The Counter

0 chickens

0 turkeys

0 ducks

0 pigs

0 cattle

0 sheep

Number of animals killed in the world by the meat, dairy and egg industries since you opened this webpage, not including the billions of marine animals killed annually.

Get this counter

Daily: May 2008 Archives

Home sweet home.

Thursday May 29, 2008 7:02 PM by Jen

I'm flying from DC back to Salt Lake tomorrow, several days early, because Magic, my dog, is very very ill. He's been tentatively diagnosed with advanced stomach cancer, and at 11 any treatments are likely to be fatal, or put him through an extreme degree of misery so that he can live for a couple more months. I think it's only right to give him a few extra months, but he's stopped eating (no mean feat for a Labrador) and drinking and he's unable to get up without assistance due to lack of strength and arthritis. He's been put on an IV and pain killers, but his prognosis is grim, so I'm going home to say good-bye if necessary. Obviously, this is devastating.

Alex is staying in DC and will be making regular posts.

Not just my opinion.

Tuesday May 27, 2008 2:47 PM by Jen

When I was a vegetarian, I justified my lack of activism by using the ol' "everyone is entitled to their opinion/ethics/morality and you can't tell other people what their morals should be" excuse. I don't know if I ever really believed this, but I certainly said it. Maybe it was to justify the fact that I hated being yelled at, hated being in the confrontation that invariably ensues from trying to tell someone that their dietary habits are directly responsible for the death of sentient beings.

Also, I hate being told what to do myself. I could sympathize.

I still get nervous about confrontation, but like my fear of heights, it's under control. Although I no longer subscribe to the above argument, I still get it thrown at me on a semi-regular basis. Don't get me wrong, I think many things are simply a matter of opinion. Sexuality, for example. There's no rational explanation for why it is wrong to be homosexual. Thus, it's an opinion. A lot of the people I know from school have a tendency to extrapolate that same thing to animal rights: "Veganism is just your opinion." Which is to say given our reasoned argument supporting animal rights, "Morality is a matter of opinion." An argument that lets them off the hook.

That may be so, but I'm willing to bet there are some things encompassed by "morality" that don't fall under the sphere of mere opinion. For example, when we pose the question about whether or not it's okay to kill babies, we get a resounding no. Even if your culture said to? Even if you had a really good reason? What if it saved lives? Are you sure? No, no it's not! (Interestingly enough, the same holds true when we ask if it's morally okay to burn kittens with a blowtorch.)

That's why we fight for human rights, because we've identified a common morality that we believe should hold true across all cultures. I don't know anyone who would say that we should forgo talk about rights in the human context. When we talk about rights, we're not trying to say you should believe what we believe. This isn't religion. If I refuse to convert, I harm only myself. If I refuse to recognize rights, however, I will probably harm other sentient beings, which is about justice. What we're saying when we speak of animal/human rights is that they exist whether or not we choose to recognize them. Maybe that's not really a hard and fast truth (everything is subjective, right?) but if you argue that then you commit yourself to saying that no moral rights exist; for example, slavery, when condoned by the law, is beyond moral reproach. Likewise, just because the law says we have a right to skin an animal alive doesn't mean that it is okay anymore than when the law said it was okay to own human slaves.

If someone makes the assumption that veganism is simply an expression of opinion, they should have to defend that assumption. What they are saying, without actually saying anything at all, is that our efforts to collapse speciesism into the same moral tent as racism, sexism, bigotry, etc. is erroneous. Therefore, they must tell us why animal rights is an opinion while talk of other rights are a moral baseline. If your relegate speciesism to the status of an opinion, you must in turn make the claim that racism, sexism, sexual prejudice, agism, etc. are merely matters of opinion, and that we should simply remain quiet about these 'personal views' even when we see them being violated.

Crossposted @ Vegan Soapbox

Knights of infinite faith.

Saturday May 24, 2008 1:00 PM by Jen

Last semester I took Western Philosophy. Our professor was an amazing little woman who had done her master's thesis on the existentialist Soren Kierkegaard. When we covered his essay "Fear and Trembling," I discovered that his definition of faith is one that speaks to me. Kierkegaard characterizes his knight of faith by his "faith in the absurd," his paradoxical belief that even though what is, is, he knows that God will provide. He relinquishes everything, but knows things will come out right in the end. Minus the God part, I believe this idea can characterize the vegan view of the world.

