Kim Stallwood

I received recently a much appreciated letter from Greg Raschke, Associate Director for Collections and Scholarly Communication at NSCU Libraries, recognising my work in support of the Tom Regan Animal Rights Archive at North Carolina State University.

I wanted to take this opportunity to thank you personally for all of the hard work you have put forth towards helping us build the Tom Regan Animal Rights Archive here at the North Carolina State University Libraries. As you know, the animal rights archive at NCSU is one of the best venues for scholars and activists to conduct research on the history and development of the animal rights movement. We hope to continue growing the collection and to encourage even more frequent use of the materials.

Your pivotal role in helping NCSU obtain the records of the Animal Rights Network was a key part in generating the momentum we needed as we sought to expand our animal rights collections. We are equally grateful that you have brought other collections to our attention, such as the Animal Rights/Animal Welfare Pamphlet Collection that we recently acquired. In April we released a press release announcing this acquisition and soon thereafter received a larger number of inquiries from researchers wanting to access the materials. No successful archive is built in isolation, and we are grateful for the collaboration of leading scholars such as Dr. Regan and leaders in the field such as you. Your contributions in connecting us with materials for purchase that are appropriate for the archive are most appreciated. We would like to build on these successes as we continue to grow the Tom Regan Animal Rights Archive.

Happy Birthday to this website which celebrates its third birthday on February 8!

I worked in a chicken slaughterhouse 40 years ago this summer. I was a student at a college in London learning how to manage hotels and restaurants. Three years later, I was a vegan at Compassion In World Farming, campaigning against factory farming and the live export of farmed animals to Europe. Today, I work as an independent scholar and author on animal rights, and proud to include Compassion among my clientele.

Looking back on my life in animal rights has preoccupied me recently. This is because I have obsessed over the completion of the manuscript for my first book. I explore what it means to care deeply about animals. I look back on my involvement in the animal rights movement in the UK and USA. I conclude there are four key values in animal rights: Compassion, Truth, Nonviolence and Justice.

The end of January is not too late to consider what I want to accomplish this year. Clearly, the book, which has still yet to be finally named, will be a major preoccupation. In fact, I am as fed up with talking about my book-to-be as you must be in hearing me prattle on about it. At last! I will breath a sigh of relief because it will be finished. And those who want to will be able to read it because Lantern Books will publish it in May.

Here’s a recording of me briefly talking about the book and reading a short extract from the Introduction.

Writing is just one chapter in a book’s history. The next is the promotion and marketing to draw attention to what it has got to say. I will be in the USA on a book promotion tour from May to July. Before then, I will relaunch this website to feature the book. Incidentally, I have put the blog of my alter ego, the Grumpy Vegan, on hold because he deserves a well-earned rest.

Writing is a large part of my life now. In addition to my first book, I have also written papers for four academic journals and anthologies to be published in Italy, Canada, the USA and the UK. I will share with you here information about them as they are published. Also, I am working on a second book which explores the animal rights movement in America and Britain. My goal is to publish this as an ebook in the summer. Then, later, to publish it as a ‘real’ book.

Meanwhile, I continue to work with various organisations as an independent consultant.

The Animals and Society Institute is very dear to my heart, not only as one of its co-founders along with Ken Shapiro, but also as a very special group dedicated to, among other things, the development of Human-Animal Studies.

It’s great to be involved again with Compassion In World Farming. This time I work closely with Philip Lymbery, Compassion’s Chief Executive, as Editor of his blog, A Compassionate World. I assist Philip with the research and development of material that the blog considers.

If your organisation is interested in exploring how I may be able to help you as an independent consultant, please email me at kim@kimstallwood.com.

I also believe in giving back to the animal rights movement and volunteer for two groups. One is local; the other international.

The first is East Sussex Wildlife Rescue and Ambulance Service, which rescues, cares, treats and releases, whenever possible, injured wildlife back into the glorious part of England that I live. The other is Minding Animals International, which I help as its Deputy Director. I work on MAI’s further development and our next international conference in January 2015 which is in partnership with the Wildlife Trust of India.

