Climate change thoughts made bite sized.

Climate change 2008 itsy-bitsy synopsis. Read it.

For those of you who don't know, or don't care: our so-called leaders keep on saying that we can make small incremental changes that will mitigate climate change. At least this is what the meetings at Poznan would have us swallow. Riiiiiiight. Just like you can staunch the flow of blood from a severed limb by applying small band-aids one at a time, slowly, and without too much effort. Moving to a more concrete and relevant example: you do not stop climate change by switching to energy efficient lightbulbs and by recycling the packaging from your overpackaged, unnecessary shit. The kind of half-assed and ineffective measures that people are taking in the name of "do what you can without actually changing any of the big stuff" are exactly that: half-assed and ineffective, at least on their own. If you don't care enough about your home (ie, the entire planet) to actually make real changes, then how can you expect real change to come about?

Let me try an analogy. The planet is warming, and weather is becoming more and more unpredictable at some rate. Let's call this rate Fucking Fast (FF). Now, we are in a metaphorical footrace with FF, and want to win. If we move Fucking Slow (FS), FF will outrun us, and we will lose. FF will not negotiate with us, and will not slow down (in fact, it's accelerating). Either we speed up enough to keep up, or we lose. Right now, we're losing, and refusing to speed up. And idiotically, we're pretending that we can win with such a strategy.

Frankly, the answers are simple. They probably cost money, and require a dip in our ridiculously high standards of living and consumerism in the developped world. But frankly, the planet will not negotiate with you (or me, or the president of the US, or the head of any multinational corporation, no matter how rich) on this one. Either we smarten up, or it might stop playing nice with us. Cutting into "economic growth" kinda sucks, but not having a habitable planet sucks worse. And like I said, while leaders sit on their thumbs at these international meetings "negotiating", they forget that the planet and it's climate won't negotiate. Either we put in less greenhouse gas than the planet can absorb, or we risk whatever it has in store for us when the surplus gasses stay in the atmosphere (where we put them, remember).

Here are some *real* changes you can make (along with your lightbulbs and your recycling):

Go vegan. Animal agriculture is the single biggest emitter of greenhouse gasses. Plus, it takes more energy at every level to make animals and get them to your dinner plate than it does to make plants. And don't give me that "local meat" bullshit. If you really think that current levels of meat consumption can be sustained using local, small-scale operations, you're wrong.

Stop driving. Even if it means you have to get up a whole 15 or 30 minutes earlier to bus or subway to work. If you're just too damn important to waste 15 minutes of your valuable time, consider getting an ego reduction. If you live somewhere with no public transportation, organize some carpooling, and lobby for public transportation.

Buy less stuff. Buy used stuff. Fix your old stuff, or pay someone to fix it for you. Freecycle.

Vacation near your home. Go camping. Take a bus or train to a nearby city and explore it.

Pressure politicians at local and national levels. Lobby for bike lanes, better public transportation, and community recycling/composting . Ask that governments actually commit to taking action on climate-change related issues.

calling in gay, and eating noodles.

This is a great idea, especially in light of the rampant homophobia that was on display in the United States, what with voting to ban gay marriage all over the place. ..*ahem* Sheesh. The way people are fighting it, you'd think we were talking about *mandatory* gay marriage... for everyone. Now, even though I've always secretly wished that homophobes were literally afraid of me (which would get me a lot more space on public transportation, and would ensure that I had a WHOLE BIKE LANE all to myself as terrified heterosexuals threw themselves out of my path in fear and panic), they aren't. Even though I know that my life is a frikin' (vegan) cakewalk compared to the lives of queers just a few years ago, so-called progressive places (like my ex-country Canada) didn't just hand over rights to queers because they like us and actually think we should have them. Nope. They had to be ordered to do so in court. And we still don't get the same treatment as everybody else. For example, how ridiculous would it be if big old queers everywhere got to vote on whether or not we thought heterosexuals should be allowed to adopt? What if we said no, and instead voted to restrict the rights of heterosexuals, but still expected them to contribute time and money and support to society, just as if they were equal? See? See how ridiculous that is? Frankly, I think it's worth throwing a bit of a temper tantrum occasionally over this. (Actually, I think it's worth a lot more than that). So my darling American readers, on December 10th, call in Gay, and if you can't (or if you work for an employer who actually gives you the same benefits as heterosexuals or is really awesome, such that you'd just be being kinda nonsensical), don't buy anything. Keep your big, fat, gay dollars (or pounds) in your pocket for the day.

