About four years ago now, I attended the first Wake Up Weekend vegan event at Calvin College as a skeptical pseudo-vegetarian. (Yes. I admit that at that time I was–for some inexplicable reason–still convinced that fish were not animals.) I could see why killing cows, pigs, chicken and other animals for food was problematic–especially from a health perspective. But these vegans seemed to be making a bigger deal about eggs and dairy than I thought were warranted at the time. As the two-day event unfolded, Harold Brown (Farm Kind), Adam Durand (Compassionate Consumers), Nicole Matthews (PETA), and Nathan Runkle (Mercy For Animals) made their case for veganism as a matter of ethics and slowly I began to see things differently than when I arrived. However, it was really the first release of the documentary Peaceable Kingdom, that transformed my skepticism, nixed my pseudo-vegetarianism, and propelled me toward seeing veganism as an integral part of my commitments to social justice, creation care and to my walk as a follower of Christ.

To say that watching the earlier version of the Peaceable Kingdom was a powerful and transforrming experience for me would be an underwhelming way to put it. Watching that film made my heart ache as it opened my eyes to the reality of processing animals for food, be it meat, eggs or dairy. I was blind to the reality of what was happening each day to bring certain items to my table, and the film gently called me to a different way of being, even as it exposed my incredible naĂŻvetĂ©. Even so, the producers of the film Tribe of Heart recognized that there were shortcomings in the storytelling, the main one of which was the focus solely on factory farming. Issues of “humane meat” production were not included in a significant way and as this industry grew and the veneer of “free range” and “grass-fed” labels increased, people responded to images of outright cruelty in films like Peaceable Kingdom by simply switching brands and glossing over the heart of the matter.

Now a second edition of Peaceable Kingdom has been created to posit that the source of animal cruelty (and this includes for me unnecessary killing for food when alternatives are available) is not simply the particular system in which they are reared. The source lies in the basic view of these creatures as commodities, resources and products and, I would add, the persistent need human beings have to see themselves as wholly distinct from (and therefore more worthy of care, compassion and mercy) than other animals. The new documentary tried to address this core by interviewing both farmers who once participated in industrial methods, and people who have tried to adopt more humane alternatives. Of particular interest to me is the story of Jim Vandersluis and Cheri Ezell-Vandersluis who find that their “their idyllic vision” of starting a small goat dairy farm in which excess animals could avoid the slaughterhouse “crash head-on with the economic realities of animal farming.” Then there is the story of Cayce Mell who discovers that–even after her training to become a police officer dedicated to humane animal issues does little to address the real underlying problems.

Although I have seen the first version of the film, these improvements make me want to see and hear the story told anew. I encourage others who haven’t seen it before or who wonder if it might be worth seeing it again to think about watching it. Currently, there are screenings scheduled for this June at the Berkshire International Film Festival in Massachusetts, the Cleveland Institute of Art in Ohio, and at the Mindful Metropolis Event in Chicago. A DVD will hopefully be available for purchase soon. For more information, visit www.peaceablekingdomfilm.org

Set on the planet Pandora, Avatar is a sci-fi story of a mercenary-backed corporation’s attempt to confiscate and mine the land inhabited by humanoid aliens known as the Na’vi. Enter Jake Sully, the paraplegic U.S. marine protagonist who joins the science and anthropology wing of the operation as a substitute navigator for his deceased twin brother’s avatar. Early in the film, we discover that the avatar is an expensive high-tech clone that allows its user to temporarily experience and subsequently infiltrate the Na’vi community. After a series of unexpected events during his first avatar excursion, Jake finds himself living amongst the Na’vi clan known as the Omaticaya where he becomes an apprentice to the female tribe member Neytiri. From that point, the film revolves around the internal and external conflicts that arise as Jake bonds with the Omaticaya and struggles between his mission and his allegiance to the aliens.

Although Avatar’s primary focus is on Jake’s steady transition from an ambivalent supporter and participant in colonizing Pandora to a rebel against both the project and his own people, the film also touches on a number of hot-button issues. Without trying too hard, viewers will quickly notice thinly veiled commentary on the Iraq War, the American government’s policy on terrorism, veteran benefits, corporate greed and concern for the environment. There even appears to be a nod to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as the Na’vi attempt to fight heavily armed helicopters with wooden bows and arrows. Yet these and other references are used to explore the film’s bigger question: who are the savages, the terrorists, the “uncivilized?” Is it the near-naked, primal, forest-dwellers with the intimate connection to each other and their planet? Or is it the technologically advanced humans who kill and dominate on behalf of their shareholders? Avatar clearly answers: it is the latter. Yet, the film also insists that the colonizer’s savagery is not a permanent condition. How it chooses to make this second point, however, is praiseworthy at times and problematic at others.