All in all, 2013 looks to be a very busy year. Which, of course, is as it should be, all the while animals are denied justice.

Please stay in touch with me by:

• Visiting this website for periodic updates and announcements, including speaking engagements
• Following me on Twitter as the Grumpy Vegan
• Liking me on my personal Facebook page and my official Facebook page
• Connecting with me on LinkedIn
• Viewing my photos on Pinterest
• Search my animal rights collection on LibraryThing
• Read my book reviews at GoodReads

Here’s to making a difference for animals in 2013!

Although the impact of ecofeminism on my thinking about animal rights is as present as ever in my life, I had forgotten how important the presence of Feminists for Animal Rights was in the animal rights movement … until yesterday’s conference in celebration of the life and work of Marti Kheel at Wesleyan University in Connecticut.

It is Sunday morning. The day after a very long day yesterday spent in the conference. I am still too close to what happened to be able to say anything about it other than it was incredible.

To meet and hear attendees and speakers, who are old friends and colleagues, some not seen in decades, and authors and intellectuals, who I only know through their writings but have now had an opportunity to hear speak, is something to be celebrated. Such a richness of insight and expertise.

The conference was built around a series of four presentations. Each one consisted of a panel of mostly four speakers in each one. As one of the presenters, we were asked by the organisers, Carol Adams and Lori Gruen, to submit a paper in advance to share with our fellow presenters. At the conference, we were asked to make a 10 minute summary presentation, which was followed by a discussion between panellists and then with everyone present.

This approach meant that in one session the subject ranged widely from a hearty critique of capitalism to the consideration of a hypothetical group of people from another time and place who were occasional cannibals. And much more to recall and detail here.

One of the outcomes from the conference is planned to be the publication of an anthology of articles. So, stay tuned on that one.

More immediate, however, another outcome is the revival of Feminists for Animal Rights. For various reasons, FAR had become dormant as an organisation in the animal rights movement and beyond. Yesterday reminded me of the unique and special role FAR had in not only informing the debate about our relations with animals but also with the development of the animal rights movement. There is a new website, which includes copies of FAR’s newsletter and important articles as well as links to like-minded organisations. Please visit the FAR website to discover or renew yourself with the unique insight of what ecofeminism has to offer.

Here is an extract from my paper from yesterday which recalled the impact FAR made on me as my ideas about animal advocacy developed.

So, beginning in the mid-1970s with the publication of Animal Liberation by Peter Singer, which advanced a utilitarian argument in support of animals, and, then, in the mid-1980s with Tom Regan’s Case for Animal Rights, I saw the emergence of animal ethics as a key discipline. Regan challenged Singer’s utilitarian arguments by making the case that animals were subjects of a life and held intrinsically rights, including the right to respect, which could not be traded away in something like a utilitarian calculation. Thus began the development of animal ethics whereby one theory was challenged by another and my thinking of animal ethics developed accordingly. Then, in the early 1990s when I found myself unknowingly transitioning from animal activism to animal advocacy, I became intrigued with what was I was learning from my discovery of ecofeminism.

Two developments stand out. The first is the publication of Carol Adams’s Sexual Politics of Meat in 1990. The second is watching Marti Kheel and Carol Adams present Feminist for Animal Rights slide show (a copy of which is in my archive). They awakened in me new and intriguing ways to think about animal rights and animal advocacy. These experiences led me to conversations with, among others, Marti, Carol and Batya Bauman, and to other books and anthologies which I also found enlightening. I liked how ecofeminism presented animal exploitation within a progressive context alongside other social justice issues. I found it exciting to see written and visual analysis being made of ideas about masculinity and masculine behaviour. As a gay man who was intuitively uncomfortable with sexism but little understood the theories of feminism, they resonated well and deeply with me.

On Saturday, September 29, I was lucky to be part of a walking group led by historian Hilda Kean which explored ‘Animal Pasts in London’s Landscape Today.’ As Hilda writes on her Web site,

Alongside our human ancestors animals have created the physical and cultural landscape of London as it exists today. In this walk of c. 2 hours we will look at traces left by cattle, horses, dogs and cats – and their human companions. Skirting the city, this walk will  offer a different way of seeing London.

