A Stranger Told Me that I Exploit Animals

Is the vegan ethos true? Do we really exploit animals!

Rosie (our goat) is listening…

“So, you exploit animals?” Was the statement fired back at me from a well-dressed middle-aged woman standing on a busy corner of the popular beachfront thoroughfare?

This was not an encounter I expected on my leisurely morning bicycle ride along one of Queensland’s most popular and picturesque routes, but the colourful signage, group of ardent looking supporters and words “Activism!” grabbed my attention.

Fervent Believers

“What activism?” I enquired, only to be greeted with a quizzical look. After some to and fro, it emerged that the said activism was about animals. “Ah! That’s right up my alley I exclaimed with a degree of excitement, having just published a book on animal intelligence and why we eat them regardless of how smart animals are.

My enthusiasm was short-lived, however, when the conversation began to take a combative turn. “Are you vegan?” she asked, to which I sheepishly replied “no”, feeling like a naughty child who had just been caught wagging school. “So, you exploit animals”, came the retort!

I tried to explain that we have animals, a menagerie of goats, alpacas and chickens and that we don’t eat them. Do you eat eggs? Asked my inquisitor, “Yes”, I replied. “Well, you are exploiting them!” she barked. I attempted to argue that we have an unwritten agreement with our chickens; we shelter and feed them, and in return, we eat their children! My feeble attempt at humour just drew a blank look.

It suddenly dawned on me: that familiar line of argument, the line in the sand that won’t be crossed and the glazed, emotionless expression. This person was a zealot, a champion for a cause which they fervently believed.

The Secret Knowledge

They had access to information that others were not privy to, a secret cache of knowledge tightly held that the world must hear about.

There is no give and take, no rationalisation of the stance on exploitation, and nary a chance in hell that an intelligent conversation will arise. I wished the person a good day and congratulated them on standing up for a cause they believed in, and then cycled off into the distance.

The meeting was largely forgotten until a few days later, when I decided to look up the group’s website. The organisation seemed harmless enough, but the ‘drink the Cool Aid’ enthusiasm of the volunteer raised my suspicions.

Some online research regarding other animal activist organisations revealed multiple hair-raising accounts of people who have escaped the clutches of destructive cults in the guise of animal rights groups.

When Activism Becomes a Cult

Cults employ an array of psychological and social manipulations to control their members. Separation and exceptionalism; we are not like everyone else! Then there’s the secret knowledge they possess, only privy to them at the behest of a knowledgeable and venerated leader.

Then comes the branding, the deindividuation of each person, where they wear the same clothing, badges or logos. Social conformity plays a significant role in promoting group homogeneity, but strikingly, most cults abhor one thing above all else…. being questioned.

Don’t Rock the Boat

If you question the status quo, the rules or the core beliefs of a cult like organisation, then you are out on your backside! I’m not implying the organisation behind this person I met was a cult, I do not have the evidence to support that, it’s simply that any form of rigid fanaticism always raises my suspicions.

One of our ‘exploited’ chooks

The Exploitation Paradox

So, what exactly is exploitation? The Merriam Webster Dictionary describes exploitation as “an act or instance of exploiting”, where to exploit means: “to make productive use of; utilise, OR to make use of meanly or unfairly for one’s own advantage.”

I must assume the activists are referring to the latter; otherwise, they would pack up and head to McDonald’s for a burger! Let’s break that down into its components. “To make use of” is pretty straightforward there; we use lots of things, objects and people without undue harm. “Meanly or unfairly”: two concepts there, meanly implies a behaviour, outwardly cruel or malicious. Fairness is more nuanced, however, crossing over into the territory of morality.

The Moral Conundrum

Professor emeritus of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Marc Bekoff, has written extensively on animal morals, describing how animals display aspects of fairness, empathy, and reciprocity [1]. Fairness and reciprocity are a big deal in animal and human play. Unwritten rules of engagement dictate that stronger animals submit to weaker animals to facilitate play, swapping and occasionally reversing roles.

Reciprocity plays a role in the social structure of many species, scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours! Primate grooming behaviour is a great example; cows lick each other to maintain social bonds and, in return, expect reciprocity. Similarly, pigs in wild social groups perform alloparenting, babysitting each other’s young.

According to behavioural Primatologist Frans De Waal, morality is an evolved social function that primarily promotes harmonious communities and boundaries [2]. He described the building blocks of morality in non-human animals as being empathy, reciprocity, retribution, conflict resolution and fairness.

Created in Adobe Firefly

So, to return full circle, it would seem that ‘exploitation’ has a strong moral component. We like to believe that our morals are concepts gifted to us by some higher power, instilled by a wise clergyman or handed down in archaic texts.

However, the reality is rather more benign; our morals are largely influenced by culture, ethnicity, group conformity and social obligations. DeWaal argues that human morals add another layer of complexity to animal morals and those of the great apes. Judgment, self-reflection, and reasoning, the careful reflection on what one has done versus what one could or should have done, are distinctly human traits.

Back to animal exploitation, it can therefore be assumed that this is the act of utilising an animal, cruelly and egregiously, that crosses a boundary, causing some sort of moral insult.

Symbiosis or Exploitation?

