Posted in February 2012

You Are Paying for Atrocities Against Wild Horses. Private Companies Are Pocketing the Profit.

Out west, wild horses and burros live in packs, forming strong bonds with family and friends and doing all the photogenic things people expect of them: running like the wind, tossing their manes, resting their heads on each other’s necks, and generally looking majestic. I know this because I have met them up close.

It took a tiny little plane and a four-wheel drive journey over some very bumpy “roads” and past quite a few oil pumpjacks to find them, and right they were to hide — the federal government is out to get them.

Every year the Bureau of Land Management flies helicopters low over the horses, rounding thousands of them up in a terrifying ordeal that injures some horses, drives others off of cliffs to their deaths, and separates nearly all of them from their family and friends. The captured horses are sold for slaughter or kept in pens for the rest of their lives; a (comparatively) lucky few are adopted.

There is no rational explanation for this expensive operation. There is an irrational one, though: private ranchers want their cattle and sheep to graze on the public land the horses live on, and the government helps them do it, charging only pennies on the dollar for the privilege. Those privately-owned for-profit outfits that are sucking up the oil have a hand in this cookie jar too. So wild horses living on public land are terrorized, penned, and killed on the taxpayers’ dime to increase the profits of private companies.

What’s more, there is a very specific federal law meant to protect wild horses and burros. It’s called the Wild and Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, and it says that for the most part, the government should leave these animals alone.

When I was a lawyer at The Animal Legal Defense Fund we went to court to stop the round-ups. A federal judge in Salt Lake City turned us down because, as humans, we weren’t the beneficiaries of the law and therefore didn’t have the right to try to enforce it. Needless to say, the horses aren’t allowed to enforce it either. It’s a well-intentioned law, but perhaps not so well thought out.

This mess has been going on for years. Yesterday Vickery Eckhoff published a thorough article on Forbes.com about the politics, the history, and the impact on the animals of government round-ups. I recommend reading it.

 

Tagged , ,

Race and Weight: Is Self-Esteem Better for Your Health than Weight Loss?

Black women in the U.S. are happier with their appearance than white women even though they are fatter, according to an article in the Washington Post by Lonnae O’Neal Parker. The article suggests that because most glamorous female images in the media are of white women, the images have less of an impact on black women. For once blacks benefit from being excluded.

Also, cultural beauty standards differ, as the article notes; black women and men don’t seem to buy that “you can never be too thin.”

(Ironically, this may help African-Americans lose weight: for what it’s worth, the monitor at my gym that alternates in-house ads with health-related factoids reports that people with better body images have more success shedding pounds.)

Black women value their health highly, according to a survey by The Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation (90% of black women consider a healthy lifestyle “very important,” compared to 78% of white women). How they have evaded our society’s current obsession with the link between fat and chronic disease I don’t know, but they have simultaneously evaded the corrosive low self-esteem that tends to plague white women — 67% of black women surveyed agree strongly that they see themselves as having high self-esteem, compared to 43% of white women.

High self-esteem correlates with good health, and low self-esteem with poor health, according to the MacArthur Foundation and others.

The data on whether it is better to be fat and confident or thin and insecure seems to be conflicting. Which would you rather be? Please pipe up by submitting a comment — and if you don’t mind, include your race & sex. Thanks!

 

Tagged ,

What Doesn’t Separate Us From Animals 2: Empathy, Cooperation, and More

If humans aren’t fundamentally different than animals, isn’t it wrong to treat them the way we do — like killing billions of them each year to eat?

Yet scientists continue to disprove speculation about the differences between us and other animals. This week a group of scientists at the American Association for the Advancement of Science conference discussed findings that whales and dolphins “are capable of advanced cognitive abilities (such as problem-solving, artificial ‘language’ comprehension, and complex social behavior), indicating that these cetaceans are far more intellectually and emotionally sophisticated than previously thought,” according to www.care2.com.

Speakers on a panel at the conference “presented multiple examples of cetaceans acting with empathy, cooperation, and self awareness.” On that basis they supported granting whales and dolphins “basic rights to life, liberty and well-being.”

For more information on the movement to protect whales and dolphins, read the Declaration of Rights for Cetaceans.

Tagged , ,

What Doesn’t Separate Us From Animals

Humans have long invented and clung to rationales for our superiority to animals, and, by extension, for our right to use and abuse them. One favorite distinguishing characteristic was language, but then great apes like a chimpanzee named Washoe learned sign language. People claimed that only we use tools, but multiple species were found to do the same; some crows even improve the design of tools for specific purposes and teach the new designs to each other.