This video shows how we started at Smithfield Market. It began as a place where once live farmed animals were brought, bought, sold and killed to a meat market today. Hilda read out from Charles Dickens’s Oliver Twist,

It was market-morning. The ground was covered, nearly ankle-deep, with filth and mire; a thick steam, perpetually rising from the reeking bodies of the cattle, and mingling with the fog, which seemed to rest upon the chimney-tops, hung heavily yabove. All the pens in the centre of the large area, and as many temporary pens as could be crowded into the vacant space, were filled with sheep; tied up to posts by the gutter side were long lines of beasts and oxen, three or four deep.

Smithfield is on the borders of the City, whixh is a place of many histories. For example, St Bartholomew’s, the oldest hospital in London, was founded here by Rahere in 1123. It was a site of executions and Protestant martyrs were burnt to death, including William Wallace and Wat Tyler. The live trade in cattle from C12 to 1860s led ironically to the first legislation in the world to protect animals in 1822, when it became illegal to ‘wantonly and cruelly beat abuse, or ill treat any horse, mare, gelding, mule, ass, ox, cow , heifer, steer, sheep, or other cattle.’

Samuel Johnson’s cat, Hodge, as represented by sculptor Jon Bickley in 1997.

On our way to Samuel Johnson’s house in Gough Square, Hilda pointed several key landmarks and buildings, which I will tease you with by saying, dear reader, you will need to join Hilda on a future tour to find out! Samuel Johnson, the famous essayist, lived in a house in Gough Square, between 1749 – 59, which was during the period when he published his famous dictionary. Dr Johnson opposed cruelty to animals, including vivisection which he defined as perpetrated ‘by a race of men that have practised tortures without pity.’ He also loved cats. One of them, Hodge, was described by Johnson as a ‘very fine cat, a very fine cat indeed.’ Here is a link to an extract of a videoI shot of Hilda telling us about Hodge.

Sam, who had all the ideas.

Later on the walk, we saw another statue dedicated to a cat. This was Sam. Sam, who was a real cat who lived with Patricia Penn, and is now commemorated in sculpture by John Fuller in Queen Square. Penny, as she was known, was a local campaigner and active in the residents association. Penny and Sam lived nearby. Apparently when Penny wanted to reveal something or spread an idea, she’d say ‘Sam heard … or Sam has had an idea.’ We also visited another statue dedicated to a cat, Humphrey. Click on this linkto watch Hilda explain who Humphrey was.

I took this photo looking up to the door which horses were taken through. I am standing on the corridor leading down to the lower flower looking up at the front door. The cobbled steps, which were installed to help make it easier for the horses to walk, are clearly visible.

The last but one site we visited was what used to be the horse hospital but is now an art gallery on the lower floor and the contemporary wardrobe collection on the upper floor. The horse hospital is located at the rear of Russell Hotel in Herbrand Street and Colonnade. It was built by architect James Burton in 1797, who also built the Veterinary College in St Pancras and then redeveloped after 1860. Now a grade 11 listed arts centre, the interior still contains the moulded ramps and cobbled floor which enabled horses to walk from the bottom to be treated on the first floor. Apologies for this brief account of what was a fascinating two-hour plus walk through central London. Please visit Hilda’s Web site to learn more about her various projects in animal rights and other histories. Her book on the history of animal rights is also highly recommended. It is called ‘Animal Rights’ and is published by Reaktion. Please also check out this link. It is to a video of Hilda making a presentation at a recent conference of the International Society of Anthrozoology called, ‘The Changing Human-Feline Relationship in Britain c.1900-1950.’

Writing this on September 11, I cannot but help think of it as a sad day. Not only for everyone who was affected by the terrorist attacks in the United States in 2001, but also for the people in South America, when a military coup in Chile in 1973, deposed the democratically elected government. As difficult as it can be, life marches on relentlessly. We have to keep up and with its consequences. There is no option available here.

