Media Watchering, and Bill Clinton, or: something reasonable

Hello chickens,

The last two months have been up and down, up and down, and I shan’t say more.

Here’s a lil’ sumthin’ sumthin’ from today’s Age online healthy blog section – not to shabby and not outrageously hysterical (at this stage. Wait until the charred-chops and salty-sausage eaters consider this article a threat to their way of life, all they hold dear and the Great Aussie Dream).

http://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/wellbeing/blogs/chew-on-this/going-vegan-for-your-hearts-sake/20101220-192c2.html

Also, did anyone see the recent M Magazine (also The Age) which highlighted people who are social oddities – the asexual fellow, the childless woman, the nudist – and a vegan. I was all fine and dandy with this until the vegan bloke wrote that he is happy to each ‘happy eggs’. I don’t want to be the Vegan Police but if you’re going to put your mug in a national magazine as an example of a lifestyle choice that most people are unfamiliar with or think is a little on the beardy-weirdy side, don’t confuse the matter by saying that you’re not actually very strict and can eat whatever you want really. It makes us all look flaky. If you need to do it then just do it, but please don’t make a great big public song and dance about being vegan if in fact A) you are not, and B) you probably know darn well how often the rest us have to explain that we can’t make just one little exception on this one little special occasion for the butter milked from your delightful cows and churned by your rosy-cheeked milkmaids, and your yolky eggs collected lovingly from your feathery chickens by crooning farmhands.

Vegan products in a non-vegan brand, or: the perils of the supermarket

It’s not often that PeTA and I agree. As I rule, I, like many others, feel very icky about their tactics and imagery, but they get thoroughly criticised for that if other places so if you’re interested, just go and have a google.

But to the agreement: I agree that L’Oreal are vile animal abusers and I haven’t used any of their products since veganising myself over three years ago (my how time flies when you’re busy reading every label on every product you buy …). However, I read some time ago that they had brought out a vegan hair care line, EverPure, which actually marketed itself as being vegan, and my interest was piqued.

I had a little tussle with myself when I finally saw it in the supermarket on the weekend. My personal policy has always been that through mainstreaming and the wonders of shoppering veganism would become more widely known, acknowledged, desirable and even easier for people to live with. I have always supported the power of the market in being able to bring consumers vegan-friendly, reasonably-priced and high-performing products, and I am always pleased to see any product which states its vegan credentials on the label, because this is recognition that being cruelty-free is a selling point and worth shouting about – and I usually buy one in a show of support. The EverPure line meets all these criteria.

But did I want to support a company I know to be heavy users of animal testing and derivatives? Not really. Did I want to buy a line they had produced – one of many other, non-vegan lines, admittedly – which highlighted that it was vegan? Yes.

So my next question to myself, staring intently at the shelves in the personal care aisle, was that even though the product was vegan, in that it contained no animal products and had not been tested on animals, was it ok to buy it knowing what we do about L’Oreal? This was really where I felt uncomfortable.

And then I looked around me at the supermarket where I shop every week. That supermarket sells flesh and cow breastmilk and chicken ova and all sorts of non-vegan things. In my trolley was bread from bakeries that offer honey-infused lines. I bought cereals that offer yoghurt covered raisin varieties, baked beans which have ham-filled counterparts, hummus from brands that also sell smoked salmon dip, and tinned soups which I had to hunt for amongst their chicken stock and milk solids-filled shelfmates. On a naughty day I’ll buy chips that I can eat whilst leaving the honey baked ham packets from the same brand alone, and some types of sweet biscuits but not the creamy ones. I do this all the time. I choose products that suit me, and ignore the rest. I choose to buy things and tell companies that I, the consumer, want milk and honey free bread, cereal-only cereals, bean-filled baked beans, dips made only from chickpeas and vegetable soups that only contain vegetables. I choose because I have to and I want to. I choose because despite the existence of the outstanding Radical Grocery, I cannot and do not buy all my grocery items at vegan-only shops. My belief in the power of mainstreaming and my desire to see veganism become more widely understood and accepted make me choose.

And so I chose to try EverPure.

Incidentally, it wasn’t half as good as Organic Care and almost three times the price, but I would still like to know what you would choose. I chose one way, but you may choose another. Do you buy vegan products from non-vegan manufacturers (or do you not consider those to be vegan products at all?)? Or do you draw the line at very-non-vegan companies like L’Oreal and Proctor&Gamble on principle? Or do you support companies putting a toe in the water and buying their vegan-marked products regardless?

