May 26th...or...Trying to be Socially Aware is a LOT of Work

Over the past few years, I've been trying to be more aware of where my food comes from, where my clothes come from, and what my support for certain businesses might say about me as a person.  I tell you what, it is a lot of work.  I'm sure if I knew more about everything I use, eat, and wear on a typical day, I'd be shocked.  If I was able to abstain from every product that had an offensive CEO, business model, or manufacturing process, I'd probably find myself starving, naked, and homeless.  I feel like unless a person was somehow able to be fully sustainable, there is no way to avoid organizations who don't have the best interests of the environment or human rights in mind.  It's impossible.  It makes my head spin.

I try to buy American when I can.  But what does "Made in America" really mean?  I drive a Jeep, which is the product of an American company.  But where were the parts made?  What were they made with?  Are the workers making the parts treated fairly and compensated fairly for their work?  Do they work in a safe environment?  Was there anything even remotely American about my Jeep by the time it was manufactured, assembled, and delivered to the dealership I bought it from?  Is it even possible to purchase a vehicle that was made and assembled in America?  I have my doubts.  Still...if I have the option to purchase an item that was made in America versus made somewhere else, I typically try to go with the American product.  Providing that it's actually a decent product.  I don't want to waste my hard-earned money on an inferior product just because it's American.  American companies still need some motivation to make quality products if they're going to edge out the foreign competitors.  

A lot of people I know boycott things that are made in China.  I think China is an easy scapegoat.  I tend to try to stay away from Chinese things as well, but I can't help but wonder about the workers.  Is life better for them now that they are manufacturing things to be sold on American soil?  Even though their wages are minuscule compared to what they would make over here, are they still better off?  The Chinese government apparently doesn't feel the need to provide, acknowledge, or take care of its poorest of citizens, as demonstrated by their construction of walls to shield the poor from view during the Olympics in Beijing.  And it's not just the social aspect of buying products from China that keeps me away, it's the overall poor quality of a lot of Chinese goods.  I don't know if this is the fault of the Chinese workers themselves, or if it's just evidence of the vast corner-cutting that a lot of companies are taking to mass-produce all the crap that they think we Americans need (more like want) in our day-to-day lives.  Every time I wander through a store lately I marvel at the excess.  All the racks of clothes, and their clearance counter-parts from a few months before.  Obviously those things didn't sell, so why are we seeing the same thing in a different color a few months later?  Is that necessary?  Someone higher up obviously thinks so, and they're trying to trick us into thinking we need the newest things all the time too.  These companies are creating a demand where there really isn't one.  Case in point, I have four pairs of running shoes.  Four.  Why do I need four pairs of running shoes?  I don't need four pairs of running shoes.  Technically, I only need one, as I can only wear one pair of running shoes at any given time.  But I have four because there is a certain pair that I like, and it's been rumored that they are going to quit making them, so when I find them for a good price, I buy them.  It's silly.  It's stupid.  I tell myself that, but there's this little voice in the back of my head telling me that if I don't get them now, I might never get them again.  As if there won't ever be anything else that will work.  Even when I'm trying to be aware of all of this, I still get sucked in.           

I try to make good choices with the food I eat as well.  I found it almost comical when I went to a grocery store in Florida and could only find oranges that were imported from Chile.  Or when I lived in California, a mere hour from the town of Gilroy which literally reeks of garlic from all the garlic they grow and process...but in the grocery store the garlic was imported from China.  What the what??  Why are we importing things that we are perfectly capable of growing right here in the US?  However, given that other countries have more strict regulations on GMO's, maybe I'll start seeking out the imported fruits and veggies.  I try to buy organic as much as I can, but it adds up, and organic has become trendy, which means that retailers try to take advantage of that fact by jacking up their prices.  And there's a lot of semantics at work with the food industry.  "Organic" is not the same as "made-with organic."  You put one organic ingredient in a box full of preservatives and crap and suddenly you've got the word "organic" on the box.  In my grocery endeavors, for example, I've noticed that there are several different types of eggs.  You have your regular eggs, your cage-free eggs; your cage-free organic eggs; your cage-free, free-range, organic eggs...amongst others.  Am I being tricked into buying the $4 a dozen eggs by semantics?  What does "free-range" or "cage-free" really mean, and who is regulating it?  Because I think the argument could be made that those giant chicken and turkey barns where the birds are packed in so tightly that they run the risk of dying due to close proximity of the body heat of their chicken/turkey counterparts, spreading all their germs and illnesses to each other, could technically be considered "cage-free."  If you put a chicken outside in a 2 foot by 2 foot pen, then fill the pen full of GMO corn, is it then both free-range and cage-free?  I guess the only way to really know what you're getting is to go to the source, which is difficult given the way big companies have taken over the things we wear, eat, use, and drive.  It's so much easier to wander into a store and buy the carton of eggs that doesn't have a broken one it, than to try to find a local farmer who lets his chickens wander around his property all day.  