Toro de la Vega, where a bull is killed by a mob with spears

Even today, as I worked from home this morning, I followed the live developments of the Toro de la Vega in Tordesillas, which is in the province of Valladolid in central northern Spain.

The Toro de la Vega consisted of killing Volante, a five-year-old bull weighing 622 kilos, by spearing him to death with lances. The Toro is known in Spanish culture as a ‘tournament.’ But it’s impossible for me to think of it as that. It is violence toward animals.

Terrorism, regardless of the victim’s species, has no place in the world, if we want to think of ourselves as civilised.

Being in the fortunate position of working full-time for animal rights as long as I have, all too often every day is a sad day. Of course, I know I am not alone in feeling this. It’s true for everyone whose hearts and minds are open to animal cruelty and exploitation. Somehow, we cope with all the sadness, which is often softened by the joy we experience sharing our lives and homes with other animals. I like to think of these rescued animals as refugees. Citizens who are lost in a profound way who we must take in. Even if it means frequent cleaning of the litter box and walks when we’d rather have an early night.

Shelly, tucked in and asleep

Speaking of which, Shelly continues to settle in well. Her time spent in my office working with me is increasing. But she gets easily bored there, as my attention is focused on my work. Even though she can sleep for as long as she likes. And there’s always someone around who is happy to make a fuss of her. So, now, I spend some days, like today, working at home on the dining room table.

Now that we’re in September I have begun to focus more on planning my trip to the USA for the month of November. My itinerary includes New York, Washington, DC, and Ann Arbor, MI. I will be working closely with my colleagues, Ken Shapiro and Bee Friedlander, at the Animals and Society Institute. Also, I will be speaking at a conference at Wesleyan University in Middletown, CT celebrating the life and work of ecofeminist philosopher Marti Kheel. In Troy, MI, I will be speaking as part of the ASI/Michigan Humane Society Speaker Series on ‘What Does It Mean to Care Deeply About Animals?’ The next day I’m also speaking at the Michigan Partnership for Animal Welfare on ‘USA/UK: Who is Making Progress and Why.’

Last week, I gave a paper, ‘Animal Rights: Moral Crusade or Social Movement?’, at the Universsity of Manchester which hosts MANCEPT, the annual forum in political theory and philosophy.

I also heard back from the folks at Lantern who read the manuscript of my first book. They made insightful comments and we’re presently working on making further improvements to the text. John Sorenson at Brock University also made positive comments about the chapter I submitted to the anthology he’s editing on critical animal studies.

So, perhaps, I shouldn’t feel so sad after all because, slowly but surely, all of us who working for animal liberation are making progress.

Well, it’s a long, long time

From May to December.

But the days grow short,

When you reach September.

And the autumn weather

Turns the leaves to gray

And I haven’t got time

For the waiting game.

Extract from September Song. Lyrics by Maxwell Anderson. Music by Kurt Weill.

Minding Animals

Nearly one week ago I returned to England from the Netherlands where I attended the second international Minding Animals conference at the University of Utrecht. Although I have been incredibly busy between then and now, the luxury of these few days distance offers me an opportunity to reflect and consider what it all meant to me. I’m grabbing sometime now before it’s too late to commit my thoughts to paper, er, virtual paper. Otherwise it will be too late. The memories and feelings will soon dissipate.

Let me be abundantly clear. As Deputy Chief Executive to Minding Animals International, this post reflects my personal views. Not the opinions of MAI or anyone else associated with the project. Having said that, I’m confident that some of my colleagues will agree with me here (and there). But it’s up to them to share their own thoughts. By the way, MAI Deputy CEO is a voluntary position. (As is CEO, which is held by Rod Bennison.) I paid to attend MAI2 myself. All the costs were met by me, except for conference registration, which was complementary.

I was unable to attend the first Minding Animals conference in Newcastle, Australia three years ago. Various reasons prevented me from going. Everyone I speak to who did describe it as a transformative event. Several reasons are given. The first event of its kind. The smooth organisation. The opportunity to meet at last with people who folks have been only in contact with via email. And so on.