You know what? I don't even want children. But, like the dude in that Monty Python film, I want the RIGHT to have children. I also, for the record, have no intention of getting married, and have problems with the very idea of giving special rights to couples, but if you're going to recognize couply relationships, it should be all couples. Not having (or adopting) a kid or getting married or whatever should be a choice, not a restriction placed on you because of who you happen to get nekkid with.

Here, if you need to comfort yourself, need to comfort your friends, or just need energy for more hot, out-of-wedlock queer sex... Soba noodles. Easy, yummy, and oh-so-slurpy. On the noodles: dried mushrooms, kibble (ahem, tvp), pumpkin and chard, simmered in water, soy sauce, wine and a bit of sugar. That's it. Simple. Yet extremely Gay.

queerly: I wish I was him. Bikini Kill.

I might be a party pooper

...but voting overwhelmingly to deny gay people the same rights as straight people takes the veneer of "progress" off electing a black president. One step forward, several steps back.

Anyway. No time for deep political commentary here. Must go have hot, out-of-wedlock queer sex. Over and over. Bye!

A commandment from the chocolate god

Thou shalt not use blood chocolate. I post a lot of chocolate stuff, and so I think I have some responsibility to ask you not to use chocolate produced by slaves when you make the lovely, decadent dark chocolate goodness from my blog. Animal slavery is not vegan. Human slavery is also not vegan. Both suck, and the edge of guilt will ruin the otherwise perfect taste of chocolate. And it will break my little dancing vegan chocolate god heart. For more info, go here.

You can be a chocolate snob like me and still not rely on child slaves to get the stuff to your table. Many of the fair-trade, organic chocolate bars have failed miserably to impress me, but just as many have knocked my socks off with how good they are. Here are my recommendations:

For cooking cakes etc: Green & Blacks or GEPA dark chocolates, Plamil for cases where you want a dairy-free milk or white chocolate. Green and Blacks also makes kick-ass coco powder.

For super decadent stuff (truffles, hot chocolate): Valhrona, either tempered or not, depending on the application.

For straight up eating (decadent): Coppeneur, Charlemagne, Coco of Bruntsfield, Luento Santoro

For straight up eating (fun): Dagoba (if you can get it fresh-ish... I don't know why, but I've had extremely bad luck with getting stale/bloom-ish chocolate from this company, yet their lavender chocolate is so good, I still buy it.)

Generally, stuff marked organic (or fair trade) is slave free, as is single-origin chocolate that is not from the Cote d'Ivoire. Please do your sleuthwork if you are unsure of the origins of your chocolate. Here is a link to a list of some slave-free chocolates. If you're too lazy to do your own research, please please please stick to the brands that others have taken the time to research for you.

bitching about Skinny Bitch pakaging

I know I've been told to love Skinny Bitch. After all, it seems to be making more vegans, which is what matters, right? Welllllllll.....

Why am I throwing this out into the blogosphere instead of just shutting up? Because books, tv programmes, ads, websites etc. like this anger me. They obviously prey on women's body insecurities and blatantly reinforce the message that we get every day that we should (want to) be skinny as hell and jealous of any other woman who "succeeds" better than we do at attaining this ideal. Just because the book is cute and the tone is flippant, that doesn't change the message. It only candy coats it. Just because something is cute, smiley, has the word "bitch" in the title, and is written by women, it doesn't mean that it's not serving up a big fat load of sexist crap.