I really need to utilize a CSA (community supported agriculture) more.  There is one here in Flagstaff and I just haven't been there yet, but I really need to go.  Simon and I found a butcher here in town who contracts with local farmers for his meats for most of his products.  We've already eaten some of the chicken from his place, and it was fantastic.  So flavorful.  Unlike those pale, over-inflated chicken breasts we see in the grocery store.  I'll never forget the time I bought chicken from Sam's Club.  Seriously, those chicken breasts were the size of turkey breasts...they were huge.  They actually tasted good, but I found out later it was because they had been infused with a chicken broth solution.  So...I came to the conclusion that the chicken itself didn't taste like chicken, so they had to infuse it with chicken flavoring.  Gross.            

Lately I've been a little more focused on human rights.  I'm a supporter of human rights no matter your color, creed, sexual orientation...whatever.  If you're a human, you deserve to be treated equally.  Except for pedophiles.  I think they all ought to be taken out back and shot and have that be the end of it.  It sickens me to know that my tax dollars are feeding, clothing, and providing shelter for those monsters...oh, and that my tax dollars are also providing them the means and access to legal council and multiple appeals, in the hopes that they'll get off on a technicality.  And it's not even about the money...those people have harmed children, the most innocent of human beings, and they don't deserve our compassion, our food, or anything else that we as Americans enjoy.  ANYway...hahaha...I get so off track sometimes.  Gay rights have been in the news a lot lately, and I support them.  I wrote a post recently on my feelings towards gay rights, so I won't get into it again.  But if you'd like to see how I feel about it, feel free to check it out here.  There are several companies who are openly against gay rights, and I no longer give them my business.  One of the bigger ones, and most disappointing for me, was the Salvation Army.  They are very openly anti-gay, and in the past I not only donated a lot of my things to them, but I would randomly shop there as well.  And who hasn't dropped a few coins in those little red buckets at Christmas time?  I'm happy to say that in the last few years my coins have stayed in my pocket, and I've taken my charity elsewhere.  I know Salvation Army does a lot of good for a lot of people, but they're not willing to be charitable to all people, so they've been nixed from my radar.  A list of some of the more anti-gay companies can be found here.  Some of them might surprise you.  In contrast, a list of companies who support the gays, can be found here.  Neither of these lists are all-encompassing, and so my research continues.  I did find that Starbucks is very supportive of homosexual rights, which makes me happy since I go there so often.  I'm sure someone will burst my bubble and inform me of their bad behavior elsewhere though.  *sigh*

Recently I had posted my delight on FaceBook about the impending opening of a Jimmy John's here in Flagstaff.  I've loved Jimmy John's for years, and have even dabbled with the idea of someday having their sandwiches involved in my someday wedding...as the food at the reception...Simon and I will not be exchanging sandwiches as a sign of our everlasting love and fidelity...hahaha!  After my comment was posted, a friend of mine commented back that she doesn't support Jimmy John's because the CEO, Jimmy John Liautaud, is a big-game trophy hunter.  I was disappointed to hear this, as I think all forms of trophy hunting are pretty awful.  There is no good reason to trophy hunt, other than for the purpose of bragging rights...and honestly, I think it's a little bit sociopathic to kill something just because it's there.  Not that I'm against hunting...there are many different reasons that people hunt animals.  Foremost, I think if you're going to go out and kill something with the intention of eating it, go for it.  If you want to keep some sort of memento of the thing that you killed and ate in the form of taxidermy or what-have-you, more power to you.  In my someday house, I want to have a fish on my wall...preferably one that I've caught myself, and if not, then I'll take a picture of one and get a replica made...no harm done.  I understand that there are times when hunting is necessary to decrease populations of certain animals that have become too large, posing a threat to the animals themselves..."thinning the herd," if you will (mostly this happens when the Apex predators have either been eliminated or are too small in number).  I also understand that there are times when an animal must be killed because it was in danger of harming people and attempts at relocation were not successful...a friend of mine had to shoot a black bear in northern Minnesota to keep it from attacking, injuring, or killing his mother.  These things happen.   

I had kind of put the rumored hunting exploits of Jimmy John to the back of my head.  Not because I didn't care, but because I wanted to think about it and I wanted to do some research before I made a decision on whether or not I will continue to fill my belly with his sandwiches.  I thought to myself that if he was hunting responsibly, legally, and sustainably, then maybe I would be all right with it.  And then I took to the internet.  I was sickened and repulsed by the photos of him standing next to an adult African elephant that he had killed...a leopard...a giant grizzly bear.  I question the "legality" of hunting elephants.  I would have to assume that in certain areas in this world, anything is legal if there is enough money on the table.  I don't know that for a fact, but I'm suspicious.  Given the fact that the gestational period of an elephant is about two years, I think that hardly qualifies as a "sustainable" kill for Mr. Jimmy John.  Is is an accomplishment to take down an adult elephant?  Given the fact that it takes an entire pride of lions hours to take down a single elephant, I guess I would say so.  Does that mean people should be going out onto the savanna with their guns to take down elephants with a few bullets?  No.  I don't consider that an accomplishment at all.  I consider it cowardly, wasteful, and incredibly disrespectful to the animal itself.  The fact that a leopard is considered an Apex predator, meaning that it is at the top of the food chain, also calls into question the sustainability of the kill.  The grizzly bear was also upsetting, but not so much as the elephant and the leopard.  I know that in the U.S. there are seasons for bear hunting just as there are for deer, turkeys, elk, etc.  These seasons are short, and the number of animals killed are regulated by the DNR.  However...I highly doubt he ate that bear.  But maybe he did.  I don't know where he killed that bear or what he did with it afterwards.  Perhaps it was a nuisance bear that had been relocated several times.  I guess I tend to think that the DNR would take care of animals like that themselves and wouldn't take over-stuffed CEO's out to get their jollies along with them for those types of hunts.  But...I have to assume that a man who would kill an elephant and a leopard for sport wouldn't be killing a bear solely because it was a nuisance or because it posed a threat to human beings.  