A few days ago I was talking to a friend online about veganism, animal rights, and what she likes to refer to as 'my point of view'. She's a very down to earth person and she's always willing to listen to what I have to say, but for some reason she always pulls out the same argument when we talk. This particular conversation was about horse racing, and even though she hates what's happening in the industry, she believe in more regulation, not abolishment. Why? Because "That Will Never Happen".

That Will Never Happen is a terrifying concept, and yet it is one we all deal with every day. There are some days in which the sheer magnitude of what we're trying to change are completely overwhelming. Days when I come home and want nothing more than to curl up in my bed with the sheets over my head and not come out. There are times when all I want is to make my life easier and forget what's going on and just have a slice of cheese. There are days when I want to resign myself to fighting for a lost cause, and become nothing more than a martyr.

And yet, if we give in to That Will Never Happen, we loose all hope of change. Daunting though the task may be, we act so that That Will Never Happen doesn't become a reality. We must be the knights of infinite faith. Even on those days when we are faced with the idea that in our lifetimes, our ideas will never come to fruition, we solider on, refusing to believe. When someone says to me That Will Never Happen, I smile and point to the Lincoln-Douglass debates where Douglass declared that the abolition of human slavery was nothing more than a pipe-dream. I smile and point to our laws against murder and abuse, and our efforts to combat poverty, racism and sexism. All these things could fall into the category of That Will Never Happen, and yet people fight passionately against them. Not for their reduction or regulation, but for their cessation. Perhaps we are looking at a thousand year battle, but that battle has to start somewhere.

I could just sit on my couch watching Family Guy re-runs and scratching my arm pits. This is my summer vacation, after all. I could forget everything I know, or try to. I could face the 'inevitable' and become instead a knight of infinite resignation. But I'm holding myself out for something better.

Then again, who are we kidding - I'm probably scratching myself inappropriately at this very moment anyway.

We'll call this an experiment.

Friday May 23, 2008 8:32 PM by Jen

One of the main problems I see in the animal rights movement is that, not unlike the women's movement, we're a fractured groups made of a lot of different people with some very different opinions. We do share one thing, and many of us share one desire, but we have very different ideas about how to go about this. We're a little confused about how best to do this, and how best to go about helping advance our goals.

Case in point: Vegan Freaks is a blog with a community forum, catering to us vegans who also happen to be freaks. I came across the community and blog ages ago, but was rather put off by the level of hostility. There are some things I really do like about the VF community. As I've said, I liked parts of it so much I wanted this blog to take on some of the tone. I also like that they provide a place for vegans to go and just be vegans. Much like I love going to Sticky Fingers and being able to order anything off the menu, I like the idea of going onto a blog and not being attacked or having my views mocked. I like the idea of helping people with their transition to veganism. I like the idea of taking out my frustrations on people who will understand.

In short, I like this idea very much.

The problem is that VF can be tricky to get into. That's right, there's an application process. And a lot of people fail it. I understand they why behind it, but for some reason no one seems to see how many intelligent, dedicated people are being turned away or turned off by the 'secret club mentality'. I'm not talking about unwanted omnivores or hunters, but vegans and people who are trying to go vegan.

EDIT: I've been informed by another source that it's actually not that hard to get in to the VF forums. They just (understandably) want to keep their privacy intact. Like I said before, makes sense. And I've totally been there.

If we vegans can't pull together and support each other, if we reject each other because of petty issues, if we're too busy sniping at each other, how on earth are we going help anyone?

The other problem is that while communities like this may provide some much needed rant room, they also provide a breeding ground for the very things vegans are constantly accused of being. Namely:

"self-righteous, holier-than-thou, and elitist".

As a friend once said to me about her vegan roommate and friends, "all they do is sit around telling each other things they already know, saying the same things over and over and over." The short and long of it is that we shouldn't be representing ourselves as some special club that only the best, the most vegan-vegans, can get into. We need our private places, but we should be open to helping people, not scaring them away.

Hint: Nothing is not the correct answer.

Friday May 16, 2008 1:22 AM by Jen

I've received some criticism from horse people about my stance on horse racing and other horse sports. So I have a question to ask all the people who thought what I had to say was wrong.

Why is it okay for horses to die in these sports?

If it's not okay, what can we do about it that will stop the deaths?

Think about it long and hard. By saying that these sports should continue you are agreeing (tacitly, but agreeing none the less) that the deaths that occur - both horse and human - are okay. Is that what you want to say? Let me know.

Do we really need an association for this?

