The Homeless Wolves

By Tillie (Age 8, 9and 10)

Once upon a time there lived a stray dog called Elle and her sister Tillie. Elle said to Tillie lets go and play! But Tillie was tired so she got up reluctantly and when she got outside she said because it was windy she would go and get the kite. when Tillie got the kite she was not strong enough to hold it so Elle helped but the wind was so strong it took them up up and away! flying through the air Tillie and Elle held on the string for dear life! When they landed they must of been miles and miles from home so Elle got some stick’s for the fire and Tillie set up a little den. When dark fall came they went to bed on two big leaves. In the morning Tillie was up before Elle to get food and water for the long journey ahead of them, when Elle got up there was a ditch with a hair in it.

“What are the rabbit’s for”? said Elle. “they’re for food” answered Tillie. After Tillie explained what the rabbits were for the 10th time, they set of on their adventure. They traveled far and wide in all types of weather until they stumbled upon a little cottage it was old and broken down by the looks of it so Elle knocked on the door there was no answer so they went in. The outside of the house may have looked bad but the inside was amazing it had a fun fair and a hotel it even had an arcade! Tillie and Elle were so distracted they forgot what they were meant to be doing! after a long time of looking around they remembered what they were doing and went to the door but it was locked they tried and tried but could not open it! then suddenly a ghost appeared Elle and Tillie were scared but the ghost looked much more frightened. Tillie plucked up the courage to say h-h-hello.

The ghost said hello back and then it came closer Tillie and Elle went one step back

The ghost said “what are you doing here?”” in a whisper. Elle said we are lost” The ghost took them into its house and said this was the dream realm but now that they found here she was sleeping right next to them in their camp! So they tried everything to try and wake up but nothing had worked. The ghost said that the only way to free them was to get her body back so Tillie and Elle said where is your body then? the ghost said it is in the golden volt the golden volt is in the maze of puzzles. So off they went to the golden volt. When they got there Elle said “we never got your name is your name just the ghost”? “so sorry I still haven’t introduced my self I am Rosa” replied Rosa. When they got in the maze there was an empty room with a door and then a voice said this is your first task of the maze of puzzles. You will have to fill this bucket with water. They suddenly spotted a river and a bucket. Elle said this will be easy so they tried to fill the bucket but the water just fell out and then Tillie turned the bucket upside down and said it had a hole in it! everyone thought for a long time and then Tillie finally had it then she got the bucket and dropped it in. Elle said what did you do that for? Tillie said the bucket is full and then they looked closer and she was right! the bucket was full so the voice said you have passed the first puzzle. Tillie, Elle and Rosa walked through the door to the next puzzle. this is the second puzzle. you have to catch the mighty beast Cerberus with a lead.

Everyone gasped at the site of Cerberus with a lead of steel next to him. Elle got the lead and jumped from wall to wall and at last she landed on Cerberus’s head and put the lead on. Well done said the voice. you have passed and now you have to fight ME!! Rosa had a plan so she asked the voice that was also a ghost if they could have a few mins to talk, and the ghost said ‘Fine’. Rosa said I will float through the ghost and get my body back and then I’ll handle the ghost. Rosa floated through the ghost and then she picked the lock in the chest that had her body in side and she was wolf again!

For some reason the floor started to crumble and the walls started to collapse. Rosa said come with me and Rosa made them run under a falling wall! then suddenly they were in their camp again and Elle shouted shared dream!!! and then Tillie saw Rosa next to the river that was not so far from their camp/shelter and asked her what she was doing. Rosa said ‘can I stay with you’. and Elle and Tillie yelled OF COURSE!!!!.So the the three friends set off on their adventure once more.

Tillie, Elle and Rosa saw a river and they all had a little play and then suddenly a fox jumped out of the bush! and brushed past them and then they saw a group of squirrels and a bear running in the same direction as the fox Tillie, Elle and Rosa were scared of where the animals were running to. But they should have been afraid of what they were running from!! The three friends heard cries of “RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!” and “TO THE ANCIENT TREE!!”.They decided to go with all the animals and then they found themselves in what seemed to be a very old tree and then they saw a squirrel step onto a log and it said “animals you are all running from THE SERPENT am I correct” the crowd all yelled “YES” so the squirrel continued ” as you all know the serpent has haunted us all for many years and we need someone to stop them. The serpent hast to pay for their crimes” an uproar of voices all shouted in agreement but one question remained, who would catch the serpent?

