Cutting Meat from our Diet as Climate Action

1

We are what we eat! Changing our diet can help improve our health as well as the health of the planet. Global warming and climate change are the twenty-first century’s existential crises. The effects of climate change cause death, destruction and devastation of budgets and economies through intensified and frequent natural disasters. The solution is decarbonisation of the economy. How can our diet help reduce our carbon footprint? Isn’t it just fossil fuel use, heating and industrialization that causes environmental devastation, you think? But agriculture is actually the third largest emitter of greenhouse gases (GHGs), mainly carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, the main cause of global warming. Livestock and the industrialization of the various steps of agriculture lead to the emissions. Cutting and controlling meat and dairy in our diet, hence can have a significant effect in lowering GHG emissions.

Agriculture is what feeds us, but it is also the leading cause of deforestation and mass extinction of species. Most of the crop grown nowadays is food for livestock. As per current consumptions, according to ProVeg International, 70 billion animals are killed annually to feed the world population – that’s 10 livestock animals killed for per person. The environmental impact adds up in water consumption, carbon footprint as well as the multiple contributions to GHG emissions. Reducing our dependence on meat and dairy – a vegetarian and a vegan diet – can dramatically reduce GHG emissions, check deforestation and halt the loss of biodiversity.

According to the World Health Organization’s advisory on the link between cancer and other lifestyle disorders such as obesity and diabetes, “over-consumption of processed meat and red meat  is worrying and a major public health risk” like the one posed by tobacco. While the per capita annual meat and dairy consumption in South and Southeast Asian nations are still quite low, the huge populations of these regions adds up. Also, meat and dairy in the diet is aspirational – as people earn enough to live above the poverty line they aspire to eat more meat and dairy products like “rich people.” Thus in addition to elevating people from poverty, preventive and pre-emptive measures should be taken to avoid lifestyle disorders and excessive consumerism. Lifestyle disorders that kill millions and cost billions are linked to excessive processed foods and meat consumption. It would be a positive, pre-emptive move to put in place policy in developing countries, as populations progress to a better quality of life, to show that vegetarianism and veganism are the better and healthier options. This could bring in more income to smallholding farmers and reduce the cost of agriculture as it costs less to grow crops and plants rather than raise livestock exclusively. This could also help avoid public health crises such as China is facing with the generational upliftment of large sections of the society to “middle-class” “first world” lifestyles which led to an explosion in lifestyle disorders in proportion to the exponential increase in meat and dairy consumption. It is only now China has put in place dietary guidelines and policies to promote the reduction in meat and processed foods consumption.

In the quest to feed the billions, we are losing vital biodiversity. A recent report mentions that of all mammals on the planet, humans and livestock make up 96 percent! Slash and burn agricultural practices and deforestation to make way for farms in ancient and equatorial forests lead to devastating loss of plant and animal biodiversity. Introduction of livestock near ecologically sensitive zones and biodiversity hotspots also causes desertification, loss of grasslands and deforestation.

“Changing lifestyles” is mentioned rather than concrete policy recommendation to promote vegetarian and vegan diets in the drafts of the latest IPCC report despite the impact on biodiversity, climate change, healthcare costs and good health.  In India and developing countries of Asia, it’s still cheaper to opt for the healthier fast-food-free option, but in developing countries processed foods and fast food chains are cheaper than meat-free fresh foods. Thus when you are on a budget in the developed world, the unhealthy and environmentally devastating options are the only ones available. Agricultural and food processing companies are making huge profits off of these conditions. In addition, these companies’ GHG emissions and carbon footprints are massive. According to Daniel Brown, Head, Research & Science at ProVeg International, just the top five agricultural companies of the world emit more GHGs than a developed country like Germany.

While there is no dearth of pure vegetarian food and varieties across India, the vegan–dairy free option is still elusive. But promoting lower consumption of meat and dairy products is good for health, good for the pockets and good for the planet and as Ruchir Sharma, Head of Communications and Campaigns at ProVeg International puts it, it’s the “low-hanging fruit” in the quest to curb global carbon emissions. More campaigns in the developed world to have “No-Meat Mondays,” “Vegan Wednesdays” and promotions like the Vegan Afternoon Tea London Bus Tours, slowly but surely help cut the high per capita consumption of meat, processed meat and dairy products in urban areas.

In India and most developing countries of Asia, religion can help promote the shift to a meat-free lifestyle, as has been my personal experience. My parents and most of the older generation in my family have given up consuming meat for decades now. Religious sentiment as well as medical dietary guidelines have helped many of the Generation X shift towards a healthier, planet-friendly, plant-based diet as they got older. In my household, we don’t cook meat at home, and I am the only one who occasionally eats meat and that too only when I am eating out. Familial moves and peer pressure to get healthy can help drastically reduce per capita meat consumption.