Thursday May 15, 2008 9:46 PM by Jen

When I was a little kid, people always asked me if I wanted to be a vet when I grew up. I guess this is something most adults ask an 'animal crazy' kid, and I remember most people being a little shocked about the voracity of my answer:

"No. I never want to be a vet. I don't want to kill animals."

That sounds harsh, but that's how I thought. I never once wanted to be a veterinarian because I knew I simply couldn't stand to be the one euthanizing an animal. It wasn't that I didn't understand why euthanasia is practiced, or support it, but I knew I couldn't be the one doing it. Plus blood and gore make me nauseous, as I found out when a vet forced me to watch him excise tissue from Rivet's injured knee and I fainted. Not the job for me, thanks.

When we think of a veterinarian, we like to think of them literally as a doctor for animals. I have known many vets in my life, and many of them were amazingly kind, intelligent people. Rivet's current vet is an amazing man - he still makes house calls for small animals, for one thing, and he's able to calm down my horse, who recognizes the vet's truck by sight and sound and has more than once pulled a lead rope out of my hands trying to escape his bi-yearly shots. I appreciate him, and I trust him and his judgement. However, I recognize that his role isn't really that of doctor, it's much closer to that of car mechanic, as Bernard E. Rollin argues:

If my car is broken, I bring it to a mechanic and ask for his opinion. If the mechanic thinks that we can fix it for less than the cost or value of the car, we do; it's prudent to do so based on the market-value of the property. If not, we junk it and I get another one.

As a thought experiment of your own, substitute your dog or cat for the car and veterinarian for mechanic. The outcome is the same isn't it? Yes, some people spend more money to "fix" their animal-property but this is only so because they place a higher value on their property than the market dictates.

That sounds amazingly harsh, and I don't mean to suggest that all veterinarians fail to consider the well being of animals - not as property, but as living beings. Many vets do pro-bono work for just this reason. However, their relationship to animals is not the same as the relationship between doctor and human. Veterinarians have been forced to assume a role of trying to decide between the interests of humans, and the interests of those they are ostensibly supposed to be helping. Instead of being able to advocate solely for the interests (we'd say rights here, but animals have none) of their patients, they must instead consider the selfish needs of another party who has nothing tangible to loose and everything to gain if the interests of their patient are violated. In many cases, life is weighed against monetary interests, and because animals are not persons in the eyes of the law, money wins every time.

Consider this: by law, veterinarians must be allowed to examine laboratory facilities where animals are used. Many 'independent review boards' - groups established by research institutions to facilitate ethical practices - contain veterinarians. Veterinarians castrate animals without anesthetic. They examine slaughter houses. They agree to kill healthy animals because it is too expensive to keep them, or because they have been deemed undesirable by humans. They sanction these institutions by participating and condoning their conduct. What does that say about how they view those they are supposed to be helping/protecting?

Human doctors are charged with the role of keeping humans healthy, and of preventing their deaths at all costs if possible. Why should doctors for animals have a different one? When human doctors have participated in activities like those detailed above, we call it an outrage. Tuskege, the Holocaust - these are examples when human doctors have done just that, and we remember them with trepidation, and fight to keep them from ever occurring again.

Perhaps we need to redefine the role of the veterinarian in our society. One group has already begun - the Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights. How strange is it that we require a subgroup to delineate that mission for veterinarians? What should their role in the lives of animals be?

Makes me so proud to be from Utah.

Monday May 12, 2008 12:44 AM by Jen

For about the fifth time my home state of Utah has failed to pass 'Henry's Law' which would make animal cruelty a felony. Utah is one of only seven states where this crime is still only a misdemeanor, and while I fully support the passing of any law that will deliver a heavier punishment to those who participate in un-sanctified cruelty, there's another issue here. Actually, there are several.

First and foremost is the fact that animal cruelty is almost impossible to prosecute. Did you know that animals cannot be seized from situations without surrender or a warrant? The probability of being prosecuted for animal cruelty tiny. For example, in Massachusetts there were 80,000 complaints of abuse and neglect between 1975 and 1996 but only 268 prosecutions. That's .3%. Of those, only 44% of cases were found guilty and only 5.2% were found not guilty. The rest were dismissed, defaulted, denied, not sought. So out of all those cases, only .14% were ever sentenced or prosecuted. While this may speak to problems with the criminal justice system as a whole, it's well documented that certainty of punishment and not severity is what leads to a decline in crime rates. So even we do make animal cruelty a felony, if people don't think they'll get caught and prosecuted, they probably won't care. Plus, according to Arnold Arluke from Northwestern:

"Criminal justice professionals, including police, district attorneys, judges, and criminologists do not appear to regard animal abuse as a serious or common crime."

