to avoid upsetting our
audience in order to keep their receptivity open

320
00:30:54,524 --> 00:30:58,480
—however, this is a perfect illustrative example of walking the line.

321
00:30:58,480 --> 00:31:01,920
It’s not about making sure not to upset anyone

322
00:31:01,920 --> 00:31:09,520
—if they’re grasping the truth, they should be upset! 
It’s making sure that the push-back to the truths

323
00:31:09,520 --> 00:31:16,400
we reveal are aimed at their rightful sources, 
leading to constructive, well-deserved outrage.

324
00:31:16,400 --> 00:31:22,000
When we present them with solid factual 
information about the industries in an educational setting,

325
00:31:22,000 --> 00:31:29,280
we supply a “buffer” of sorts—providing 
a target for their outrage other than themselves,

326
00:31:29,280 --> 00:31:34,459
thus sidestepping shut-down and channelling their outrage to action.

327
00:31:34,459 --> 00:31:40,160
I do want to note that this is not an 
attempt to excuse participation in exploitation.

328
00:31:40,160 --> 00:31:45,920
When I speak to a non-vegan audience, I always 
tell them that they deserve to know the truth

329
00:31:45,920 --> 00:31:49,760
about what they're putting in their body—about 
what they're feeding their children.

330
00:31:49,760 --> 00:31:56,320
They deserve to know how what they eat impacts their 
planet. And that they certainly deserve to know

331
00:31:56,320 --> 00:32:01,070
what they are paying others to do to animals in their name.

332
00:32:01,200 --> 00:32:08,403
Approaching vegan outreach from this perspective 
helps defuse the "charge" of defensiveness and resistance.

333
00:32:08,403 --> 00:32:13,200
There is no need to pander, sugarcoat, or offer more palatable options.

334
00:32:13,200 --> 00:32:18,720
I simply present them with factual evidence, allowing them to evaluate

335
00:32:18,720 --> 00:32:23,520
whether they want to continue supporting actions out of line with their values.

336
00:32:24,160 --> 00:32:29,520
Another barrier I strive to eliminate in my activism is the issue of trust.

337
00:32:29,520 --> 00:32:35,520
There are many reasons non-vegans may dismiss the vegan 
message, not the least of which is the messenger.

338
00:32:35,520 --> 00:32:40,880
This is why, when I speak with non-vegans, 
I am sure to present information put forth by

339
00:32:40,880 --> 00:32:46,720
their own agricultural industries and governmental 
bodies. This not only helps defuse the potential

340
00:32:46,720 --> 00:32:52,880
defensive charge of some random vegan telling 
them how bad things are, but it also allows me

341
00:32:52,880 --> 00:33:00,960
to show that even the proposed ideal
—which is of course never met—is absolutely horrifying.

342
00:33:00,960 --> 00:33:08,771
This is of particular importance when speaking to 
audiences in other countries and cross-culturally.

343
00:33:08,771 --> 00:33:10,560
When I spoke in Dubin, Ireland,

344
00:33:10,560 --> 00:33:15,280
I dove deep into the humane legislation 
of both Ireland and the European Union.

345
00:33:15,280 --> 00:33:19,280
Now, Ireland is a powerful case 
study—it’s essentially the humane

346
00:33:19,280 --> 00:33:24,880
concept embodied in country form. 
Cows graze outside in picturesque fields,

347
00:33:24,880 --> 00:33:31,251
lending support to the common refrain that “it’s not like that here.” 
And by all appearances and accounts, it’s not.

348
00:33:31,251 --> 00:33:34,880
Even after some digging, I only found a single undercover video of abuse.

349
00:33:35,440 --> 00:33:41,360
However, I didn't want to focus on abuse. 
I wanted to focus on the ideal standards.

350
00:33:41,360 --> 00:33:46,025
I told the audience, “the facts I’ll present 
today are not of my creation

351
00:33:46,025 --> 00:33:51,280
—I’ve sourced them from primarily Irish governmental and 
industry documents, the European Union,"

352
00:33:51,280 --> 00:33:56,160
and stated that they didn’t even have to 
believe me, as I’d be providing a link to a full

353
00:33:56,160 --> 00:34:02,160
transcript of the talk with citations for every 
fact, a bibliography and additional resources.

354
00:34:02,160 --> 00:34:05,520
This not only provides opportunity for further learning,

355
00:34:05,520 --> 00:34:09,520
but also removes the significant potential barrier

356
00:34:09,520 --> 00:34:16,240
of requiring someone to trust in me personally 
on issues about which they’re already guarded.

357
00:34:16,240 --> 00:34:21,575
As animal activists, we do not have to fear presenting the bare facts.

358
00:34:21,575 --> 00:34:25,040
We don't have to try to sensationalise or exaggerate:

359
00:34:25,600 --> 00:34:33,840
The truth is bad enough. 
The ideal—the very best we have to offer—is bad enough.

360
00:34:34,640 --> 00:34:38,457
And more importantly, we do not need to—and should not—

361
00:34:38,457 --> 00:34:44,237
compromise the integrity of our ethics in an effort to 
make veganism more approachable.

362
00:34:44,390 --> 00:34:49,440
When we do so, we're supporting the very things we are fighting against.

363
00:34:50,000 --> 00:34:57,222
We do not have to fear sharing the truth with 
others—it's not only vital for the sentient beings

364
00:34:57,222 --> 00:35:01,862
we are defending, but it's also the most respectful approach

365
00:35:01,862 --> 00:35:06,880
for the non-vegan with whom we're speaking. 
They deserve to know.

366
00:35:06,880 --> 00:35:11,470
And they deserve to make a choice 
with all the facts at their disposal.

367
00:35:11,600 --> 00:35:15,840
I hope that this has been a helpful exploration 
of the importance of language in activism.

368
00:35:16,800 --> 00:35:18,668
Thank you so much for having me.

369
00:35:18,800 --> 00:35:23,598
I hope you enjoyed hearing my speech from 
the Humane Hoax Online Conference.

370
00:35:23,598 --> 00:35:25,760
To stay in the loop about new Bite Size Vegan content and updates,

371
00:35:25,760 --> 00:35:31,054
remember to subscribe to the newsletter or 
follow the Telegram channel for the most reliable notifications.

372
00:35:31,208 --> 00:35:33,632
Now go live vegan, and I'll see you soon.