Sex and the City Saves Elephants

Actress Kristin Davis, co-star of the show Sex and the City, traveled to Kenya a few years ago for a safari. A ranger approached her vehicle and asked if they'd seen a baby elephant, so the whole truck stayed with the rangers for two days helping look for the baby. They finally found her among lava rocks, scared and angry, and had to cover her eyes and practically tackle her to get her safe. They gave her water, moistened her skin and transported her back to the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust, where she'd be cared for.

The rangers who approached Kristin's truck did so not because they thought approaching a celebrity would help, but because they simply needed more eyes. In fact, they didn't know she was a celebrity. It took DSWT a few weeks to realize who she was. Kristin Davis adopted the baby elephant she helped find, who was named for the area they found her, for $50, getting her email updates as to the elephant's health.

The David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust takes in orphaned elephants, most of whom are orphans because their mothers were slaughtered for their ivory tusks, and raises them to be released back into the wild. Some of the adult elephants actually come back to the reserve on occasion for a visit.

Oh, and Kristin Davis is also an advocate of women's rights. While her character in the TV series would get into the gritty details of her sex life, the actress laments that there are so few shows on TV that star women that each one still gets compared to Sex and the City, which ended 8 years ago. She does Broadway now, has adopted a baby girl, and has become the public face of the Wildlife Trust. She feels strongly about women's health issues and women's rights; she wants to raise her daughter to grow up in a world where there are not only elephants but complete freedom for women. Surely having played such a liberal, confident woman for so many years has helped shape her own beliefs and ideals (or did her beliefs and ideals shape the character?), but to have a show that starred and focused almost entirely on women be as popular as it was encouraged the teens and young women watching it to pursue their dreams.

Kristin Davis has done a lot to educate herself on the plight of elephants over the last few years and has compared buying ivory to buying blood diamonds, bringing something people widely regard as into the spotlight, using terms they recognize and understand. She's trying to bring attention to the severity of the problem (elephants could be gone in less than 10 years), describing the scenes she herself has witnessed (an elephant's head hacked off after it had been chained to a tree and left to die, with another not a half mile away).

"You want gritty details?" She asks, fully prepared to give journalists the shock they're looking for.

Oh yeah, and she's also passionate about women's issues and laments that there aren't enough shows about women. I don't think I could like a celebrity any more.

One Is Not Like The Other: Part 1

This is what's wrong.

Let's get this straight right at the beginning: animal activism does not equal veganism.

Surprisingly, it is actually possible to eat meat and animal products and still support animal rights and welfare. I know, right? Now, this will involve educating yourself on your meat and animal choices and reevaluating where your food comes from and exactly how far you're willing to go to meet yourself in the middle. But it's really not hard, especially if animal activism is important to you.

Up until my preteen years I was an avid meat eater. In a way I identified with predators (my cat and dog, the hawks and owls I watched around my house, even the way my rat ate bugs), and meat was tasty. Especially sausage. Mmmmm, sausage. My tastes have changed over the years and although I eat very limited amounts of meat now I don't like the notion that you have to be vegan in order to support animal welfare.

I come across websites that imply (or outright state) that the only way to be a real animal activist is to adopt a vegan lifestyle. While I fully support those who are vegan and sometimes wish I had the courage and tastebuds there's just no way I could do that. And that's because I love cheese. Cream cheese with salsa or cottage cheese and tomatoes for breakfast, potatoes with eggs and cheddar in a burrito, mozzarella with tomatoes and basil, grilled cheese sandwiches, pepper jack or gouda with crackers and apple slices, rice and beans with cheese... I love cheese. The only meatless things I can order when eating out have cheese. And I'm OK with that.

But here's the thing: I love animals. Animals will always be around, and not having a pet in 2008 was the most depressing time in my life. Seeing wildlife every day at the Wild Animal Park made my year in 2009, I vote for animal rights when they're on the ballot. I make choices based on how it will affect animals and their environments and choose the meats I do eat carefully. But I also love food. Like, really love food. Cooking, creating new dishes, sharing food with people, grocery shopping, and eating. I love eating. I will never be one of those skinny twigs because I love food. 

Probably 90% of my grocery shopping is done at Trader Joe's and Sprouts, which is about as local as it can get without going to a farmer's market (which is great, just a bit out of my budget for most things). I support local hunting and fishing and don't believe that eating animals is inherently wrong. It's the way we get our meat that's wrong, but that's in another post. It's also the idea that we must be eating meat for our meal to be "real"or for us to be healthy that's wrong.

