Appearance and advocacy

July 5, 2009

Judging advocates on their appearance is nothing new. As one example,

one prominent animal welfare advocate writes in an essay about

" effective " advocacy ( http://bit.ly/YGiMn ):

__________________

Obviously, there are forums where green hair, body piercings, and

ripped-up clothing are perfectly acceptable, but in most situations,

when we reject mainstream society’s standards, we are limiting our

capacity to help animals. ... The fact is that if you LOOK sickly or

SEEM lethargic, you’ll be less effective as an advocate. If you are

frequently sick, drop dead from a heart attack, or end up in the

chemotherapy ward, you’re making veganism look bad, and you’re no longer

able to help animals! (emphasis mine)

__________________

With a healthy dose of ableism, they also suggest that vegans with

cancer or other chronic illnesses make veganism look bad and are not

able to help non-human animals. This is eerily similar to the McDougall

article.

On a tangible level, this devaluation of others leads to animal advocacy

campaigns that play upon and strengthen various harmful norms in society

(including fattist, ableist, ageist, cisgenderist, classist,

heterosexist, racist, and sexist). I've witnessed this in action

firsthand on multiple occasions in working with some animal welfare

corporations. Not only is this harmful for our community of vegetarians

and vegetarian advocates, it's harmful for our society as a whole.

Fortunately, this works in reverse: the less we as a community think

this way, the less power it will have in the broader society. And so

while I am saddened that this hurtful material was forwarded to the

list, I feel encouraged by and grateful to those who shared their

impassioned and personal objections.

Victor

__________________

Karin wrote:

This particular sentence really struck a nerve: “Furthermore, their

audiences of meat-eaters and animal-abusers may be so distracted by

their appearance that they cannot hear the vital issues of animal rights

and the environment; resulting in an unacknowledged setback for a fat

vegan’s hard work for change.” Is this statement for real? Are we really

going to deem some people less worthy of carrying the vegan/ animal

rights message because they don’t fit some sort of idealized body image?

The animals need all the activists they can get, and alienating and

attacking other people in the movement does nothing to help the animals.

Why are we spending time criticizing and shaming people within our

movement for their appearance instead of directing that time and energy

towards fighting animal abuse?

Just as we embrace ALL animals, there needs to be room in our community

for people of all different shapes and sizes.

--

Veganism as Anti-Oppression: http://loveallbeings.org/

July 5, 2009

Victor,

Thanks for saying this -- you are so right! As a libertarian

activist, I not infrequently hear this same kind of thing in our

community -- that we should try to look " mainstream, " " professional, "

" non-threatening, " etc., in order to (oh, the irony!) be more

effective at promoting liberty. These advocates of self-censorship

would have us believe libertarians who look too nonconformist or

individual are not good " salespeople " for spreading our ideas, and

that these folks should shave their unruly beards, wear suits or

" business attire " (as if there were only one kind of business!), hide

their tattoos and piercings, etc.

I suspect that most every political movement in this country today if

not the entire world is filled with similar " marketing-think " crap.

But the reality is that what's considered " mainstream, " " normal " and

" acceptable " isn't set in stone; it is what we all collectively make

it. If a veg*n activist pressures people working with us conform to

conventional standards of appearance, then that person is helping to

perpetuate restrictive ideas of normalcy that not only hurt the

ability of their fellow veg*ns to be accepted when they are out of

" conventional uniform " and trying to live their day-to-day lives, but

also hurt nonconformists in the libertarian community and all the

other communities out there of people who are trying to change the

world. Vice versa, to the extent that libertarians or others engage in

this kind of self-censorship, it will likewise negatively impact the

climate in which veg*ns are trying to spread our message, by making

nonconformity of appearance be perceived that much less as mainstream/

normal/acceptable in society as a whole. So let's all do each other a

favor and be who we are without shame or fear!*

Love & Liberty,

((( starchild )))

*Of course being healthy is good, and I'm not suggesting anyone should

embrace a socially unpopular appearance for the sake of political

correctness if it is harmful to their health and happiness.

“Politics is when people choose their words and actions based on how

they want others to react rather than based on what they really think.”