That sends a great message. Microwaved your cat? Yeah, just don't do it again, please.

Second is that even under if animal cruelty is prosecuted as a felony, animals still remain property. Some people, like the delightful Charles H., feel like this is okay. As Charles puts it..

"Animals should be treated in a humane and civil manner. BUT, they are and must remain chattel property of the owner. And punishment for mistreating an animal should never exceed the punishment for mistreating a spouse or child or even complete stranger."

Apparently to Charles I should also remain chattel property, or at least be compared to it? No one is asking that the punishment for animal cruelty should exceed that of mistreating another human. If I put my baby in the oven, I hope I get charged with a felony. If that's not how it is, than those laws must change too. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't punish willful acts of cruelty to living beings with more than 7 hours of community service and a $100 fine. He does make a good point though:

"How many persons have been convicted of animal cruelty and sentenced to the maximum penalty under current law, actually served that sentence, and then gone on to re-offend because the penalty was too leniant? How many in the last 15 years?"

Too few have been convicted, have been sentence to the maximum, too few have served and far too many have gone on to re-offend because the message we send is that it doesn't matter. I've had speeding tickets with bigger fines than the majority of people receive for animal cruelty and I still speed.

Thanks for painting such an awesome picture of Utah, Charles. I too am glad we haven't given in to peer pressure and that our beer remains at 3.2% alcohol, that you can't buy wine coolers in grocery stores, and that poking a dog's eye out won't get you jail time. Maybe we should change out state motto to "Utah: You can't buy beer on Sunday, but heck, you can torture an animal instead."

The end of my much needed vacation.

Saturday May 10, 2008 9:42 PM by Jen

Alex and I spent the past week having an extremely needed vacation in Williamsburg, VA with his mom and her friend Michelle. Some highlights:

The billboard on the side of the road that advertised Fireworks, Ham, Sausage and Cigarettes.

The free samples of chewing tobacco in the gas station.

When my v-neck shirt was blown off my shoulders on a roller coaster in Busch Gardens, causing me to more-or-less flash the whole park. The whole incident was caught on the ride camera and put on display for all the teenage boys running around with their choir groups.

Alex lost his phone. Which almost killed him.

A lot of people have asked what we do diet-wise when we're on vacation, so I thought I'd mention a couple things. Since we were staying at a time-share with a kitchen, we went grocery shopping and stocked up on a couple key items for breakfast and lunch. Soy milk, some margarine, a couple yogurts, bread, lots of fruit and some veggies and we were able to cook in for almost every breakfast and lunch for both us and for the 'parents'.

All our other meals were eaten out, and following our usual vacation pattern, we just went wherever they wanted to go and found or made a vegan meal. We do this mainly because Alex's mom is usually buying and we like to be polite, but also because it's an effective way of proving that yes, we can actually go out and have a good time - we don't even have to stick to salad. We do have to ask a couple extra questions and sometimes ask for some special details on our meals, but it's not hard.

In other news, new posts will be coming more regularly since school ended last week. You can also find our writings at Vegan Soapbox.

Because a tattoo that says 'I HEART MOM' won't fly.

Monday May 5, 2008 4:09 PM by Jen

Mother's Day is just around the corner, so I thought I'd share my list of possibilities. I never know exactly what to get my mom, so I try to have a big list to narrow down. One thing I wanted but couldn't find was an awesome vegan lip gloss, so if anyone knows of one, let me know. Other suggestions are also welcome, as being me, I haven't actually picked a gift yet.

Skinny Bitch, by Rory Freedman and Kim Barnouin

If your mom doesn't mind the 'B' word and the occasional eff-bomb, this cute, sassy little health and diet book is a must have. Although it's really an all over health book that addresses everything from coffee to cigarettes to medication, the authors advocate for a vegan diet in unequivocal, no nonsense terms without bringing in the complexities of ethics and philosophy. Who wouldn't love a book with a chapter entitled "The Dead, Rotting, Decomposing Flesh Diet." This books was meant for a younger audience, but depending on your mom, she may love it. Did I mention there's also a chapter entitled "Pooping"? If you don't think she's ready to be called an 'asshole' by a book, you should try the companion cook book, Skinny Bitch in the Kitch. Fun, easy, yummy vegan recipes for everyone.