Any vegetarian from India who travels abroad will tell you how difficult it is to find a vegetarian option. Just offering a vegan and vegetarian option, that too tasty and affordable ones, inspire people to opt for the cruelty-free, pocket-friendly, climate-friendly option. This observation has been supported by experiences in Portugal where it became policy to offer such options to promote a meat and dairy free diet. The experiences of the Fruitarian couple living in Bali demonstrate how more fruit and varieties of local fruits in the diet could be the answer to the obesity, diabetes and cancer epidemics. And the experiences of extreme athletes like Calle Alexander and Tim Sheriff on American Ninja Warrior and UK Ninja Warrior bust the myth that a vegan and vegetarian diet aren’t compatible with body building and strength training requirements.

Phillip Wollen in a viral clip of a debate in Australia vehemently puts forth multiple examples on the links between lifestyle disorders and the conditions of livestock farmed cruelly on an industrial scale. An increase in the number of vegans and vegetarians will ensure that even with organic farming and smallholders our current lands under cultivation can feed our going population. Just by reducing having to grow grains and feed for industrially farmed livestock can make more nutritious and cheaper vegetarian options accessible to all thus tackling the hunger epidemic as well. Bio-concentration of plastics, antibiotics, pesticides, insecticides and toxins is a concern in meat and dairy products as well and is symptomatic of the effects of the fast-paced anthropocene plastic age. A simple and progressive move towards a meat and dairy-free diet could therefore benefit the economy, people and the planet.

Raakhee Suryaprakash is a Chennai-based analyst with a Master’s degree in International Studies and a Bachelor’s degree in Chemistry. She is the founder of Sunshine Millennium and is associated with civil society organizations such as the Red Elephant Foundation (REF), Chennai Centre for China Studies (C3S) and Climate Tracker.

Featured image: BBC

Mapping and negotiating power

Uncuff India Episode 10: Dimensions of conflict and peace: visioning a utopian world

Uncuff India Episode 9: Civic space and dissent: A pathway to social justice

Khatna and the Boundaries of the Female Body

1

India is divisively governed by its personal law. There are indeed very few boundaries the gospel truth of religious customs will not broach. And for as many ardent followers it fosters, it makes a proportionate number of sharp tongued critics. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India is currently hearing the petition filed by Advocate Sunita Tiwari, praying for a blanket ban on the practice of female circumcision or khatna and further rendering it a non-compoundable, cognizable, non-bailable offence with a stricter punishment under the law. The litigation has incited significant ire between different sections of the society; primarily, the litigation implicates the Dawoodi Bohra community under Islam which routinely has their girls circumcised at a very young age.

What is Female Genital Mutilation?

Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) comprises all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. The WHO recognizes all forms of FGM as a violation of women’s rights stemming from an intrinsic inequality between men and women.

The WHO outlined four types of FGM, of which the Dawoodi Bohra community in India practice Type 1. Type 1 FGM, or clitoridectomy, is the partial or total removal of the clitoris. Further there in consensus that these practices (unlike male circumcision) have no health benefits for women and in fact are actively harmful. They create vaginal and urinary complications, lead to infertility and haemorrhaging and are particularly susceptible to cysts, infections, and swelling.

By Who and Against Whom?

Advocate Sunita Tiwari is New Delhi based women’s rights activist and lawyer who has filed a public interest litigation under Article 32 of the Constitution of India against the Union of India, which seeks to render the practice of female circumcision illegal throughout India. The petition names the Ministries of Health & Family Welfare, Social Justice & Empowerment, and Woman & Child Development as well as the States of Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan and Delhi as the concerned Respondents.

What does the petition say?

The petition has been filed in light of the growing instances of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) being reported throughout the country. The petition highlights the following points of note in calling for a blanket ban on FGM:

1. The petition finds that the practice of FGM is contrary to the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Convention on Rights of the Child, both of which India is a signatory to. The practice further violates the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the right to equality under Article 14, and is discriminatory towards women against Article 15 of the Constitution. Further the practice has been characterised as violence towards women.

2. The petition notes that although FGM is recognized as an offence under eight different section of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the enforcement machinery in the country has been lax in taking action against those propagating the practice. Thus, there is a distinct emphasis on the necessity of a special law banning the practice entirely.

3. The petition notes that the Dawoodi Bohra community is the only Muslim community to mandate the practice of Type 1 FGMs in India. Their faith in the practice comes from centuries of custom based on the archaic notion that the khatna will kill the sexual urge for anyone but the woman’s husband.