Eating meat does not make a person an opponent of animal welfare just like not eating meat does not make a person a supporter of animal welfare. There are plenty of people who eat meat and support animal rights, people who want to see the way our animals are raised change, people who acknowledge their place as an omnivore who also believe animals we eat deserve a better quality of life and death. Suggesting otherwise is a little closed minded.

Eating Dogs

Don't do a Google image search for "dog meat."

Depending on where you live, the concept of eating dogs really doesn't give people the reaction that it probably (hopefully) gives you.

However, this is not going to be a debate about eating dogs.

I came across this article on CNN a while back that was provocatively titled "What's wrong with eating dog meat?" So of course I clicked on it, because... well, that's what it was there for (so I'm a sucker). The article was written in a slightly negative tone about how animal activists complained enough to make the Korea Dog Farmers' Association cancel their dog meat festival, which was designed to showcase the upside of eating dog.

Dog meat isn't actually consumed very often in Korea, so that's not the point (China is a little bit of a different story). The point is going to be a less animal activist and a lot more English major.

First, the writer calls it ironic that animal activists claim we shouldn't eat dogs because they're companion animals even though Korea didn't have many companion dogs until very recently. That's not ironic.

Second, the writer pulls quotes from other authorities to describe the difference between Korea's pet dog population (in the city) and meat dog population (on shit farms in the country), and how the only difference between these two types of dogs is that one was born in one place and one was born in another. As soon as this quote is finished, the writer launches into a just-because-we-don't-do-it-here-doesn't-mean-it's-bad closing argument. WTF? Where did that come from?

Her last words, calling a practice bad just because it's not a worldwide practice doesn't make a very good argument, follow several (very short) paragraphs about how dog meat isn't even a popular food, how more and more Koreans are taking on pet dogs and how animal activists in Korea have effectively shut down pro-dog meat festival. Ms Emily Lodish, you do not know how to construct an argument either for or against something.

But your editor can write a damn controversial title.

Eating Animals: A Review

This guy knows what's up. And so do I.

I've embarked on a mission. Since middle school I've restricted my meat intake, cutting out cows, pigs, sheep (not that I ever even ate sheep) and fish (but I didn't even like fish anyway). Then I discovered I really liked fish and kept my meat-eating to fish and poultry. Then I more or less discovered (rediscovered? remembered? acknowledged?) the pain and suffering most poultry endures to become food, so I decided to (mostly) stick to free range birds and sustainable fish. Then I discovered how expensive it is to eat animals and by default became a vegetarian-when-alonekind of person who ate chicken and fish when someone else was doing the grocery shopping.

Then I read Foer's book, Eating Animals. I learned cows are treated the best of any animal we eat (which is still awful), pigs are treated better than they used to (which is still awful), and birds and fish suffer the worst (which is awful). Which is interesting because I and probably others restricted our diets to poultry because we figured cows were too... human... to eat. Chickens are birds and fish are fish, and they're much further removed evolutionarily from us mammals. But as Foer rightfully points out, they still feel pain and their ethical regulations are kind of nonexistent, with stuffed bird cages stacked one on top of the other and fish left hanging on hooks for hours at best. So when you look at it that way, the best thing to do is to be a vegetarian.

Actually, the best thing to do is to be vegan, but that takes resources unavailable to many people. And, let's face it, I'm not giving up cheese.

As Foer mentions several times throughout his book, what you eat is a choice. You choose to order chicken or beef or fish or no meat at all. Every meal is a choice, and every time you choose meat you support the meat industry, like it or not. Foer, obviously, chooses to be a vegetarian and to raise his young son vegetarian.

But here's where I disagree with him: though he never once wrote that the goal of his book was for everyone to become vegetarian, he did say those in the know about the animal industry have a responsibility to inform others of the meaning of their choice. Which means you should inform your friends and family that their turkey sandwich is the end product of hundreds of thousands of birds suffering cruel torture their whole, short lives until dying a slow and painful death, and that's to say nothing of the toxins and bacteria found in the meat. The biggest problem with that plan, though, is it's a surefire way to lose friends and alienate people. And then what good are you to the vegetarian mission if everyone you know thinks you're crazy?

Where I do agree with Foer is that every time you eat you influence others. I believe that is a stronger method of conversion, even if just for one meal, than scaring your tablemates with horror stories of factory farms. When others see your delicious vegetarian meal (creamy mushroom risotto, for example... mmmmm) they'll be more apt to think they ought to give that a try next time. But if you're sitting at the table with a salad and everyone else ordered a juicy steak, telling them the pain and suffering that cow endured right before they take their first bites isn't going to win anyone over.

