Gary Francione comes to Rochester

That’s right, I said it!  He who must not be named; the one and only Gary Francione.  I had the opportunity to meet him in person last night.  I am glad I have not written his name before.  Such is the human way in that we form opinions and pass judgement on people, often whole groups of people but in this case just the one, without ever having met them/without learning about them in a way that is not bias.  So now that I have met him, I feel ready to write about him.

Photo Credit: Alex Chernavsky

Gary Francione is a no-nonsense straight-forward man.  He speaks loudly at a pace that was so fast I had to use shorthand to capture the essence of his speech.  To be honest he reminded me a little of my favorite comedian George Carlin.  Francione is direct, honest, funny, charismatic and talks about veganism with no-holds barred.  There is no candy coating anything with him – not even one little teeny tiny sugar crystal to dilute his message.  So while he is anything but sweet, he is funny, quick witted, engaging, entertaining, but his most unique talent lies in his ability to speak truth in the rawest most Carlin-istic of ways.  He was also able to do something no abolitionist vegan has ever been able to do: cause me to finally understand what the problem is with single issue campaigns (SICs).

Gary Francione is nothing like the abolitionist vegans I have met.  I am not sure what the disconnect is.  I am not the only one who has had negative experiences, one after the other, with his subscribers.

Learning about psychology of the human being helps a vegan to understand what they are dealing with in people who are not yet vegan.  Every abolitionist vegan I have ever engaged repeats the same words, almost verbatim, making them very easy to spot.  The speech Gary followers use is esoteric and elitist (remember, I am commenting here about Gary’s followers and NOT Gary Francione). Believe it or not, not everyone knows what the word extant means, or even what the phrase ‘moral baseline’ means.  What people do know is when they hear those words they feel put off. Speaking to people requires speaking to them in a way in which they can understand.  I believe this is a problem. Engaging future vegans in the way his followers often do may further the stereotype that vegans are pompous.  This will only serve to repel future vegans.  This is the opposite of what is needed to achieve the goal: to end animal exploitation people must stop exploiting animals.  How do we stop people from doing it?  We cannot.  But we can send the message, and this is Gary’s key, that says unequivocally veganism is the way, veganism is the only way.

I agree.  But may I add something to this?  Because after an hour and a half speech the following was the only thing I found missing from the speech and to be honest, I agreed with everything Francione had to say.  But here is the only thing I would add:

A message is a discrete unit of communication intended by the source for consumption by some recipient or group of recipients. 

I intend for you to get my message.  In fact, it is a matter of life and death that you receive this message.  If I know that you do not own a computer but I send it by email anyway, have I made good on my delivery?

The message is important, in fact the message Francione sends is the most important message in the history of the history of human beings.

But I would argue that equally important is the delivery of such message.  If you deliver the message in such a way so as to cause the recipient not to understand it (esoterism), so as to repel the recipient (rudeness etc), so as to cause the recipient to stand more firmly in their beliefs about eating and using animals (cognitive dissonance leads to conformational bias) then are you a messenger? You have the most important message ever to be received. Each recipient has a slightly different way in which they can receive that message.  It does not matter how you yourself received it.  It does not matter if it totally pisses you off that you might have to change your delivery based on individual reception differences.  The only thing that matters is that you actually make good on the delivery of the message. Otherwise you are not a messenger.  In fact, much worse, you may have just damaged the very movement you seek to further.

If you can send an email to those with a computer, write a letter to someone without a computer, knock on someone’s door who does not have a phone, send a text message to those with a phone but never answers the damn thing, etc.  If you can tailor your physical delivery of your message every single day on the most mundane of matters then you have proven that you are able to change your delivery mode depending on the person and therefore it is your responsibility to do so, it is of the highest importance that you do so, on the things that matter the most.

Do you have to water down the message?  No you do not.  Can you deliver it in a way that is unique to each person so they may best receive it?  Yes you can.  In fact, you have to. Otherwise you’re no messenger.  You are not solving the problem.  You have become part of it by being the stereotype that is so repulsive to the general population about veganism.  It doesn’t matter if it shouldn’t be that way.  It doesn’t matter if people should not judge veganism like that. The truth is they do.  And until vegans learn to let go of their vegos and accept the psychological state of being human for what it is and learn how to work with that, how to play the game, only then will they rise above to meet the needs of the vegan movement.

Gary Francione doesn’t need to do any of that.  He has earned his position and style of rhetoric.   Does the world need Francione Clones?  No because his style cannot be emulated with the same effect.  It is his own style  and should not be duplicated because unless you were born with his personality you will not be able to pull it off without seeming like a jerk every time.

As for SICs I have a few things to say.  The first is I now understand Gary Francione’s position.  However I still stand by what I have said before:  all vegans are abolitionist.  No vegan wants anything less than 100% freedom from use for all animals.  Therefore all vegans are abolitionist.  I also do not know any vegans that spend time advocating SICs.  Every vegan I know advocates veganism.  Again, all vegans are already abolitionist.

The only other thing I want to say is that while I completely understand now how SICs confuse people, I believe it creates further devastating confusion when vegans attack SICs.  Truth is important.  And the truth is, whether we like it or not, that when a vegan attacks a SIC it makes vegans look schizophrenic.  While those that understand the problems with SICs, those that do not will form a very negative view of vegans and veganism as a result.  The truth is this drives people away from veganism.

So what to do about SICs?  There must be a better way to approach the problem because as of right now, the way it is being approached is actually harming the vegan movement by repelling people from it and, just as SICs harm animals, so does creating yet another negative stereotype for veganism.