I’d really like to know – without wanting any Vegan Policing, I think this is fascinating.

Dymock's continues to impress me, even on a whirlwing whizzbang lunchtime quickie shop.

This lunchtime's haul includes the new 2011 Sarah Kramer 'Go Vegan' calendar, which will adorn the toilet wall at the T-House so that guests are held captive whilst reading its messages. No pics as only the 2010 calendar is on the website, and we couldn't possibly be that out of dat, daaaahling.

I also bought Sara Gruen's new book, Ape House. Ape House follows the bestselling( which I'd never heard of) Water for Elephants which is set in a circus (not vegan) during the Depression (neutral vegan) and according to the cover is about learning to communicate with ... an elephant (quite vegan). 

Ape House, and I rip this from the blurb, features bonobos who speak American Sign Language escaping into the world and capturing media attention for doing spookily human things - not so spooky given bonobos known intellectual abilities, just spooky to those who still consider animals to little more than responsive, unsentient biological machines. I don't know what it will be like, but it seems to be compassionate at first glance, and certainly better than other books by certain authors who misunderstand and misrepresent veganism and then send very rude emails exhibiting a complete lack of manners when called out politely for sloppy research.

Review possible shortcoming, and in the interests of full disclosure I should add that I also bought a book on uses of bicarb soda around the home because I am a bit sad.

Argument not over yet, buster, or: babies in the crockpot

With more from the "never ever read the comments" file:

http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/restaurants-and-bars/from-cradle-to-crock-pot-20101013-16imh.html

I quite liked this article. It doesn't resolve anything, but it does try to pinpoint why killing and eating baby animals can be more confronting for omnis than eating adults. Speaking about the discomfort is identifying it, which is small as it is, is a step towards questioning. 

My favourite new form of omni-spam is this kind of comment: "All you sooks who cry about eating baby animals, you are such hypocrites in your leather shoes and belts!". Yes you would be. But I'm not. Argument not over yet, buster.

Next stop: World Domination, or: I spread my metaphorical blogging wings

For the duration, meaning for the period in which I am engaged and probably for a bit afterwards too or for as long as I have things I wish to inflict on the blogoverse's collective ears, I'll also be blogging over at PolkaDot Bride (in the Weddings section), which is a blog that leaves me with long strands of sticky saliva extending from lip to keyboard as I gaze at the prettypretties (that sounded so unglamorous, but I assure you it's the very height of style). 

My first post is up and there will be more. I'll continue to write here too, focussing on more vegan-nuptially things, but remember to have a squiz and Polka Dot Weddings too.

Forcing it down your throat, or: Don't read the comments.

http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/restaurants-and-bars/making-a-case-for-veganism-20101004-163m6.html

I don't want to comment on the slightly bizarre and pointless article. 

However I will say this: why is it that any article about veg*ism is responded to immediately by a number of comments demanding that  veg*ns just shut up and stop telling the author of the comment to eat meat ... and why do these comments appear before a single pro-veg comment has appeared? 

It is an imaginary blast against an imaginary veg*n? Is it wishful thinking, in the way that one often has verbally violent arguments with people in one's head, coming up with a number of cutting and pithy remarks that utterly fail to spring to mind in real life? Or have the authors actually met some haranguing veg*n at some time? They do exist, but thankfully I have only ever seen them online and certainly not amonst my own friends. 

My experience is the opposite: I have had it demanded of me over the dinner table to explain myself. I recently had a chef tell me I had a mental illness, in a faux-but-not-really joking way. I have had friends introduce me - regularly - as "the vegan". I have had a million questions, all designed to find the tiniest flaw in logic as though the possibility that I would agree that if alone on a desert island having been shipwrecked without communciations devices with a newborn to feed and the absolute certainty that I will never escape then I might drink the milk of the cow stranded with me means that the entire agri-business structure is ethical. I've had countless "I could never ... I love cheese ...." and "Tasty tasty murder", usually while I'm eating. I've had "Well sorry, we're going to order pork anyway", without me having said a word. I've had "plants have feelings hahaha". 

And this in response to what I said, which was ... nothing. 

In my experience omnivores confronted with veganism are often aggressive, defensive, abusive and loud. Some aren't. A surprisingly sad number are. I will only discuss veganism with people who I think want to have a reasonable discussion with me. Otherwise I am silent. 

Who is forcing what down whose throat?

Mrs B, Engaged Vegan

Dear Reader, 

I married him. 

(Not just yet, but I will). 