MAI2 had a tough act to follow. During the intervening three years, there had been much progress in the development of Animal Studies and animal advocacy generally. Of course, Animal Studies is not a monolith. Even though it is still a relatively small and emerging academic discipline, I think of Animal Studies as an umbrella name for various strands of academic thinking that fall under it, including Human-Animal Studies, Critical Animal Studies and Animalia Studies. These differences are important but it’s not necessary for my purposes here to explore them.

Suffice it to say, folks representing the various strands of Animal Studies were present at MAI2. It is not surprising, therefore, that this caused some disagreement among the delegates over the program. I am not going to go into here but the organisation behind MAI2 was a complicated affair. The conference convenor, Tatjana Visak, worked incredibly hard to make sure the conference was a success. In my book, Tatjana is a hero whose attitude and professionalism were exemplary.

Nevertheless, as is perhaps to be expected with a new venture with 700 people in attendance, it was a hugely complicated meeting to organise. I know from my own experience of organising lobbies on Parliament, workshops, conferences, demonstrations and much else besides, that sometimes things simply do not go as they planned. But there were also somethings that were planned that I disagreed with. As I say, the organisation behind MAI2 was a complicated affair. In any event, everyone’s feedback was considered, noted and will be used to help improve future MAI events and activities.

So, which thoughts about MAI2 linger with me one week later?

First, the confirmation that Animal Studies is alive and well and growing as an academic enterprise. It is vibrant with a kaleidoscope of perspectives, disciplines, interests and possibilities. Given how our confused and complex our relationship is with other animal, the inter-disciplinary nature of Animal Studies is not only necessary but exciting.

Second, the development of political theory and animal rights. As Ken Shapiro, my colleague at the Animals and Society Institute pointed out, it was necessary for the modern animal rights movement to devote a chapter in its formative stage to animal ethics. This was needed to lay a foundation of moral understanding which, in turn, facilitated a further stage of political theory and animal rights. The plenary session with Robert Garner and Will Kymlicka was fascinating. Together with Siobhan O’Sullivan and others developing political theory and animal rights, I am encouraged that the animal rights movement might yet have a chance of making animal rights a mainstream political issue.

Third, the importance of conferences in of themselves as opportunities to meet and reacquaint ourselves with each other as well as indulge in time and space to think, chat, argue and learn.

Finally, Utrecht is a stunningly impressive city. This was my first visit. It appears to be a very civilised city. But watch out for the bicyclists.

Toward the end of 1975 the BBC began an innovative series of community-based television programs called ‘Open Door.’⁠ They selected a handful of organisations to help them make programs about themselves. Among the first was one by and about The Vegan Society.

I recall watching the program as a vegetarian. My Mum also watched it as she had become a vegetarian too. We agreed that the vegans featured on the program had a point or two. But, we thought, they were all rather, well, odd. Looking back, it was clearly original programming and an ambitious step for the Vegan Society to take. The BBC programme generated some 9,000 enquiries and added about 1,000 new members to its books.⁠

Two of them were Mum and I, as we went vegan on January 1, 1976. I subsequently got to know some of the vegans who appeared. They were not odd at all, but dedicated pioneers. (Perhaps by then I had become odd, too.) For example, I am eternally grateful to Kathleen Jannaway who was the society’s secretary and played a prominent role in the program. She had a profound impact on many people through her indefatigable work for the society for many, many years. She was a quintessentially English vegan who personified stoic determination.

I have not watched the Vegan Open Door since 1975 until today, as it is now available on Youtube. I encourage everyone to watch. It is truly amazing to see how these vegan pioneers presented themselves so well. They are articulate, thoughtful and confident. Nevertheless, they are all a bit odd. And I love them all the more for it. Everyone who is vegan today and hereafter has much to thank them for. They were originals who developed the case for veganism which resembles in many way the one that we make today.

The animal rights movement is a social movement.

