Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Porn, pork and produce
I am writing this post as a simple comment and manifesto, partly prompted by Paul and Lauri and partly by the state of affairs in the world today. Let's start with a show of hands: who believes in fair play? Good. And how many of you would like to play fair in your own lives, not only believe in it? Very well. All that remains is defining fair play. Usually it goes like this: all players agree on a set of rules before the game starts, all players are equals, and all volunteer to play. Rules are followed and if breaches occur, they are dealt with so that most players believe justice has been done. Unnecessary harm to other players, the field, or to spectators is to be avoided and, if necessary, punished.
Now the specific rules and regulations obviously are different in chess and, say, ice-hockey; but basic rules of fairness exist in any case. So how does this relate to our title of the day? Let's tackle the human issue first: porn here stands for sex industry, prostitution, films, pictures, anything that is there to satisfy sexual needs in exchange for money. Female, male, young, old, whatever your fancy. It is quite easy to apply rules of fair play here to define what is acceptable and what is not - for example, an underaged and inexperienced person is not an equal with a grown-up, therefore it wouldn't be fair play. Same applies for a person from distressed economic background - again, players are not equal. An example: a 25-year old Norwegian sex worker in California is more likely to be a player in a fair game than a 25-year old sex worker from Ghana in Italy. Especially if he/she is in the country illegally.
In fair play, everybody gets the same resources in the beginning, and it's up to the player what to do with them. Unfortunately, this is not the case in real world. I believe this is what makes people uncomfortable about phenomena such as sex-tourism in Thailand or busing women from Eastern Europe to work in the sex industry of the west - the game is not fair when someone with all the resources is playing with someone who had little or none in the beginning, even if all parties are consensual adults.
Then on to pork and produce (produce, as defined by Webster's Dictionary: agricultural products collectively, esp. vegetables and fruits). Obviously, pigs and plants are not volunteers in the game of food production. However, people do need to eat. So how can one eat and be fair? For argument's sake, we will assume here that neither pigs nor plants have a consciousness that would provide them with the ability to choose whether to play or not. Therefore, it falls on us to follow the remaining rules of fair game: not causing unnecessary harm, to each other or the spectators, and not destroying the playing field (or the chess board). Also, since this is about food production, the human producers of the food can be taken into account - are they fairly treated and equal with us in this game?
Not causing unnecessary harm would include treating the beasts that are to become meals with dignity - not marching up to the slaughterhouse on red carpet, mind you, but keeping in mind that these are sentient beings. Pain, stress and discomfort ought to be avoided, just like one would avoid them oneself - it's only fair, right? The other issue here is taking care of the playing field, the game environment. Super-size farms with only one product, be it pork, cotton or corn, generally deplete the environment and require more measures (pesticides, poisons and medication) to be kept viable. They also require more space and are at a longer distance from the consumer, requiring longer transportation times. The longer the transportation, the more energy is wasted and pollution created, and harm caused to the playing field.
If you didn't raise your hand in the beginning when I asked who believes in fair play, fine. You don't have to. For the rest of you, give it some thought. With your next purchase - be it porn, pork or produce - you can make a choice. I promise you will feel better for the afternoon, although after a while you'll probably just feel dum for putting that extra three dollars in the locally produced, non-pesticide lettuce. You may feel free to blame me for your momentary lapse of reason.
Now the specific rules and regulations obviously are different in chess and, say, ice-hockey; but basic rules of fairness exist in any case. So how does this relate to our title of the day? Let's tackle the human issue first: porn here stands for sex industry, prostitution, films, pictures, anything that is there to satisfy sexual needs in exchange for money. Female, male, young, old, whatever your fancy. It is quite easy to apply rules of fair play here to define what is acceptable and what is not - for example, an underaged and inexperienced person is not an equal with a grown-up, therefore it wouldn't be fair play. Same applies for a person from distressed economic background - again, players are not equal. An example: a 25-year old Norwegian sex worker in California is more likely to be a player in a fair game than a 25-year old sex worker from Ghana in Italy. Especially if he/she is in the country illegally.
In fair play, everybody gets the same resources in the beginning, and it's up to the player what to do with them. Unfortunately, this is not the case in real world. I believe this is what makes people uncomfortable about phenomena such as sex-tourism in Thailand or busing women from Eastern Europe to work in the sex industry of the west - the game is not fair when someone with all the resources is playing with someone who had little or none in the beginning, even if all parties are consensual adults.
Then on to pork and produce (produce, as defined by Webster's Dictionary: agricultural products collectively, esp. vegetables and fruits). Obviously, pigs and plants are not volunteers in the game of food production. However, people do need to eat. So how can one eat and be fair? For argument's sake, we will assume here that neither pigs nor plants have a consciousness that would provide them with the ability to choose whether to play or not. Therefore, it falls on us to follow the remaining rules of fair game: not causing unnecessary harm, to each other or the spectators, and not destroying the playing field (or the chess board). Also, since this is about food production, the human producers of the food can be taken into account - are they fairly treated and equal with us in this game?
Not causing unnecessary harm would include treating the beasts that are to become meals with dignity - not marching up to the slaughterhouse on red carpet, mind you, but keeping in mind that these are sentient beings. Pain, stress and discomfort ought to be avoided, just like one would avoid them oneself - it's only fair, right? The other issue here is taking care of the playing field, the game environment. Super-size farms with only one product, be it pork, cotton or corn, generally deplete the environment and require more measures (pesticides, poisons and medication) to be kept viable. They also require more space and are at a longer distance from the consumer, requiring longer transportation times. The longer the transportation, the more energy is wasted and pollution created, and harm caused to the playing field.
If you didn't raise your hand in the beginning when I asked who believes in fair play, fine. You don't have to. For the rest of you, give it some thought. With your next purchase - be it porn, pork or produce - you can make a choice. I promise you will feel better for the afternoon, although after a while you'll probably just feel dum for putting that extra three dollars in the locally produced, non-pesticide lettuce. You may feel free to blame me for your momentary lapse of reason.
# posted by Aino @ 3:46 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
I'm not quite sure what you mean when you ask whether I (or someone else) believe in fair play. When it comes to fair play the way you seem to defining it, I can only say the same that Dr. Albert Schweitzer once said when he was asked about the civilization in Europe: "It might be a good idea". Fairness would be nice, but unfortunately almost impossible to reach. Still I agree with your thesis that even striving for it can make a difference. At least that's how I understood it.
Nevertheless, I disagree with this at least in some extent: "Super-size farms with only one product, be it pork, cotton or corn, generally deplete the environment and require more measures (pesticides, poisons and medication) to be kept viable."
Specialization usually means that the producer can reach the same result with less investment than if (s)he would produce different goods. That's why people do it.
Nevertheless, I disagree with this at least in some extent: "Super-size farms with only one product, be it pork, cotton or corn, generally deplete the environment and require more measures (pesticides, poisons and medication) to be kept viable."
Specialization usually means that the producer can reach the same result with less investment than if (s)he would produce different goods. That's why people do it.
Well, I have to admit I am no expert in farming (nor porn industry, or mostly anything for that matter). It probably is true specialization takes less investment, but how about impact - on nature, environment, and human health? I may have been brainwashed into believing that rotating crops and keeping diversity in farming are one way to reduce need for pesticides and such. Of course, the end product might also be more expensive, and therefore less profitable - but perhaps more fair?
Post a Comment
<< Home