My absence from this blog recently has been in the most part due to my frenzy of organising after the lovely Buzz and I decided to get hitched. And the secrecy was because we were not yet engaged, and I wanted to be proposed to and he wanted to  propose, so we were keeping it all under wraps. Instead of blogging, I spent my time caressing my wedding folder, emailing vendors and whipping myself into increasing fervour about bombonniere. 

But now we’re official! He is my fiance and I am his fiancee. Without going into the teary details of the proposal, I will just say that it was perfect and meaningful and it rocked. And there is a rock. 

Buzz also gave me the best present he could have on my 30th birthday when he said that he wanted to have vegan food at our wedding. This had been a little sore point for me, as early on our relationship I had made some sort of thoughtless generalised sweeping comment about it, inadvertently putting the omni Buzz onto a knife edge and asking him to do something he wasn’t yet comfortable with. I’d come to terms slowly with a compromise in my own head, reluctantly accepting that it was his wedding too. But blammo! Out of the blue on my birthday he said he wanted all the meals to be vegan. My heart went all butterflyey and pitter patter. 

So as we embark on a planning a vegan wedding, I think this will become my fodder for the next year or so. There are of course a number of posts and blogs already which describe fantastic vegan weddings - not least of which is In The Mood For Noodles, when K and Toby had a potluck feast and hosted a truly brilliant reception - but as our wedding will be a bit more traditional, and really quite big at 150 guests, I think our trials and tribulations will be useful for any others planning an Offbeat Lite (as they say on Offbeatbride.com) wedding. 

And so, Item the First! 

The Grub & Booze

We were both on board with all vegan food, and as much of the alcohol as we could manage. Our first consideration was finding a venue that didn’t baulk at the idea of catering for 150 vegan meals, and more to the point, didn’t offer us a menu of salad - risotto - fruit salad. 

This actually proved to be one of the most heartening aspects of all the organisation we did. Every single venue we contacted was very open to vegan meals and one of them - The Centre Ivanhoe - even prepared us an excellent sample menu before we went to inspect the venue. They will be using this on their website as an example of what they can do, so any couples looking for an Art Deco masterpiece should definitely contact them. 

The other consideration was alcohol. We needed somewhere that could offer to either source vegan wine and beer for us from their own suppliers, or allow us to supply our own with minimal charge. The second option is much less desirable; the cost per head we were quoted to BYO was between $10 per bottle and $25 per head! 

I had to come to a compromise on champagne. The only vegan champagne is Moet et Chandon, and maybe Veuve Clicquot, and our budget simply can’t stretch that far - and if it did I’d feel terribly wasteful. Our bridal table will have Moet - a girl has to have champers on her wedding day! - but I’m comfortable with something else being served to our guests and I would not be comfortable with not offering them champagne at all. Considering I had originally come to terms with a half omni menu, I think this a place I’m happy to rest. 

In the end we inspected four venues whose capacity was adequate, and each of them was beautiful and extraordinarily accommodating about our needs. The Centre Ivanhoe, Quat Quatta and The Willows were all excellent and very helpful, and I would happily recommend them. 

But in the end we chose the first place we visited, which set the benchmark for everywhere else. The Treasury Restaurant at the Sebel Hotel really captured us - it is an old bank now operating as a restaurant under a hotel , and the architectural virtues and sense of history really sealed the deal. The building is immaculately restored - nothing less glamorous than peeling paint - and offers the right balance between a sense of both spaciousness and intimacy that we want for our guests. We can hold the ceremony there (indoors is very important given it will be winter and evening!), then guests can head up to the mezzanine level for drinks and canapes while we get our photies, and then the reception will be held downstairs again. A bit of a change of scenery and no one (except us!) has to brave the dark and cold! And the best bit is that when the night is over, shoes are kicked off and eyes are closing, we can simply head to the lifts and be carried up to our room. 

CheekySneakyPeekies: Hustle That Bustle

As you may recall from this post,  I highly endorse everyone and everyone they've ever met getting their sweaty mitts on a copy of the Veg Food Guide.

And this year it's supersized itself, morphing into the Aus Veg Food Guide - it's gone megasuperduperexplosive!

You - yes, the bow-legged one* - can get an advance cheeky-sneaky copy here: http://www.aduki.net.au/component/virtuemart/?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage-ask.tpl&product_id=48 

(and it's at a reduced price to boot). 

Most of all though - I am one of the reviewers! So bask in my reflected glory and Hustle And Bustle over to www.aduki.net.au Pronto.

*Shout out, Salt'n'Pepa. Shout.