I think I can sum up America's problem with meat consumption in one sentence: we believe that we have to have some sort of meat on the plate or it's not a complete meal. (For example, bacon and eggs at breakfast, turkey sandwich at lunch, meat sauce on pasta, and pepperoni on pizza.) When we have a vegetarian meal we think we're being so healthy or giving up so much, when we really aren't. The picture below is what I ate while typing this paragraph.

Yum.

A black bean, corn and onion mix, spooned onto a tortilla with melted cheese, and topped with bell peppers, tomatoes and spinach. I served myself with a side of mango salsa and tortilla chips, and I felt very satisfied.

And speaking of myself (because, after all, this is my blog and I am writing about my own little mission for truth), I made the decision to not make a decision. Ta da! I've read one book on the subject and there are hundreds more equally full of good information. I know what my conscience tells me, but I know what my reality is. For the time being, at least until I can read some more books, I'm going to be as vegetarian as possible. It's actually very easy to be vegetarian: meat is just too expensive to buy regularly anyway, and vegetarian dishes from restaurants are almost always as good or better (vegetarian burrito from Chipotle FTW!). My biggest hurdle is cooking with friends. Most of my friends enjoy eating meat and because I'm not skilled in the cooking-vegetarian-dishes-that-meat-eaters-would-love field I give up easily. I'm comfortable enough buying fish that the EDF says are sustainable or eating fish my friends caught themselves (my lady and I make BOMB fish tacos), I'll still put chicken in my enchiladas until I figure out a good meat-free alternative and I'll still eat eggs (which I'll do my best to buy ethically). My homework includes reading The Omnivore's Dilemma (for funzies I'm re-reading The Jungle while I'm in between researching), experimenting with new recipes and shopping for ethical animal products. It will be a process, but it's been an interest of mine for more than a decade, and one I feel compelled to research until I'm satisfied with my personal answer.

Eating Animals

I kind of have a hard time eating guys like this.

As you may have noticed to the left, I'm reading a book called Eating Animals. Eating Animals is a book I've wanted to read for a long time now for it's frank journalistic look at what eating animals means for us, for animals, and for the planet. The author has had a on-again off-again relationship with eating meat, often being a vegetarian who had bacon on Sundays and on burgers. The book is not, so far at least, an evangelical vegetarian piece. It proposes an honest look at our meat industries, doing research too involved to do on a smaller scale and too unbiased for Peta or other animal welfare groups. The author, Jonathan Safran Foer, is someone who really likes the idea of vegetarianism but also really likes how meat tastes. When his first son was born he realized that he would have to make decisions about food for him, and he decided he couldn't do that without knowing what that meant.

The first few chapters talked almost exclusively about tuna. I read those chapters while eating a tuna melt. The second time I sat down to read I was eating a banana with peanut butter. The third time I ate black bean and corn tacos. I feel I'm going to find it more difficult to eat meat as I read this book, an issue Safran Foer discusses. He points out that the automatic assumption we make when reading about meat, even when we see the title Eating Animals, is that it must be against the meat industry for its inhumane practices, and if that's the automatic assumption made by the majority of the people, what does that tell us? It tells us that we already know the meat industry is wrong, that even if eating meat isn't wrong in itself, that how we treat and kill the animals we do eat is wrong.

One of the reasons I like Safran Foer (so far) is his inquisitive manner and understanding way of writing. He likes meat. It tastes good. He gets that. He just also gets the importance of not supporting the way we obtain our meat. To him, supporting something he believes in is worth ignoring his cravings. He's not out there to convert you- just to provide any reader with the information they need to make a decision 3 times a day. If you make the decision to eat meat, fine. But here are the facts anyway.

Peta, take note. The whole "chickens are people, too" campaign doesn't work. Mostly because chickens aren't people.

Kill All Humans

Bender really does have it right. Humans are the most destructive force on the planet. And some are just downright stupid.

Take Elle Macpherson. Actress, model, designer, producer. Speaks 4 languages, lives in the UK, 2 kids, fucking rich. And she eats rhinoceros horn.

Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah! What the fuck is an quasi-educated white woman doing buying BLACK MARKET ENDANGERED ANIMAL KERATIN? Thanks to you, Elle, rhinos are still endangered. They're still being killed for compressed hair. That's right, hair. Save the stray hairs from your brush until you've got a nice handful, then grate them on your salad. Or use your fingernail clippings. I'm sure for a lot less than $100 grand you can go to a nail salon and ask them to save their clippings for you.