The Ethics Of What We Eat, by Peter Singer and Jim Mason

Whatever your feelings about Peter Singer, this book is a great introduction to why what we eat matters so much. It's one of my go-to gifts for non-vegans, after I gave a copy to my dad last year for Christmas and he actually liked it. The book follows three families practicing three different diets to the store, and then attempts to trace their purchases back to the source. In addition to addressing the ethical issues of eating meat, dairy, etc. it addresses issues like the environment, fair trade, and buying local.

When Elephants Weep: The Emotional Lives of Animals, by Jeffery Masson

This book is one of my favorites so far this year, and with a mother who loves our dogs like children, it's a perfect gift. Animal emotions are something most of us take for granted, but are generally denied by the scientific community as a myth or a mistake. Full of charming, beautiful, touching anecdotes as well as information, this book wraps up with a powerful chapter on why it all matters.

Green & Black's Chocolate

As a chocoholic, I'm all in favor of spoiling people with dark chocolate. Greene & Blacks is one of my favorite brands, with 8 vegan varieties of chocolate. Personal recommendations include Mayan Gold and Mint, although I'm dying to try the Cherry. A couple of these make a great gift basket.

Origins' Gloomaway

I'm obsessed with Grapefruit right now, and this lotion isn't helping. Plus Andrew Weil is my mom's best friend's ex-husband, so shamless plug for his products! This product is completely vegan, and although some Origins products do contain beeswax and/or honey, nothing they make is tested on animals and they specifically state that the wax/honey is 'cruelty free'. All in all, this is an excellent treat for a mom.

Coconut-Citrus-Blueberry Muffins

I'm a firm believer in the fact that you can say anything with home baked goods. I created these muffins this spring by throwing whatever was in the fridge and cupboards into plain muffin batter, that they've been a huge hit. This is the recipe as near as I can figure: I generally just throw however much coconut, blueberries and juice/zest as I feel appropriate in. Feel free to do the same. The recipe makes a dozen muffins.

2 cups all purpose flour

1/4 cup sugar

2 teaspoons baking powder

1/4 teaspoon salt

1/4 cup canola oil

3/4 cup soy milk

1/4 cup unsweetened applesauce

1 cup unsweetened shredded coconut

1 tablespoon lemon or lime juice, and 1 - 2 teaspoons of zest

1 cup blueberries, fresh or frozen

Preheat your oven to 375 F. Combine flour, baking powder, sugar and salt in a bowl. Add soy milk, oil, juice and applesauce, and mix until combined. Fold in the coconut and zest, then fold in blueberries. Fill muffin cups 3/4 full, and sprinkle a little shredded coconut on top. Pop into the over for 18 - 22 minuets. You'll know their done when a toothpick/fork tine/knife stuck in comes out clean. Remove from the oven and refrain from eating until you've had a chance to share with your mom. They're great with a little faux-sausage or a scrambler.

Way to 'marr' my race viewing pleasure.

Saturday May 3, 2008 11:57 PM by Jen

"The race was marred by the death of runner-up Eight Belles, who collapsed after the wire after fracturing both front ankles. The brave and massive gray filly, trained by Larry Jones and owned by Fox Hill Farms, was euthanized almost immediately on track."

From the synopsis on this year's 124th Kentucky Derby.

This 'brave' filly was asked to put thousands of pounds of pressure per stride on her delicate, half-formed leg bones. Years of 'selective breeding' have created a Thoroughbred horse who is faster - but who is so delicate that track injuries are steadily increasing. When 800+ plus horses die on tracks every year, it makes you wonder, what number will be great enough that we'll move horse racing into the category of abuse currently occupied by dog and bird fighting. Add to that 800 the thousands of horses who are seriously injured and killed later, or who do not perform and either end up as meat or breeding machines. Once again, it's not okay for me to break a horse's legs at home, even if someone paid me a million dollars. But in a competition? Sure, that's fine. Yes, the odds of it happening aren't huge, but the odds are significantly greater than if Belles was home, hanging out, doing what horses are meant to do. Which isn't to run 35mph for a mile and a half with a 105lb human on their backs. Or to jump a 5 foot fence with a 120lb human on their backs.

I see a great beauty in a horse speeding down the track. Despite everything I know, my heart soars when I'm watching them fly down the backstretch. But I see equal beauty in a horse playing by himself in a field. I can see no beauty in a three year old with her whole life ahead of her snapping both her ankles. I see nothing but a grizzly spectacle reminiscent of the the gladiators of Rome.