Adorabubbles, or: just let us have one positive article

Well duh.

Yummy vegan cupcakes. 

And duh, there are comments about how lovely rich melty butter and yolky sunny eggs are underneath, and how healthful and not at all cruel they are. Can't the egg-and-dairy-country-farmyard apologists even let one article about vegan cupcakes- sweet, innocent, adorabubble cupcakes - slide without raising their fists in anger to tell us how much better theirs are ... even if they admit they've never tried a vegan cupcake? Can't we just have one article about cupcakes without being told we're all going to die of brittle bones, too weak and puny to get of bed to reach 'real' (ie: flesh and bodily emissions) sustenance?

Anyway, enjoy the cupcakes. Raspberries to them.

Eating Wilbur and Patting Rex, or: re-establising the Farm to Fork Continuum in the public mind

I suspect a zeitgeist. 

On Sunday, perusing as is my pretentious wont, the Weekend Australian Magazine (actually I never read the Australian; it was a one-off), I read a column that I can't locate online in my lunch hour, but which I assure you exists, about the break in the farm-to-fork continuum that allows self-proclaimed animal lovers to chow down on Daisy, Wilbur or Lambert whilst simultaneously petting Fido and stroking Fluffy. 

Today's Age contains this column, slightly more academic and pointed, but in the same vein. I hope that the 'conscious forgetting' of Jonathan Safran Foer that the author refers to is getting more and more forgotten itself, but it does at least seem that this issue is getting more media airtime. I hope that someone, reading the weekend paper with a cup of coffee on the couch (or beer if you're like me), glanced down at faithful Ralph or Rex or King or Duke or Bailey or Sam, and then reconsidered their plan for a pig sandwich for lunch and a baby sheep roast for dinner.

Cookering Bookering, or: I have purchased more instructional veganic literature

I've oohed and aahed before over the excellent vegan cookering bookering section at Dymocks in Collins St.  They seem to have more all the time, including Terry Romero's Viva Vegan for those who like Latinesque foodering (not enough pictures for me ... yet. But I do really like the cover and think it's a bit a la Nigella ... so therefore mainstreamish and more appealing to audiences. I rate that). 

Dymocks' psychic pull on me is intense, because recently I have bought:

• The Vegan Table by Collen Patrick-Goudreau (also of The Joy of Vegan Baking). We've made some verrry noice burgers from it. No pictures, breaking my usual rule, but beautifully laid out and fonted. (Fonted?).

• The Ultimate Vegan Cook Book (not Veganomicon ... I can't find a picture of it and it seems like a stock published book, but it was only $25 and it even has instructional pictures)

• Clean Food by Terry Walters. This book doesn't contain the word 'vegan'. But any book that uses agar agar in dessert recipes sure darn is. Quite American as its focus is seasonal ingredients, but still looking sensational and heeeeeps of recipes.

• Babycakes by Erin McKenna (even though I'm not really a bakerer, I loved the purdiness of the book and also the chance to cook something vegan and gluten free so I can share it with Buzz's mama)

• Easy Vegan (again, a publisher only book, but 'easy' rings bells in my soul)

• The 30 Minute Vegan by Mark Reinfeld and Jennifer Murray (like 'easy', 'quick' is like angel wings beating against my heart). 

My collection is growing ... soon to take over more shelves in the kitchen and colonise a cupboard. 

'The Animal Cruelty Syndrome', or: The NY Times follows up

**TRIGGER WARNING**: The article discussed here contains some graphic and heartbreaking descriptions of animal abuse. I found it hard to read. If you think this will trigger you, I advise you not to link to it. The extracts below do not contain these descriptions. 

In March the NY Times reported that an increasing number of US States were passing legislation to bar convicted animal abusers from owning or coming into contact with pets, and to mandate child or spousal abuse officers and animal control officers to share information and report to each other when they find something wrong.

Today the NY Times has published an extended piece titled 'The Animal Cruelty Syndrome', which discusses the growing recognition that animal cruelty is part of a constellation of behaviours endemic to abusive households, gang activity and the psychologically disturbed. 

The article is by Charles Siebert, a contributing writer, who is the author of “The Wauchula Woods Accord: Toward a New Understanding of Animals.” The article is well-written, empathetic and unflinching - I think I'd like to read this book. 

I'll try to do a more in-depth discussion when I'm not, say, at work, but for now here are some extracts. 