What is it she thinks she gets out of rhino horn that she's willing to pay out the ass for it? She's nearing 50... maybe rhino horn is the fountain of youth? What gets me even more is she's the producer for Britain's Next Top Model, which means all those aspiring young models, who might look up to her, might see that she takes rhino horn and might want to take it, too. Seriously guys, not only is it ridiculously silly, it's illegal. She should have some sort of repercussion for admitting it (and then lying about it: "Oh, it's bad? I mean, I didn't know it was rhino horn, I just thought I was paying thousands for a vial of Chinese herb powder that helps me... um, I dunno, be pretty.") Fucking dumb. She should die like this poor girl:

See that, Elle? She had a 9 month old baby. And you killed her.

That rhino was the last female in Krugersdorp Park in South Africa. Her baby watched the killing and was then moved to an area with other rhino orphans. There are at best 18,000 rhinos in all of Africa right now. Most of them are Southern White rhinos, like 4 are Northern White, and a few thousand are Black rhinos. Rhinos are most protected on reserves, but guess what? This picture was taken on a reserve. Not very protected. This pisses me off so fucking much. It's 100% pointless. I can almost understand ignorant families relying on ancient remedies because they have no other option. But Elle Macpherson has no excuse and this makes her a horrible person.

I have to give a shout out of thanks to Us Weekly. It was in their magazine I learned of Elle Macpherson and her horrific actions. I have a newfound respect for the gossip magazine and am glad they've exposed a model, knowing how many people read it. Thanks, Us Weekly.

*EDIT: Here's another source.

Dog Meat

China is discussing a possible ban on dog meat. Might happen sometime this decade. But you might be thinking, as I did, that dog meat is eaten because there's nothing else to eat, and it's better to eat dog than starve.

Wrong.

Dog meat is on restaurant menus and is rather popular. Dogs are collected in cages and sold and slaughtered. This video on CNN is pretty difficult to watch. It also shows how cats are kept before sold to the slaughter, but cat eating isn't as common. PRI did an interview on the ban, too, and both articles discussed the various reasons people eat dog. Many believe dog is healthier, can keep you warm in winter, help you sweat in summer, and that the adrenaline in the body before the animal is killed is beneficial (dogs are often killed in incredible inhumane manners in order to get that adrenaline). Because the Chinese are getting more and more companion animals dog and cat meat is gradually becoming less popular. Many dissenters argue that some of the animals being sold for slaughter may well be lost or stolen pets. Though no one is arguing that pet dogs should be eaten, there's no way to tell a dog is a stray once the collar is gone.

Actually, that's not true. Well known vegetarian Jonathan Safran Foer makes a case for eating dogs. And he even quotes Animal Farm! Winner! Foer makes a great point, one I've contemplated extensively for several months now, and one that makes me whip out my phone to check the EDF Seafood Selector every time I buy fish. It is strange that we eat some animals and not others, because we don't just eat the stupid ones. And even if we did just eat the stupid animals, no animal is dumb enough to not realize when life sucks and then you die a horrible death.

Whatever you do, do NOT do a Google image search for dog meat. Just don't. I did, and then did a search for cute puppies in order to not start crying. And now

Plus One For Dogs

Cutest soldier you'll see all day.

Over a year ago an Australian dog went missing in Afghani desert and was presumed dead. Until this week.

Sabi, a black Australian lab, isn't just a dog. She's a highly trained bomb sniffer working for the Australian Special Forces in Afghanistan. Sabi is as much soldier as any human working alongside her and she undoubtedly saved soldier's lives by detecting bombs. She became separated from her handler during a battle in harsh desert and went missing, being apparently "incarcerated by enemy combatants."

Even the fucking Taliban recognized this ordinary looking dog as a valued soldier and jailed her rather than shooting her on sight. She was apparently kept in decent condition, too, as she "showed no signs of stress," greeted strangers like any lab would (with a slobbery tongue), and appeared healthy. An American soldier recognized her as a bomb sniffer rather than as an enemy combatant (which I assume means the Taliban might use dogs to deliver bombs to their enemies), and rescued and returned her to her rightful post.

My point in all this: everyone who came across Sabi could tell she wasn't just some dog. The Taliban knew she was a valuable member of the Australian Special Forces and kept her and the American soldier could tell she was a bomb sniffer and returned her home. It's awesome that the dogs used to help human soldiers are really treated like soldiers; they save countless human lives in terrible places and make soldier's jobs easier and safer, and it's wonderful they're celebrated.

EDIT: Oh, and this will make you cry.