4. The petition also traces the chronological order in which the practice of FGM has progressed as a women’s rights and health concern issue. The petition follows online petitions launched by activists in support of a khatna ban and records the growing pace of media attention devoted to the issue.

5. The petition also addresses the sanction of the religious leader of the Dawoodi Bohras, Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin in supporting the practice of FGM. Holding circumcision as a religious obligation for male and female Bohras, the Syedna went on to assert that the practice must be followed in countries which did not have strict anti-FGM laws in place. In this regard, the petition calls for a complete ban on the practice.

What are the observations of the Court until now?

In the course of the proceedings the three-judge Supreme Court bench hearing the matter has noted that women are not chattel and their marital responsibilities must pass the test of constitutional morality and privacy. The Court observed that individuals had complete autonomy over their bodies in this regard and that the bodily integrity of women could not be harmed. The matter has now been referred to a five judge bench of the Supreme Court.

Priyanshi Vakharia is a Research Associate (Legal Reform) at One Future Collective.

Featured image: Charles Deluvio

Mapping and negotiating power

Uncuff India Episode 10: Dimensions of conflict and peace: visioning a utopian world

Uncuff India Episode 9: Civic space and dissent: A pathway to social justice

The Legality of Sex Work in India

1

Scintillating glass bangles and curvy traces, red pouts and hair adorned with jasmine; lascivious manoeuvres of hemlines too short: illegal by night, ostracised by day. This is a plausible melange of the imagery that term sex worker arouses. Gratifying the hushed desire of millions, a ‘vice’ that is most pronounced in the night and silenced out of existence in the day. An outcast community, with needs and desires as mainstream as us, these sex workers, live outside of  the law.

Sex work in India is governed by the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. Although sex work is not illegal according to the Act, supporting activities such as maintenance of brothels or soliciting customers are punishable offences.


Brothels are defined by the Act to include “any house, room, conveyance or place, or any portion of any house, room, conveyance or place which is used for the purposes of sexual exploitation or abuse for the gain of another person or for the mutual gain for two or more prostitutes.” The Act criminalises any sex work within a 200m radius of any public place, including hotels. Moreover, the Act also penalises any entity who owns or knowingly supports prostitution in his/her premises and also prosecutes any adult over eighteen years of age, who lives on the earnings of a prostitute.

Before we delve into critiquing the vices and virtues of this Act, it is important to understand the nature of the controversial sex industry, trace its roots and illuminate the reasons why people choose to be or end-up being sex workers.

Surprisingly, prostitution is often deemed to be the oldest profession and can be traced back to the ancient Babylons. Ancient Indian literature is also replete with references to prostitution, a prominent example of which is Chanakya’s ‘Arthashastra’ where he clearly and meticulously writes about prostitution and its code of practice. This clearly suggests that prostitution has its roots in ancient India and is not a manifestation of decadence, as is sometimes claimed. Further, it is important to emphasise that the fact that this practice found a place in sacrosanct literature, including the Vedas and the Arthashastra, implies that prostitution was not an underground practice. Rather, it was a well-acknowledged, mainstream activity. This should raise some eyebrows the next time ‘culture’ is put forth as a reason to look down upon sex workers.

Although current estimates about the number of prostitutes is not available, a 2007 report submitted to the Ministry of Women and Child Development, reported that there are 3 million sex workers in India with 35.4% of them being less than 18 years old. Often, millions of sex workers are coerced into prostitution and continue to be victims of human trafficking and forced sex. However, there are millions of other women who turn to sex work to escape abject poverty. The law thus has to be designed to protect both the victims of sex slavery as well as people who voluntarily choose to take up prostitution as their profession.

Before we begin to develop opinions about people who willingly work as prostitutes, it is important to remember Atticus Finch’s advice: “You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view until you climb into his skin and walk around”.

The ability to discern and choose between morality and immorality is a prerogative of privilege. How would you respond to this question raised by a sex worker, “So what if I have to sell my body to make money? I want my daughter to have a better life. Is that too much to ask for?”

The fact that we, the constituents of the mainstream society, had an opportunity to attend school, to pursue our interests and take up professions we were passionate about, is a privilege that not everybody has access to. The fact that our families had enough financial resources to protect and promote our physical and intellectual well-being is a privilege that not everybody has access to. Given a choice between being destitute on the streets and lulling hungry children to sleep every night or working as a sex worker and expanding the opportunities for their children, these women choose the latter. Would you still look down upon them as immoral? Put in the situation that they are in, would you be able to care about philosophical concepts of morality?