Back in the early 1980s, Lockwood was asked to work on behalf of New Jersey’s Division of Youth and Family Services with a team of investigators looking into the treatment of animals in middle-class American households that had been identified as having issues of child abuse. They interviewed all the members of each family as well as the social workers who were assigned to them. The researchers’ expectation going in was that such families would have relatively few pets given their unstable and volatile environments. They found, however, not only that these families owned far more pets than other households in the same community but also that few of the animals were older than 2.

“There was a very high turnover of pets in these families,” Lockwood told me. “Pets dying or being discarded or running away. We discovered that in homes where there was domestic violence or physical abuse of children, the incidence of animal cruelty was close to 90 percent. The most common pattern was that the abusive parent had used animal cruelty as a way of controlling the behaviors of others in the home. I’ve spent a lot of time looking at what links things like animal cruelty and child abuse and domestic violence. And one of the things is the need for power and control. Animal abuse is basically a power-and-control crime.”

...

In a separate study, a quarter of battered women reported that they had delayed leaving abusive relationships for the shelter out of fear for the well-being of the family pet. In response, a number of shelters across the country have developed “safe haven” programs that offer refuges for abused pets as well as people, in order that both can be freed from the cycle of intimidation and violence. 

...

What cannot be so easily monitored or ameliorated, however, is the corrosive effect that witnessing such acts has on children and their development. More than 70 percent of U.S. households with young children have pets. In a study from the 1980s, 7-to-10-year-old children named on average two pets when listing the 10 most important individuals in their lives. When asked to “whom do you turn to when you are feeling sad, angry, happy or wanting to share a secret,” nearly half of 5-year-old children in another study mentioned their pets. One way to think of what animal abuse does to a child might simply be to consider all the positive associations and life lessons that come from a child’s closeness to a pet — right down to eventually receiving their first and perhaps most gentle experiences of death as a natural part of life — and then flipping them so that all those lessons and associations turn negative. 

...

To date, one of the most promising methods for healing those whose empathic pathways have been stunted by things like repeated exposure to animal cruelty is, poetically enough, having such victims work with animals. Kids who tend to be completely unresponsive to human counselors and who generally shun physical and emotional closeness with people often find themselves talking openly to, often crying in front of, a horse — a creature that can often be just as strong-willed and unpredictable as they are and yet in no way judgmental, except, of course, for a natural aversion to loud, aggressive human behaviors. 

A victory for Tasmania and pigs, or: a change for Australia

Well that's good news! I'd like to think it was my letter, but I assume it was a critical mass ...

Dear Rachel, Today marks an extraordinary day for pigs. It’s days like these that we are reminded that with hard work and persistence, comes results. In this case — the first state-based commitment to phase out one of the cruellest practices in Australia...

This historic development would never have been possible without the support of Animals Australia’s members. Thank You. Animals Australia relies entirely on public donations. Please give generously to support our ongoing efforts to free animals from needless cruelty. ABOVE: Animals Australia in conjunction with Brightside Farm Sanctuary recently placed a series of high impact print advertisements in three state-wide newspapers, bringing Minister Green face to face with the animals he had the opportunity to help. TIP: Visit AnimalsAustralia.org, or our Facebook page to see other recent campaign initiatives. Following a state-wide newspaper advertising blitz by Animals Australia and Brightside Farm Sanctuary, Tasmania's Primary Industries Minister Bryan Green announced in parliament today (June 10th 2010) that he will ban cruel sow stalls in the state! Pigs are among the most intelligent species on the planet, and yet have been subjected to one of the cruellest practices ever inflicted on animals in Australia. 'Sow stalls' are typically used in factory farming operations across the country to confine and isolate mother pigs during pregnancy. The national Code of Practice permits these animals to be confined in tiny crates, unable even to turn around for months on end, denying them exercise and any quality of life. As a result, pigs suffer painful physical ailments and even depression. Recently the Tasmanian Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AWAC) recognised the unacceptable cruelty permitted by the flawed national code, and recommended to Primary Industries Minister Bryan Green that Tasmania take a leading role to become the first state to outlaw the cruel practice of confining sows in stalls. Animals Australia’s representative on the AWAC provided crucial input on the scientific and ethical arguments against confining sows in tiny stalls. Despite heavy lobbying from Australia's intensive pork industry, Minister Green has accepted this recommendation, encouraged by a flood of supportive letters and e-mails from thousands of caring Animals Australia supporters. This significant development, along with the recent announcement by Australia's largest piggery to voluntarily phase out sow stalls, could never have happened without Animals Australia's investigations, media exposés, and high profile public awareness campaigns. Consistent with international precedents, the Tasmanian government will implement a phase out of sow stalls with a total ban in 2017. Therefore it is crucial that Animals Australia continues to highlight to consumers in Tasmania and throughout Australia that they have the power to help these animals right now by refusing to purchase factory farmed products. In addition, we will be lobbying other state governments to follow the precedent established in Tasmania. Please help us maintain our high impact campaigns on behalf of animals. Hope is finally on the horizon for these intelligent animals thanks to the committed support of our members. You can help us bring about change even sooner by donating today. Thank you for being a voice for animals, Lyn White Animals Australia Communication Director P.S. If you have friends who love animals please tell them about Animals Australia. Our small team of campaigners ensure that animals in need get maximum value out of every precious dollar donated to us. With greater support, more important outcomes like this will become possible.