Sadly, I can't comment too extensively on the actual content of the book, because I refuse to support projects that reinforce the idea that women should change their entire world view to be skinny, so I'm not going to buy it. I mean, there is nothing I wold like to see more than a world of vegans. But go vegan because you have a moral compass and perhaps some basic reasoning skills, not because you are insecure about your ass. From the book previews that I've been able to see on Amazon, the animal rights info in Skinny Bitch is actually fairly accurate, and there is a strong message of ethical veganism in there somewhere. Too bad it's in such a regrettable package.

In addition to the problematic body image message, this kind of bait-and-switch marketing reinforces the idea that women are so disinterested in (or incapable of considering) the actual issues around animal rights, consumerism and power relationships that they have to be coerced into doing the right thing by appealing to their shallow, vain, insecure side. And speaking of the right thing, the basis of ethical veganism that the power imbalance between people and other animals is out of control. However, when a book uses instead of questions womens obsession with weight loss, and reinforces the arbitrary and largely unattainable version of beauty touted by mainstream advertizing, it only reinforces the power imbalance known as sexism, which isn't any less evil than speciesism. It's just a different flavour of evil.

climate change, meat, and "personal choice"

Last week Rajendra Pachauri, who is the head of the UN scientific panel on climate change said something rather radical out loud at a press conference in Paris. He asked people to "please eat less meat". You see, it's old news that livestock production creates lots of greenhouse gasses. And I'm not talking cow farts here. Livestock needs land, feed, water and transportation. Lots of it. So greenhouse gas emissions from livestock total more, in fact, than all forms of transport combined. And guess what? We've known this for a long time, yet it is rare to hear any sort of public debate about whether or not people ought to eat animal products daily, and whether or not participating in something that contributes to environmental destruction on a global scale can really be considered a personal choice.

I find it fascinating that there is broad social support for smoking bans pretty much anywhere. After all, smoking is a personal choice, no? I mean, it pollutes the air in restaurants and annoys the people around you, but is it really so different than the personal choice to eat a steak that requires cutting down rain forest, using underpaid labour, and then has to make an international journey to end up on your plate? In both cases, you are taking an environment that is meant to be a shared one, and needlessly polluting or destroying it because it makes you feel good. Oh yeah, and there's the bit about killing a sentient being for no reason other than taste and convenience. One can make the argument that smoking is also harmful to the person doing it. Well, diet-related diseases such as type 2 diabetes and heart conditions are on the rise, and the last time I checked, those were bad for your health too. I'm sorry, but in what way is that kind of behaviour a personal choice? Shouldn't a personal choice be something that primarily affects the person making it and doesn't gratuitously hurt others?

Despite the ethical and environmental reasons not to consume animal products, most environmental groups and private individuals who are concerned about equality and environmental issues are loathe to suggest that people should consume less meat or, heaven forbid, stop using animal products altogether. Even when one totally ignores the possible health benefits of a vegan diet consisting of something other than fries and sugar, there are compelling reasons to reduce or eliminate animal products from our lives. I sometimes imagine being an old woman and having to say to a teenager "Dude, sorry we left you a trashed planet, but you understand that my love of ice cream and my right to drive the suv to the store to buy it is infinitely more important to me than you and your future, right?". Put that way, no one would say that the ice cream is more important. Sadly, our actions say otherwise.

We know that the animal killing industry is bad for the planet, bad for the underpaid workers, and bad for our health. And we know that we don't need it in order to survive. So why oh why won't anyone talk about it? People seem determined to keep up our willful ignorance about how our "personal choices" are going to eventually "fuck up the planet that we rely on for such luxuries as air, water and food", and our public figures are pandering to our childish insistence of living in a fantasy where our choices about what and how much we consume are ethically neutral. Some days I meet people who give me hope that people will change, but when I see someone with a Nobel prize suggesting the western world to cut meat consumption to only 5 times a week, and the western world balking at this incredible "sacrifice", I want to crawl under my bed and cry.

rant track: the chairman dances.

more reading about animal products and the environment