-Patrick Lencioni, The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

On Jul 5, 2009, at 11:01 AM, Victor Tsou wrote:

> Judging advocates on their appearance is nothing new. As one example,

> one prominent animal welfare advocate writes in an essay about

> " effective " advocacy ( http://bit.ly/YGiMn ):

> __________________

> Obviously, there are forums where green hair, body piercings, and

> ripped-up clothing are perfectly acceptable, but in most situations,

> when we reject mainstream society’s standards, we are limiting our

> capacity to help animals. ... The fact is that if you LOOK sickly or

> SEEM lethargic, you’ll be less effective as an advocate. If you are

> frequently sick, drop dead from a heart attack, or end up in the

> chemotherapy ward, you’re making veganism look bad, and you’re no

> longer

> able to help animals! (emphasis mine)

> __________________

> With a healthy dose of ableism, they also suggest that vegans with

> cancer or other chronic illnesses make veganism look bad and are not

> able to help non-human animals. This is eerily similar to the

> McDougall

> article.

>

> On a tangible level, this devaluation of others leads to animal

> advocacy

> campaigns that play upon and strengthen various harmful norms in

> society

> (including fattist, ableist, ageist, cisgenderist, classist,

> heterosexist, racist, and sexist). I've witnessed this in action

> firsthand on multiple occasions in working with some animal welfare

> corporations. Not only is this harmful for our community of

> vegetarians

> and vegetarian advocates, it's harmful for our society as a whole.

> Fortunately, this works in reverse: the less we as a community think

> this way, the less power it will have in the broader society. And so

> while I am saddened that this hurtful material was forwarded to the

> list, I feel encouraged by and grateful to those who shared their

> impassioned and personal objections.

>

> Victor

> __________________

> Karin wrote:

>

> This particular sentence really struck a nerve: “Furthermore, their

> audiences of meat-eaters and animal-abusers may be so distracted by

> their appearance that they cannot hear the vital issues of animal

> rights

> and the environment; resulting in an unacknowledged setback for a fat

> vegan’s hard work for change.” Is this statement for real? Are we

> really

> going to deem some people less worthy of carrying the vegan/ animal

> rights message because they don’t fit some sort of idealized body

> image?

> The animals need all the activists they can get, and alienating and

> attacking other people in the movement does nothing to help the

> animals.

> Why are we spending time criticizing and shaming people within our

> movement for their appearance instead of directing that time and

> energy

> towards fighting animal abuse?

>

> Just as we embrace ALL animals, there needs to be room in our

> community

> for people of all different shapes and sizes.

>

> --

> Veganism as Anti-Oppression: http://loveallbeings.org/

>

> ---

>

> .........................................................

> : BAY AREA VEGETARIANS BayAreaVeg.org :

> : Charter/Post Guidelines http://bayareaveg.org/charter :

> : Events Calendar - http://bayareaveg.org/events :

> : Newsletter - http://bayareaveg.org/news :

> : Ultimate Guide - http://bayareaveg.org/ug :

> : Veg Food Finder - http://bayareaveg.org/finder :

> : Volunteer - http://bayareaveg.org/volunteer.htm :

> .........................................................

> Groups Links

>

July 6, 2009

I have experienced this theory in the gay community as well. I can certainly see both arguments to the story but I have to say that from my personal experience and from what I have witnessed over the years both as a gay man and as a vegan (and I have paid close attention to this) that the more "normal" (for lack of a better word) a person looks the more likely they will break down stereotypes and barriers and the more likely they will win people over. It's a shame that human nature seems to work like this but that is what I have witnessed and experienced in my life time both as a gay man and as a vegan. It's kind of a sad statement about human nature.

Not looking "normal" allows people to stereotype us and write us off. If they see that we are just like them they tend to be more accepting. That is just what I have observed. I haven't done any official studies or anything.

I think Dr. Mcdougall is just saying "If you want more people to go vegan you will be judged by non-vegans and if they see something that doesn't look appealing to them then you aren't going to win them over and therefore they won't go vegan".

I wish I had a dollar for every time I have heard non-vegans say disparaging remarks about the way vegans look (which boggles my mind because the majority of vegans I know are the picture of health!) but all it takes is one bad experience mixed with some prejudice and soon they are saying negative things about how vegans look.

Warren

In a message dated 7/5/09 1:12:06 PM, victor writes:

Judging advocates on their appearance is nothing new. As one example,

one prominent animal welfare advocate writes in an essay about

"effective" advocacy ( http://bit.ly/YGiMn ):

__________________

Obviously, there are forums where green hair, body piercings, and

ripped-up clothing are perfectly acceptable, but in most situations,

when we reject mainstream societyâ€™s standards, we are limiting our

capacity to help animals. ... The fact is that if you LOOK sickly or

SEEM lethargic, youâ€™ll be less effective as an advocate. If you are

frequently sick, drop dead from a heart attack, or end up in the

chemotherapy ward, youâ€™re making veganism look bad, and youâ€™re no longer