Things that made me teary this morning, or: Blood sports even for the smallest of creatures

Under this article from today's Guardian, is this comment, which just makes my heart break.

6 Jun 2010, 2:17AM

The cruelty does not begin or end with bullfights in Spain. At 'ferias' I have been to you can pay a Euro to throw stones at a rabbit nailed to a plank; I have seen donkeys stabbed to death in the town square in Mijas on Easter parades (there is of course the infamous traddition of throwing a donkey or a horse from the bell tower as well), and in Malaga they regularily have bullfights for children where the 'matador', dressed a bit like Ronald McDonald, invites the children to join him in hacking a bull calf to death in the ring, to much merriment of the assembled parents. And if you are too lazy to participate in the stabbing, taunting and torturing yourself, you can always watch the children's bullfighting programme on Saturday morning: 'Toros para todos.'
What a lovely country. Let's all go there and pay our respects their ancient and noble traditions, shall we?

It's not right. It will never be right. Culture and tradition be damned.

Anatomy of a birthday weekend, or: My fourth decade

Miss T for Miss Thirty. 

Friday 4 June 2010

 

 

A party at work with artwork from Miss Erin's two girls, the Misses Kira and Breanna. Breanna has even drawn directions for how to throw a surprise party. The coolest! 

 

The beautiful bangle from the girls at work - perfect.

 

A lovely brooch from Arts Victoria from Miss Veronica, who I have been friends with since were were in Form 7D together in 1993, and we now work on the same floor. 

 

A dinner of the best food in the world: A on VT.

Saturday 5 June 2010 - the day of days

 

My present from my parents and myself - a white gold pendant from Canturi. I love that you can't really tell if it's modern or Art Deco. I've been lusting for years and decided if I couldn't justify it now, it would languish forever on my list of "things that I shoulda-woulda-coulda". It's for the granddaughters.

 

Out for breakfast at Soulfoods.

 

Mr Lovaah Lovaah.

And then off to Buzz's present for me ...

 

Designed by Buzz with art direction from Miss T, executed by Tammy at Eternal Instinct. It's new and still healing so the colours will brighten. I think I may get the pink enpinkened a little if it stays paler. You can never go hot enough with pink.

Lovelovelove. 

(and I have some information on vegan ink which I'll share later). 

 

Lunch from La Panella - vausage roll.

 

Homer.

That's SammyOne Puppykins' nose trying to get at my Whittaker's. 

Dinner at Enlightened Cuisine with the fam, Mr and Mrs T and Miss T Junior, and the Esteemed Grandfather Mr R, and Buzz. Best dish, as before: 5 spice tofu.

And after (not snapped): drinks for Miss Leia Jade's birthday. 

Sunday 6 June 2010

 

Sunday morning - Camberwell market felafel. 

 

Thoughtful and generous Dinosaur Designs necklace from Mr and Mrs T's neighbours, the lovely Ms Marisa who has known me since before I was born, and family Mr Ric, Master Dante and Miss Allegra. Beeyootiful and so undeserved.

 

Miss T Jnr outdoes herself with baked New York cheesecake via Carla.  Eaten while visiting the Esteemed Grandmother Mrs R. Do not attempt more than once slice.

 

Homemade Sunday night dinner with Mr and Mrs Buzz with TV, SammyPuppins and the love of my life. 

Thank you everyone.

Tasmania could lead the way, or: banning sow stalls

I received the following email from Animals Australia. My response is below, and I urge you to do the same. This is an ooprtunity for one state to forge ahead in making positive changes to the welfare of pigs - someone must be first. 

Dear Rachel,

I'm writing to you today to share with you some wonderfully hopeful news, and also to ask for a small favour on behalf of thousands of needy animals.