Punit Paranjpe/Reuters

On the other end of the spectrum, there are women and girls who were duped into sex work — victims of sex trafficking who continue to face sexual exploitation every day. According to statistics published by the Government of India, almost 20,000 women and children were victims of sex trafficking in India in 2016. However, as a Delhi police official pointed out, the actual figure could be much higher as many victims were still not registering cases with the police, largely because they did not know the law or feared traffickers. Sex trafficking is partly a manifestation of misogyny and partly a manifestation of socio-economic vulnerabilities of the disadvantaged sections of the Indian society, who are tricked into prostitution under the masquerade of promises of a good job or better life.

10-year-old Gita was sold into prostitution by her aunt. Now, 22-year-old Gita recalls how she was pinned to the ground by other sex workers, her mouth stuffed with a cloth so that no one could hear screams as the customer raped her. She contracted HIV.

In this light, we can now understand why the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act is not comprehensive enough to regulate the Indian sex industry, prevent trafficking and supporting sex workers and victims.

The fact that the Act criminalises brothels, which includes two or more women working together as prostitutes, implies that if women want to work as sex workers legally, they should do so alone. Further, the compulsion that sex work shouldn’t be within a 200m radius of any public place again implies that to engage in prostitution legally, an isolated location should be chosen. These aspects of the Act make sex workers more vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. Moreover, sex workers who are often exploited by pimps or brothel owners can’t take the resort of the legal system because, under the law, they will be prosecuted for working in a brothel and hence, they silently continue to suffer at the hands of brothel owners. Section 8 of the Act notably criminalises the act of seduing or soliciting customers. Though the Act may not prohibit prostitution, it certainly makes it very difficult for sex workers to legitimately exercise their right to work.

Criminalising brothels, soliciting and the practice of prostitution in proximity to public places in an attempt to curtail prostitution has clearly failed, which is patently evident from the fact that metropolitan cities like Mumbai and Kolkata boast red light areas of  Kamathipura and Sonagachi respectively, which rank as some of the largest red light areas in Asia. The Act has  made sex workers more vulnerable by forcing them to work in the darker, more invisible corners of the cities, silently suffering exploitation. This seclusion of sex workers also implies that they are left in oblivion about access to information about and treatments for sexually transmitted diseases, which they are most at risk of contracting. Further, it also means that they can’t access public facilities like public hospitals, colleges and schools, the access to which are quintessential for them to expand their opportunities and improve the quality of their lives.

Mainstreaming sex work, easing access to birth control methods and medical aid together with educational opportunities will not only enable sex workers to live a more normal life but will also work to a great extent to prevent their exploitation because they will no longer be vulnerable to their perpetrators.

The Act does not do a great job with prevention of sex trafficking, either. The Act mandates that victims rescued from the sex trade remain within a ‘protective home’ until the court orders their release. These protective homes are more like a prison, with the one in Mumbai having three barred gates before the women’s living quarters. ‘The women usually stand behind these doors, asking staff or visitors like myself, police personnel or NGO representatives when they would be released,” writes Ms Vibhuti Ramachandran, whose research is focused at the intersection of law and sex trade in India, in her article: Rescued But Not Released. These women are held in protective homes until the magistrate decides the suitability of their guardians. Often, the legal formalities mean that these women end up being forced to remain in protective homes beyond the 3 week period allocated for court procedures. This is applicable for women who are older than 18 years and their consent or opinion doesn’t find a formal place in the entire process. After a harrowing experience, a broken mind and body, victims of sex trafficking need emotional, mental and physical care to allow them to heal and grow. Although intended to ensure the safety of these women, this aspect of the Act almost makes them crave for relief and rescue all over again — initially from the clutches of their exploiters and now from ‘protective homes’. The entire process of rescuing victims of sex trafficking and transitioning them into the mainstream society requires a more empathetic perspective for women, with due respect to free consent and the choice of these human beings.

Thus, if the intention of the legislation is to protect sex workers and victims of sex trafficking and provide them with opportunities for growth, it is indispensable to understand their problem from their perspective and make them a part of the decision-making process instead of ignoring their voice and consent. It is important to understand the nuanced differences between the motivations of why some people voluntarily choose to do sex work and address their interests and at the same time is important to punish sex traffickers and rehabilitate women who were forced into sex work. A more inclusive legislation — legislation for sex workers and trafficked women and not for the upholding ideals of socially construed morality is the need of the hour and this is only possible, when we lend an ear to their voices.

Miranda Kane, a former sex-worker says: “I would like to gently suggest to you, when a sex worker talks, you listen. If you want to make laws that affect us, consult us. There should be nothing about us, without us.”

Sara Sethia is a Research Associate (Gender Justice) at One Future Collective.

Featured image: gaylaxymag.com

Mapping and negotiating power

Uncuff India Episode 10: Dimensions of conflict and peace: visioning a utopian world

Uncuff India Episode 9: Civic space and dissent: A pathway to social justice