Sociologists define social movements as a ‘collective, organized, sustained, and noninstitutional challenge to authorities, powerholders, or cultural beliefs and practices.’⁠ (Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper. 2002. The Social Movement Reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 3.)

From my research I discovered there were many similarities between social movements, including the animal rights movement, but there are two significant differences which makes our movement truly unique.

As political scientist Robert Garner explains

Moreover, for humans to campaign on behalf of them requires an altruism that is much more profound than for other social movements. Not only does it involve action to seek the advancement of the interests of another species, there is also a potential conflict between the interests of animals and those of humans. (Robert Garner. 2005. The Political Theory of Animal Rights. Manchester: Manchester University Press. 164.)

Animals can not organise themselves into their own social movement. Unlike humans, animals cannot be the agency of their own liberation. We have to do it for them on their behalf. This onerous responsibility makes it even more important for us to understand how to achieve animal rights.

Further, we have to tackle the complex issues of the benefits we accrue from our exploitation of animals if we are serious about establishing animal rights.

I tend to think these benefits are over stated by the animal industrial complex, which manipulates public opinion to fear any change in their use of animals. When the public think about their relations with animals they are reluctant generally to give up any pleasure (e.g., eating meat) or benefit (e.g., curing disease) they may feel is their entitlement.

But as anthropologist Barbara Noske asks ‘which human needs are being fulfilled and whose interests are promoted by the existing animal industrial complex?’ (Barbara Noske. 1989. Humans and Other Animals. London: Pluto Press. 23. Emphasis in original.)

Whatever may or may not be at risk, the benefits we do accrue from not relying upon animals to produce food and manage disease are considerable. History shows that social movements are accused routinely of seeking change which will adversely impact society if they achieve their objective. But it rarely, if ever, turns out to be true. Indeed, it is any wonder that we have made the social and economic progress that we have, given these outrageous claims.

Any sense of conflict between human and animal interests is questionable depending upon your point of view. Those who maintain that we must, for example, use animals to produce food and fight disease will say any rights animals may have must be subordinate to dominant human interests. This is to succumb to framing human and animal interests as a competition. A strategic dichotomy all too prevalent in human history: men superior to women; whites to blacks; natives to immigrants; heterosexuals to homosexuals; and so on. In our case, it is humans are superior to animals, which is called speciesism.

As society evolves and we become aware of our superiority prejudices we seek to resolve them as we become more aware of the resulting injustices. We readjust, accommodate and move on, in all likelihood, all the better for it.

The same, I have no doubt, will be true for animal rights; particularly when we understand if we want to feed the world’s population and encourage well-being that animal exploitation in factory farms and research laboratories are not only fundamentally problematic but also significant contributing factors to aiding famine and disease in the first place.

This is why it is vital animal rights is understood as part of a progressive agenda of social justice alongside other liberation movements.

Notwithstanding the need for the animal rights movement to enact Lord Houghton’s advice, animals are already in the political arena. It is the representatives of the animal industrial complex whom we should be concerned about.

Powerful commercial interests that profit from animal exploitation are well established political players. Their involvement in the political process helps to maintain the status quo, adopt regulations and pass laws that help animal users more than the animals. This political bias in favour of animal exploitation is reinforced by our continued institutionalised, commercial use of animals as property and disposable commodities.

There is a lot of money to be made from animal exploitation and many other non-financial gains. It is, therefore, not surprising that most of the regulations and laws relating to animals is more about protecting our interests in what we do to them than in us defending them from our actions.

Animals are represented in public policy by those who benefit from the power and control they exert over them. Animal researchers (not anti-vivisectionists) and factory farmers (not vegans) are more likely to be members of the policy-making networks which determine regulations and laws governing our relations with animals.

Consequently, animal-related public policy is more about how to use animals than protecting them from us.

Who says vegans can't have their cake and eat it?

This Web site celebrates its fifth birthday today!

On February 8, 2010 the first post was made here. This is the 355th post, which makes an average of six posts per month.

Here’s a photo of one my vegan fruit cakes to celebrate.

BIG thank you to everyone who visits!