Your critical support of our campaign to end factory farming has helped create the groundswell that has made it possible for the first Australian state government to consider a legislative ban on the use of sow stalls.

As you may know, the 'sow stall' represents one of the cruellest practices ever inflicted on pigs in Australia. Already banned in the U.K. and in parts of Europe, these cruel concrete and metal crates imprison mother pigs so severely that they cannot even turn around. Here in Australia, laws currently permit pregnant sows to be left in this debilitating state for months at a time.

In an incredibly positive move, Tasmania’s Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AWAC) recently recommended that Tasmania become the first state to ban the use of sow stalls on the basis of unacceptable cruelty. The decision to accept the recommendation now rests with one man: Primary Industries Minister Bryan Green.

The pig industry is hard at work lobbying Minister Green to ignore science that clearly reveals how pigs suffer physically and emotionally inside stalls. They would rather continue the practice of confining pigs in stalls indefinitely. So who will speak up for the pigs?

Animals Australia in collaboration with Tasmanian-based member society Brightside Farm Sanctuary have responded in force by placing a series of 18 high-impact ads across three state-wide newspapers that will bring the Tasmanian Primary Industries Minister face to face with the very animals he has the opportunity to help. You can view the ads here.

Right now it is critical that Minister Green be reminded that all caring Australians are appalled by animal cruelty and will enthusiastically support a ban on cruel sow stalls — which brings me to that favour I wanted to ask you...

You can help us bring about this important outcome by sending a personal e-mail to Minister Green to urge him to accept AWAC's recommendation to ban sow stalls in Tasmania. Your message need only be a few short lines. His address is: bryan.green@parliament.tas.gov.au

Thank you dearly for your ongoing support. A few minutes of your time today could help end a lifetime of suffering for animals.

For the pigs, 

Lyn White

Dear Minister,

I write to urge you to accept the recommendation of Tasmania's Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AWAC) that Tasmania ban the use of sow stalls on the basis of unacceptable cruelty.

The United Kingdom and Europe have also recognised that the confinement of pregnant sows in a conrete and metal crate for months at a time without room to turn around constitutes severe cruelty.

It is scientifically well established that pigs are animals with significant levels of intelligence and emotion, much the same as that of a dog. Their technical classification as farm animals is insufficient justification to allow treatment of them that we would not accept if applied to domestic animals and our pets. 

The pig industry will attempt to reduce the severity of suffering experienced by sows, and present economic arguments to continue current practices. I strongly urge you to consider instead the moral imperative that each of us bears to uphold acceptable standards of welfare for animals under our care. 

I hope very much that Tasmania will lead the nation in banning this unecessary, cruel and inhumane practice.

Yours faithfully,

Miss T

Victoria Votes, or: political machinations and the Animal Justice Party of Australia

The Melbourne Magazine - something I usually find oddly entrancing despite the intense navel-gazing - has run an article in which Ted Baillieu and John Brumby answer questions posed by Victorians. 

The answers range from the straight-talkin' (here's Brumby on whether the government will raise the drinking age to 21: "I don't support that because to be honest I don't believe realistically it could be achieved or implemented") to the infuriating (how about this corker by Baillieu in answer to a question about street violence in the CBD: "We have set out a very cleat strategy to deal with it, and that's, in part, police numbers ... We've also said that we need zero-tolerance enforcement. We will get rid of suspended sentences, we'll get rid of home detention and we'll put an end to what is talked about in police circles as the notion of a free hit.").

One question posed that is very important to me is this one from Peter Singer:

"Will you empower inspectors to make routine, unannounced visits to Victorian factory farms so that the public does not have to rey on the occasional whistleblower with courage enough to report when animals are kept in cruel conditions that violate the law and the government's own codes of practice?"

Victoria goes to the polls on 27 November. The answers to this question will help me decide on my vote (I'd also love to see an answer from the Greens, whose animal policy is here - it's welfarist  in position but with some excellent points) and although I am not trying to sway your vote, I hope these answers will help inform your own considerations and decision-making process (which as a responsible citizen of a democratic nation you will of course undertake before casting your vote). 

John Brumby: 

"We're not looking at any changes in this area at this point in time, but let me say that animal welfare is a very important issue to our state. How you ensure appropriate welfare for animals is the sign, I think, of any civilised society, and so it is fundamental that businesses that operate in our state should and must operate within the laws that are set in place".

Ted Baillieu:

"There will be, from time to time, occasions where the wrong thing is being done but I have great faith in our farming sector, and I think the system is working reasonably well, at present, to identify any inappropriate practices".