Please, stop saying that Eight Belles didn't deserve this and start saying that no one, no horse, no animal, deserves this, and thus no human should put them in a position where it can happen. This isn't a tragic accident. It's "a risk we're willing to take", gambling with another life. I can't help but remember three years ago when Barbaro shattered his leg in the Preakness Stakes. Thousands of people were crushed and saddened, but did anything change? Can things change? Yes, absolutely. It's up to us to make sure they do.

I think the end of this article sums it up nicely; although she did what very few fillies has ever done, raced the Derby, killed herself for human pleasure, is dead...

"Still, Eight Belles was a sentimental pick by 157,770 fans, second-largest crowd in Derby history. She repaid their support by returning $10.60 and $6.40 for a $2 win ticket."

At the last, we rate her by her monetary value.

You can read more about this insanity here.

In memory of Frodo Baggins. Stupid name, lovely horse.

Saturday May 3, 2008 10:44 PM by Jen

I've been a horsey person since I was a little kid. I grew up loving horses, and I've wanted nothing more than to work with them for as long as I can remember. It sounds a little prejudice, but I won't lie - they have a special place in my heart. Many vegans and animal rights activists like to focus on things like factory farming and remain relatively mum about the suffering of 'pet' animals, and while it may be true that horses as a whole suffer relatively little compared with cows and pigs, that doesn't mean they aren't part of the larger problem of animal oppression.

Because of how I've grown up I struggle more with how to define my relationship with my horse than with any other aspect of vegan ethics. Cheese? I'd give that up a million times again to avoid having to think about the ethics of horsemanship as a vegan. In this area, I am so unperfect I feel very weird being critical. I usually try to keep my mouth shut - and then something like this happens.

This year at the Rolex Event, two horses died during the cross country phase of the show. For those of you, Rolex is a huge three day event - a horse show with three phases, dressage, stadium jumping and cross country. It's an international caliber show. It's huge. It's famous. Thousands of people attend yearly.

So when a friend in another online board brought up the fact that two horses died this year, I was a little upset. This isn't the first time this year a horse death in eventing has been highly publicized, but what most people don't realize is that this kind of death isn't as unusual as you might think, and the statistics are going up. While that's upsetting, what's truly unnerving to me is the attitude of some of the horse people. This quote sums it up nicely:

"It's a dangerous sport," acknowledged Valerie Ashker. She added that for those who love it, it's worth the risk.

To be fair, Valarie is speaking about the danger to people (several of whom have been critically injured when their horses died), and her comment is intended to prove that the people who become involved in eventing know and assume the risk. What this quote fails to address is the horses, who are risking just as much, if not more, when they are put out on the course.

When we consider horses to be nothing more than resources at our disposal, this attitude is what results. It doesn't matter that the horse has no say in what he's doing, we're willing to have him risk his life for something that doesn't matter to him. You can think what you want, but I don't believe horses care about winning prestigious awards and trophies. They don't care if they're #1 in the point standings, or how much money they win. They may love going over the fences, but I guarantee they equally love romping in a paddock with other horses. At least, if they have the chance. Many expensive, high level competition horses are stall bound for 15+ hours per day and when they are allowed out they're turned out alone. All this to prevent them from injuring themselves so that they can break their necks over a course of huge jumps.

Think about it this way. If I go rock climbing with my six month old baby strapped to my back, things could be perfectly fine. Or, I could make a 'small mistake', fall 50 feet, and kill my child. But hey, that's fine, because it's a risk I'm willing to take. I'm sure the judge who takes my case will accept that explanation and let me off the hook.

The cherry on the icing is that one of the horses killed was ridden by a woman who has had at least one other horse she was riding die during an event. She was not fined, punished, or even suspended despite the fact that she made the horse finish the course even after he broke down. If I break my horse's neck because I feel like it, I'm guilty of animal cruelty, but if I break his neck making him go over a jump, it's all good?

Don't get me wrong. Most of the horse people I know wouldn't put their horses in this position, and most acknowledge that something is seriously wrong with this, something that can be fixed by making the jumps smaller, the courses less technical. And yet, I can't help but feel like we're missing the underlying issue - as long as we see horses as nothing more than property, we'll be free to abuse them and call it a 'sport'.

« Daily: April 2008 | Main Index | Archives | Daily: June 2008 »

Search This Site

About this Archive

Daily: May 2008: Monthly Archives