Full review also available for download as a PDF

This year, the featured guest will be Vegan Soul Kitchen eco-chef and bestselling cookbook author Bryant Terry. Other speakers include ĂĽberActivist Paul Shapiro (Humane Society) who will discuss recent animal protection legislation and the generous and spirited Harold Brown (Farm Kind) who will share about veganic agriculture. More speakers are expected in addition to the vegan eats, art displays and the ever popular vegan chili cook-off. For a full schedule, keep your eyes peeled on the extraVEGANza Web site: http://g-rad.org/vegan/

As a vegetarian and staunch non-vegan, I went to Wake Up Weekend three-years ago as a hard-core skeptic and left as a convert. Listening to passionate presenters Christian and non-, meeting (*gasp*) healthy, happy committed vegans who could articulate their positions well, and most of all seeing with eyes wide open the plight of God’s creatures who we destroy for consumption was one of the most transforming (spiritually, mentally, practically, etc) things I have done. If you are a vegetarian who isn’t sure what the big deal is with “those vegans,” or a “meat”-eater who is open-minded enough for a challenge, or a convinced ethical vegan who wants to meet new people, deepen your knowledge or get some kick-ass new recipes, I highly recommend checking out this event if you can.

At Yale University, the IACUC permitted psychiatry professor Marina Picciotto to measure despair in mice by forcing them to swim in pools of water with no resting platform or by hanging them from their tails. For each group of mice, despair was measured by how little they were still willing to struggle to save themselves.

In another study, Picciotto bored holes into rats’ skulls, injected chemicals directly into their brains, and then decapitated the animals and froze their heads. In a study on learned helplessness, she exposed mice to 360 inescapable shocks. And in yet another experiment, Picciotto deprived monkeys of fluids and then gave them Kool-Aid mixed with liquid nicotine as their sole source of fluid. The amount of nicotine ingested by one monkey reached the equivalent of smoking 17 packs of cigarettes per day.

The fact that this systematic torture of nonhuman animals passes for research should give people pause. This student, Annie Le, and her killer were engaged in this activity day in and day out. Cutting holes in skulls, injecting chemicals, feeding monkeys poisonous chemicals we already know cause cancer. As usual the mainstream press merely mentions the fact that this is a research lab, but has failed to mention what the people inside that laboratory do to other living creatures every single day. No motive has been proffered for the killing of the student. But perhaps her killer was desensitized to violence through these horrific practices.

In addition, the fact that a male has killed a non-white female in this crime is an additional factor to ponder. As Nekeisha Alexis-Baker has noted, there is an intimate connection between slavery, patriarchy and speciesism. And unfortunately, even animal welfare groups exploit women to try to get their message across. As if anybody will be convinced by the type of ads this Dutch group has produced.

Whether it is the mainstream media, or animals rights groups, separating the violence done to nonhuman animals, women and people of color by dominant groups misses the way oppressions and violences reinforce one another and set the conditions for which the other violences can happen at all.

This past spring we helped to organize a small informational gathering on veganism at Associated Mennonite Biblical Seminary, called “peaceable eating.” Mercy for Animals gave a presentation on the egg industry showing that not only regular eggs but also “free range” eggs are part of an industrial system that treats the chickens very poorly in many ways. We then showed a video called “Wegman’s Cruelty” which makes the point very well through images.

The response after the presentation and the video by one of our AMBS professors has had me thinking for quite a while about the use of video and imagery in making a case for veganism. This particular professor told me that everybody can agree that the way the animals are treated is just aweful and something ought to be done to make sure they are treated well. But he could not agree that using nonhuman animals for food is in itself a problem. It is the treatment that is the problem, not our use of nonhuman animals for our own purposes.

I have wondered whether the video (and perhaps the initial presentation) did not reinforce that presumption in this friend and professor.

When I taught at Goshen College in the peace and justice department this past year, I spent three days on the subject in a course, and I showed a video to the class (Earthlings). A large portion of the class became vegetarian or vegan as a result and I think the video definitely helped in that process, but only because it was part of a larger, drawn out argument that treatment is not the issue. I argued that it is our exploitation and use of animals itself that is part of the problem (speciesism), and that animal rights advocates have actually very little to show for their efforts at reform over the last few hundred years. I also used Gary Francione’s arguments that most of us agree that we should not unnecessarily inflict suffering or death on any creature, but that the only way we do so to nonhumans is for unnecessary reasons. The video, within that large, sustained study seemed to have made sense. Still, I wonder. I wish there were a way to show how the use is a problem through video so that I am not simply feeding into our culture’s desensitized reaction to graphic violence.

The professor who was not convinced at our small gathering did not stay for the presentation that followed, which was by Nekeisha Alexis-Baker. Her presentation focused on the similarities in the way Black people, women, and animals have been used and how the three groups’ expoitation are actually intertwined quite often. Had he stayed for that presentation, perhaps his questions could have been different. We have uploaded Nekeisha’s video to the speciesism page (and in this post). She has given this presentation at Calvin College, AMBS, and at two universities in Sweden this summer.

Truth be told, I am highly critical of the way PETA’s public campaigns often reinforce sexism in their efforts to combat speciesism, and the way they don’t seem to make deep connections between ALL oppressions as evidenced by their ill-conceived KKK-action (see Humans are also animals article for a pretty solid critique). That said, I think Friedrich is very thoughtful and candid, and he makes some excellent points about why our call to nonviolence and mercy as Jesus-followers should be extended to nonhuman animals, and why our concern for nonhuman animals does not mean disregard for human suffering.