In the federal sphere (federal system of government ... three tiers of government... ) is the newly forming Animal Justice Party of Australia. Niki has already written about this new political party here. I'm really pleased that the issues I am most interested in are garnering enough support to warrant a political movement. I'm under no illusions that the AJP will sweep into office and declare the new state Veganstralia, but a political voice reflects community concern. It will be hard to present serious animal-related issues in a way that gathers general community support without coming across as craaaazy-vegans or making people think that their Saturday BBQ snags will be subject to armed raids (I want omnis' support. I would like to confiscate their snags too but it's no way to ensure our issues get a sympathetic hearing outside of Veganville), but I'm glad they're tackling it. I think I'll join .

Testing, testing, or: The Age is discussing animal testing and makeup

Today's 'Beauty Beat' blog at The Age website has a post on animal testing. I've responded and urge you to do the same. It's astonishing how often people assume that products are no longer tested on animals (because they rightly think that it's barbaric, abhorrent and ineffective) but it's just that the issue has slipped off the radar - I know this was the case for me when I started veganising my makeup and bathroom products. It's great that this important but often forgotten issue is getting an airing.

http://blogs.theage.com.au/lifestyle/beautybeat/archives/2010/05/cruel_reality.html

Skinning, or: Just Stop It.

From today's Age. 

Oh no no no no no bleeding hell no. 

Fur is not back. Unless you like hearing rabbits scream as they are anally electrocuted. Do you?

Farmers do not shoot foxes and rabbits and sell their pelts. Most fur comes from China where animals are raised in cages for their skins and then killed. It's simple. It's not environmental.

Leather, suede, wool, angora and cashmere aren't better, but as one sensible girl pointed out to me, whereas most shoes are leather and coats are wool (as anyone who has tried to find good quality synthetics knows), there is no reason at all to wear fur and that's why it should be abhorrent even to skin-wearers. 

Just stop it.

Furry fashion back in style

DAILE PEPPER

May 12, 2010 - 1:40PM

Comments 27

A fur vest by Harmony & Lawson. Photo: Luke Thompson

Fur is back in fashion.
The number of luxury labels across the world using faux and real fur to create their autumn/winter collections is huge and now a Perth fashion label’s real fur creations are flying off the racks.
Chanel sent models wearing full fur body suits down the catwalk, evoking images of woolly mammoths in ancient times, during their recent fall/winter show. Though the luxe label chose to use fake fur rather than the real thing.

Roberto Cavalli’s line of pelts, vests, scarves and dresses featuring fur have sent animal rights activisits aflutter, Gucci, Fendi and plenty more have favoured fur as both embellishment and the foundation of a range of pieces.
Now a Perth label Harmony & Lawson is creating garments made only of real fur, and finding the furry designs are much more popular than ever expected.
Designer Harmony Douglas said her rabbit and raccoon fur creations have proved extremely popular since she launched the label in December.

A creation by Chanel, part of the fall/winter 2011 collection.

“The market is crying out for it,” she said.
“We are just being inundated with sales.”
No longer are Anna Wintour and J.Lo amongst a tiny minority of fashion followers who wear the real thing. 
Singer Kelly Rowland purchased a fur vest from the label during her recent visit to Perth, and models including Skye Stracke had purchased the product too. Douglas said she had customers from all over the world.
But the controversy surrounding the use of fur continues. Even those designers that do use fur, refuse to comment on their use of it.
Lisa Ho’s latest winter collection features what has been said to be rabbit fur. But ask her PR team for a comment on her use of the material and you get a quick “Lisa Ho doesn’t comment on fur” response.
But Douglas says very few people voiced concerns to her about the possibility of cruelty, though she realised that for some people fur would always remain taboo.
She sourced her furs overseas, and said government regulations meant the product was farmed like other meat products. All parts of the animals were used. The fur was certified cruelty free.
It was the luxury feel of garments made from fur that was making them popular once again, Douglas said.
“It’s the luxury of it, it's so soft, and my garments are light weight,” she said.
But not everyone in the fashion industry believes the use of real fur can be justified.
While people presume Australian luxe label Aurelio Costarella uses the material to create some of the couture looks they send down the catwalk, the designer has signed the PETA agreement against the use of fur and will never use the real thing.
“We believe you don’t need to use fur as there are so many other great materials and fabrications to utilise," Costarella brand manager Paul O’Connor said.
At the end of the day it’s about using your creativity to make a luxury product and one that is desirable to all.”