My current analysis is that the cost to veganism and therefore to animals by publicly opposing Farm Sanctuary far outweighs the benefit at this point.  I am proof.  I went there a non or future vegan.  I am now vegan.  My fiance, my mother and my son all will tell you the same story.  Four more vegans in the world, all from Farm Sanctuary.  So whatever issues they have, they are not currently obvious enough for someone who is not so deeply ensconced in veganism to pose a barrier to someone becoming 100% vegan immediately upon contact with their organization, at this point.

The cost to opposing SICs such as cage free eggs to veganism is negligible compared to the benefit to the animals for educating the world on these particular kinds of SICs.  The world is ready to receive this education.  That is the key.

Speech Highlights:

• Lewis Gompertz essentially the founder of veganism and in particular tying this historical background to SICs today
• Gary Francione’s history with PETA
• You cannot tell anyone want to do, for example, be vegan.  You can tell people it is wrong not to be vegan.
• Animal welfare reform has never had anything to do with the animals.  It was always for economic gain.
• The concept of a leader is a bad idea.  I swear he said this – it is in my notes.
• Gary Francione loves Michael Vick.  Why?  Because everyone can relate to what he did, that it was wrong, and that his reason is not justifiable.  What Vick did was not worse than what happens to farmed animals.  Therefore if the only justification to do it to farm animals is taste, since we know for a fact it is not necessary for human health, then why be upset with Michael Vick?  Either all reasons are justifiable, or none are when it comes to unnecessarily harming others. “If you think you have a good reason for causing unnecessary harm then your moral rule is now meaningless” that rule being we should not cause unnecessary harm.  This is a speech Gary presents to college kids during which he asks who is upset about what Vick did, then asks who is vegan.  Then asks why be upset if you are not vegan?  Killing or hiring someone else to kill for you is the same thing.  There may be a psychological difference but there is no moral one.  I think this is very powerful because it is relevant and relatable and this creates the ripe environment to grow the necessary perspective.  In this way Gary Francione is able to make veganism versus the exploitation of animals relatable.  This is good message delivery.
• Animals have the right not to be property.  Property means that it is up to the owner to decide your value.  Simply because an owner values their dog does not mean the dog has the right to be valued.  This is the problem.  So when speaking about animal rights, this is the right Francione speaks of.
• When someone tells him they are vegetarian he responds with “I am sorry to hear that” Honestly that is hilarious and speaks to his character.  Coming from him, it works well I am sure.
• If intelligence is a criterion for rights then a lot of people are in trouble.  (again, so reminded me of Carlin!)
• If what comes out of your mouth is the language of non-violence but what goes in is a product of violence then you are confused
• If violence worked as a way to solve problems then we would all be living in Eden by now
• On the subject of animal rights advocates wanting to harm or kill those who harm animals:  Gary had a conversation with a woman who felt a vivisector  should be killed because it would save so many animals per year.  He asked her if her mother were vegan.  She said no but she doesn’t eat beef. She does however eat chicken.  Gary asked if we should kill her too since her consumption of chicken kills far more animals than a vivesector kills in one year.
• Gary’s journey to veganism

Each of the above could be an entire blog post on its own.  Gary Francione packs a lot into one speech so it would be an impossibly long blog post to write it all out here.  If possible I will try to get the YouTube link to the speech and post that at a later time.

His speech was really good and I am so glad I went.  I was surprised that he did say that he would be tolerant of someone taking a couple of weeks to transition to veganism.  My surprise comes from conversations with his followers who have the attitude that if you are not going to do it right now, exactly in the way they think you should do it, then you are a terrible person.  I have been called names by his followers and ironically I was vegan at the time although still a fledgling.  In fact I was so vegan already that I was sitting on lawn chairs in my living room and had been doing so for months, too poor to get new furniture, too vegan to keep what I had if you know what I mean.  Yet I was a terrible person because I dared to say I had been to Farm Sanctuary and what I learned there caused me to become vegan that day, and I have been ever since.

That is why it would harm the movement to speak out against at least certain organizations because it makes vegans seem crazy.  Cage free eggs?  Grass fed cows?  Sure, those are easy to help people to understand why these things are not good enough.  But Farm Sanctuary?  No one knows, no one except for Gary and a select few, that this organization may have some issues.  From the outside and to the public it is a vegan farm with animals who have been rescued from the holocaust and what they promote is veganism. As a non or I like to say future vegan, that was my perception of Farm Sanctuary.  So while some SICs are obviously flawed, others are not so obvious.  Those should be handled with care as per the vegan in the public eye or else the only result of such will be harm to the vegan movement and this is the opposite of the desired effect.

For now I leave you with one last thought:  oysters

This has been an intense subject of debate among fellow vegans.  Gary Francione uses sentience as his guide for what we should or should not eat/wear/etc.  When asked what animals he does not consider sentient I will decline to write ‘who’ he said at first although it was hilarious and I agreed but I also don’t want to create any problems!  I guess you will just have to watch the video for that one.  He was then asked if oysters were sentient.  He said “I don’t know” and therefore he does not eat them.  He does not walk on grass.  He does what he can, when he can, to avoid harm.

I bought his book and we exchanged a few words.  I mentioned kindness as a piece to promote veganism.  It was so nice to be able to talk to Gary Francione in the flesh.

I received Gary’s message.  I guess I needed to go right to the source. I am glad I did.

-Peace