But we still had friendship — only humans had genuine friendships, the argument went, while animals had at most mutually beneficial transactions, not lasting relationships built on something beyond self-interest. ”For evolutionary biologists and anthropologists, friendship has been considered one of the core traits of only one species of ape: us,” Carl Zimmer writes in the February 20th issue of Time Magazine.

And another one bites the dust: Zimmer’s article reports the observation of friendships among dolphins, chimpanzees, and members of other species. These friendships include helping each other, sharing, just hanging out, and mourning a friend’s death.

It’s getting harder and harder for humans to justify our exploitation of other animals. Soon we will be left with only one alleged distinction between us and them: we have souls and they don’t. Conveniently for those who like the status quo, science is powerless against this one.

Tagged ,

Goodbye to Cruel Gestation Crates?

Let’s hear it for McDonald’s, which has taken a step towards making the lives of the pigs it feeds to people a bit less brutal. It is requiring its pork suppliers to create plans for phasing out gestation crates, which I described in an earlier blog post:

 

Gestation crates are small metal cages only two feet wide that prevent pregnant pigs from turning around or even lying down comfortably. Sows spend most of their adult lives in these crates as they are inseminated soon after they give birth and thus kept pregnant over four out of every five months. Gestation crates cripple pregnant pigs and cause obesity. The fumes and toxins produced from the concentration of so many animals in one space sicken them (and the humans who “take care of” them). Pigs are smart, affectionate animals, and the constant confinement, lack of activity or stimulation, and pain lead to neurotic behaviors like biting the bars of their cages over and over, or chewing on nothing.

 

As the largest restaurant chain in the world, McDonald’s has the potential to eliminate gestation crates from the industry by refusing to patronize suppliers that use them. Unfortunately the company has not announced guidelines that factory farms will have to follow in place of gestation crates. Will sows have more space, or will they be crowded together though not in individual pens? Will they be able to socialize with each other? Will their environments allow them to satisfy their instinct to burrow and root around? And what about farrowing crates, where sows are caged and prevented from touching their piglets while they nurse?

The best announcement of all would be that McDonald’s and its competitors are going to stop feeding animals to people. But here in reality, let’s support the Humane Society of the United States, which worked with McDonald’s to create this policy to make farmed pigs’ short lives less miserable.

Tagged , , ,

Judge Rules That Firing Woman Over Pumping Breast Milk Is Not Sex Discrimination

Lactation is not a medical condition related to pregnancy or childbirth, and firing someone who wants to pump breast milk is not sex discrimination, according to a federal judge in Texas.

This decision is a stumper. Lactation occurs because of and immediately following pregnancy and childbirth, which makes it “related” to them. Only women lactate, so firing an employee because she needs to pump does discriminate against her on the basis of her sex.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought this suit against debt-collection agency Houston Funding on behalf of an employee whom the company fired, allegedly because she wanted to pump at work. The EEOC is considering appealing the decision by Judge Lynn Hughes (who is male).

Since the firing the federal government passed a law requiring employers to provide break time for new mothers to pump breast milk at work, but it does not prohibit employers from firing workers for pumping. One might have presumed that the anti-discrimination laws already had that covered, but now that is up in the air, and it will probably take years and opinions from higher courts to clear it up.

Tagged , , , , ,

Chivalry Has Outlived Its Welcome

Today The New York Times published my essay critiquing chivalry. You can read it at http://bit.ly/w4na48.

Tagged

New Body-Shaming for Women — But This Time the Problem is Their Men

Remember how Dove invented a new physical flaw for women to worry about and spend money on? They ran commercials for a product that is supposed to make women’s underarms more attractive, whatever that means.

Another company has jumped on the “invent a neurosis for women” bandwagon. It’s an outfit called “Masque” that advertised in Marie Claire with this copy:

“Masque is the first product proven to conceal any unpleasant flavors associated with pleasuring your man and his subsequent climax. These orally-dissolvable, flavored gel strips will take the intimacy between you and your partner to the next level.”

Translated from commercialese, the idea is that if a woman’s male partner tastes bad to her, she should endure and swallow, but then she better clean out her mouth so she tastes good to him. If he doesn’t taste good it is her responsibility to make sure he doesn’t have to experience the flavor himself.

And there it is, a new reason for women to worry that they are unattractive — unkissable — and it comes up only during sex, just when they want to feel uninhibited.

If male groin flavor is a problem, why not market deodorizing wipes for men to use before their partners visit the area in question? They could even be flavored like the gel strips for women (I’m thinking chocolate, but then I’m often thinking about chocolate). Maybe it is because men aren’t as vulnerable to body-shaming as women are, which is a different and much longer article.

Tagged