I'm so repulsed by him and those like him.  When I heard he was a big-game hunter, I was hoping that maybe it was water buffalo or something along those lines...pack animals that have gigantic herds and who might not miss a member.  I can't get the image of that dead elephant out of my head.  And it makes me feel awful knowing that the only reason he was able to hunt elephants in the first place was because he made so much money selling sandwiches.  If you care to see Jimmy John's hunting exploits, head on over to this website.  It's not pretty.  I also found the website of the safari company he used, Johan Calitz Safaris.  Apparently they have leases on certain parcels of land, and there are quotas that they have to stay within in regards to the number of animals that they are allowed to kill.  As far as who sets these quotas, I'm unsure.  Here is their most recent newsletter, informing clients of their updated quotas and restrictions.  I like how they list elephants as "dangerous game."  Dangerous to whom?  People with rifles traveling out into areas where they have no other earthly business other than to kill animals in their natural habitat?  And maybe elephants can become nuisance animals just like bears or any other wild animal can.  I'm definitely not disputing that elephants are dangerous...I certainly don't ever want to come into contact with one, especially not in the wild.  However, no information is given on the website or in the newsletter in regards to how the animals are dangerous, what they have done, or where they may have wandered to categorize them as dangerous.  From what I've read about elephants, they are extremely intelligent animals with very acute senses and complex social structures...not exactly the type of animal that's going to make a habit out of seeking out humans.  What could an elephant possibly want with a human being anyway?  It seems that most of the documented negative human/elephant interactions happen when a human wanders into elephant territory.  Check out this list of the most dangerous animals in Africa...notice how the human being is #3, ranked above the elephant, at #4 (personally, I think it's a toss-up between the human and the mosquito as to who is responsible for more deaths).  I also find it interesting that, according Johan Calitz, the elephants are categorized by the weight of their ivory, not by how dangerous or destructive they are.  So...the dangerous animal just happens to have something very valuable attached to it...but maybe that's just coincidence?  And what do they do with the rest of the elephant once the ivory is taken?  Just leave it out there to rot?  I'm guessing the type of person who travels all the way to Africa and pays to hunt elephants really doesn't care about their destruction, their danger, or what happens to them or their herds after they are killed.  I just question the integrity of a person who goes out in an air-conditioned, guided safari with the intention of shooting an otherwise unobtainable, defenseless animal.  Little to no effort is required on the part of the hunter, making the term "hunter," in this instance, an inappropriate moniker.

Oy...the burden of being socially aware.  It's so much easier and less work to be unaware.  This week it's African safaris that have me all worked up.  What will it be next week?  And it's incredibly hard to pick which things I care about without talking out of both sides of my mouth.  For instance, I'm upset about Jimmy John trophy hunting, yet I have a pair of leather boots that I adore sitting in my closet.  I know the leather industry is horrible.  I've been avoiding looking into it too much because I know I'll be horribly disturbed by it.  I like to think that leather comes from the cows that are already being killed for meat anyway, but I know that's naive.  As a product, I really like leather. It's durable, it's long-lasting, it's comfortable, and if you take good care of it, it'll last longer than you will.  And the smell, how I guiltily love that leather smell.  People have using animals for leather for about as long as they've been using them for food.  Which is worse?  The leather industry or African Safari hunts?  I guess that varies from person to person.  I have to pick and choose which things are important to me and my personal philosophy and be okay with knowing that I'm not always going to be making the right decisions.  And what's right for me isn't the same as what's right for someone else.  And it's not possible to be anti-everything...unless I want to homeless, naked, and starving...which I don't...that sounds horribly unpleasant.  The best I can do is try to be as aware as possible, and if something goes against my personal philosophy, I have to decide what I'm going to do about it, if anything.  And being aware doesn't necessarily change anything.  Chik-fil-A isn't hurting because I don't eat there, and neither will Jimmy John's.  The Salvation Army will continue to spread its message of homophobia disguised as goodwill.  Bad things will still happen to good people.  But...I can feel better about some of the choices that I personally make, and know that I'm trying my best not to support exploitation, or hate, or senseless killing.