However, all organisms utilise other organisms to varying degrees. Bacteria feed on sugars, protozoa and viruses feed on them, animals eat plants and other animals in turn eat them, and somewhere near the top of the food chain, we eat those animals.

Then there is symbiosis, where organisms show reciprocity. Fungi and trees swap carbon and sugars, ants farm sap sucking insects, protecting and moving them in return for sweet sap.

Then there are the flat-out users! Viruses exploit their hosts, parasites feed on theirs, cuckoos exploit other birds by laying their eggs in another species’ nest, the unsuspecting bird raising an imposter. Humans also use reciprocity to keep the wheels of industry turning and society functioning, often employing aspects that might be considered exploitative; think of clothing sweatshops in Bangladesh.

It can be argued that those people are being employed and feeding their families, but at the same time, we are capable of paying more for clothes but choose not to; the Bangladeshi workers often suffer appalling working conditions.

Back to the Original Question

So why is it that certain groups of people feel we exploit animals? Since the agricultural revolution some 10,000 years ago, we have selectively bred the animals we know today as ‘livestock’. Taking an animal from its natural environment and providing it with food, sometimes shelter, and protection from predators. More like a symbiotic relationship in which they, in turn, supply manure for crops, milk and ultimately meat.

The argument can be made that we have ended that animal’s life prematurely. That is true, for example, cattle are often slaughtered at around 2 years of age, their natural lifespan being 15–20 years.

Bovines (cows) are intelligent and sentient beings; they possess a range of emotions, have good memory capabilities, and form strong social bonds. But does a cow possess the ability to think abstractly, or conceptualise time, or its impending doom, soon to be made into steaks? There is currently no evidence for this, although pigs are well known to show significant stress in slaughterhouses where they see their friends meeting their demise.

But in the absence of malice, is this exploitation? We are certainly making use of the cow, bringing a calf into existence through breeding practices, ensuring its health through vaccinations and parasite drenches and feeding it sufficient nutritious food. Is it treated meanly? Sometimes farming practices are overtly cruel, but more so, farmers have a vested interest in the animal thriving.

Lastly, is that animal treated unfairly? This is the toughest question of all, as it brings concepts of morality into play, which, as mentioned previously, are wholly social and cultural constructs. Yes, it sucks that the animal did not live a full life, but without our notions of time and higher-order thinking, would that animal know any different? “Oh great, I was just planning my middle age and retirement, thinking of a nice cattle cruise, and here I am, at the burger factory!”

Returning to my newfound zealous friend, it was unfortunate that such fanatical views cloud people’s judgment. I would have liked to have had a good chinwag on the psychology of animal behaviour and compared notes and opinions, but this was not to be. It’s great to stand up for something you believe in and be brave enough to share your views.

In 2021, the US Meat and Poultry industry produced 27.95 billion pounds (12.67 billion kilograms) of beef or the equivalent weight of 70,000 Boeing 747 aircraft! (image Mid Journey)

Personally, I think to an extent we do exploit animals (and other humans) for our own gain, and subsequently our health and the environment are suffering for it. Selective trait breeding has created ‘Frankenchickens’ that grow so rapidly, they reach 2.2kg in around 35 days. Great for the corporation that sells chicken meat, terrible for the birds that live appalling lives, often unable to stand as their legs are too weak.

Is Factory Farming Efficiency or Exploitation?

Industrial factory farming has substantially raised the efficiency of animal production, but at what cost? Animal welfare is an important topic, with increasing research revealing the complexities of animal intelligence and the physiological and biological similarities we share. Whilst livestock farming contributes 30% of global dietary protein and 18% of calories, it takes up 75% of agricultural land, emits 14–17% of human-induced GHG emissions, utilises more antibiotics than does human medicine and uses 70% of the world’s fresh water [3, 4].

Sadly, we also crossed a symbolic threshold in 2020 where the weight of human-made materials now exceeds the total biomass of all living things on Earth. To put this into perspective, wild animals now comprise just 4% of Earth’s mammal biomass; humans: 34%; livestock: a massive 62%. Cows alone number around 4.5 billion, and chickens? They outnumber humans three to one. Add to that the mind-boggling figure of 370 million tonnes of meat the world produces annually, and this creates a conundrum, I believe we must have a conversation around.

To answer the question “Do we exploit animals?”, I’m afraid I don’t have a concrete answer for that; you will have to decide. Just don’t go and join a cult in order to do that!

No AI used in this story

If you are interested in these moral dilemmas and animal intelligence, please have a read of my book “*Oh My Goat!” Just how intelligent are the animals we eat?*

[1] Bekoff M, Pierce J. Wild justice: the moral lives of animals. The University of Chicago Press, 2009.

[2] De Waal FBM. Good natured: the origins of right and wrong in humans and other animals: Harvard University Press; 1996.

[3] H. Bartlett, M. Zanella, B. Kaori, L. Sabei, M. S. Araujo, T. M. de Paula, A. J. Zanella, M. A. Holmes, J. L. N. Wood and A. & Balmford, “Trade-offs in the externalities of pig production are not inevitable,” Nature Food, vol. 5(4), p. 312–322, 2024.

[4] P. Scarborough, M. Clark and L. e. a. Cobiac, “Vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters in the UK show discrepant environmental impacts,” Nature Food, vol. 4, p. 565–574, 2023.