Only three paws and one claw went in the air. The three paws belonged to the three wolves of our story and the claw belonged to Clory the fastest eagle in the forest, they all got out of the elder tree.

After they introduced them selves they set off to catch the serpent

“where would this serpent be then?” asked Rosa. “Are you new here? because all the animals in the wood know the serpents hideout is and they often try to avoid it .” said Clory in shock. “The serpent lives in the cave just down the river “. “What are we waiting for?!”asked Elle. ” Aren’t you going to pack? Asked Tillie “Oh right” said Elle a little embarrassed. After they packed all the necessary things they set of on their quest. On the way there Clory was telling her travel mates(Tillie, Elle and Rosa)about the serpent. Finally they got their , the three wolves were terefied by what they saw…MILLIONS OF WOLF BONES!!!!!

They looked in shock at the horrifying sight as it dawned on them that they were not the first wolves to attempt this task. Clory looked in horror too as the blood drained from their faces…the serpent had found them. “RUNNNNNN!” they screamed. the heroes were crashing through the woods with the serpent following closely. They only just managed to dive into a burrow as the serpent lunged for them, lost his balance, and fell down the hill. They just about dared to breath as it went back to its cave

They got out of the bush when they were certain that the serpent was well and truly back in its cave .”That was close” panted Tillie. “for sure “replied Elle “I’m hungry” said Rosa . “hahahahahahaha!” they all laughed. “lets go back to camp.”. “yeah” Agreed the wolves. “C-can I come? asked Clory pleadingly. “of course!” the wolfs said excitedly. “thank you!!”she replied. The three wolfs spent half a hour making their den bigger the fit in their new friend. The next day they dedicated to planning their plot to get rid of the serpent once and for all. They went to bed that night with their minds whirring of the plan they worked so hard on. The next day they packed their stuff an headed for the cave. “I really hope this works. said Tillie. “Same” replied Rosa. They arrived at the cave and started throwing all their food in it then they hid behind the cave waiting for the serpent to smell the food. surely enough the serpent came out to eat the food. “now!” Clory whispered. Rosa and Elle jumped onto Clory’s back while Tillie hung onto her claws and they all silently swooped into the cave “what now?” asked Elle. “we only planned this far” replied Clory.

Who are we?

An introduction to the poem- The We of relinquished responsibility

For me, a consequence of lockdown has been the increased focus and attention given to the everyday; to words, actions and intentions. Children do this naturally it appears, until asked to do something. My eight old observes my every action with intense scrutiny. I am treated to a daily tirade of questions asking why I said this, or why my face looks like that. She hears exacerbated swears uttered under my breath from rooms away yet she does not hear a present and directed request to put her socks on, very odd! I have noticed my husband is very fond of the word we. “We should do something about this”, he says with regularity, to signal his acknowledgement that an action needs to be taken, without actually doing anything about it. I have begun to call this The we of relinquished responsibility. I wanted to explore this We a little deeper. Author George Marshall, an expert in communicating climate breakdown, calls it the bystander we or the slippery we.

When looking at inauguration speeches, Marshall observed that President George Washington said we once, Jefferson, ten times, John F Kennedy, twenty nine times and Barak Obama used We fifty-seven times! Marshall argues that the repeated use of the pronoun is problematic- ‘a rhetorical gambit that sounds inclusive and assertive but is actually ambiguous and often meaningless’. (1) As lockdown has forced us inwards, I had begun to share Marshall’s sentiments on this word, although I had been unable to express my musings as articulately. I did, however, write a short poem, inspired by Marshall’s critique of the political We. So here it is-

The We of Relinquished Responsibility-

Who are we?

Who we are matters, you see

It’s the difference between action and apathy

The private we

The political we

A word overused

To imbue agency

Spectacle over substance

That’s your we

The we of relinquished responsibility

Notes:

(1) George Marshall, Don’t even think about it- Why our brains are wired to ignore climate change.

Check out more of my writing at: https://ethicalwrites.co.uk/

What do you want to be when you grow up?

My daughter is obsessed with author and poet Michael Rosen at the moment. Every morning we have to listen to Michael Rosen stories and poems while eating breakfast.

Image: Birmingham School Poetry Celebrations

On the walk to school this morning I suggested that she might like to try and tell her own stories. It could be a story about getting up in the mornings and coming into our bedroom to jump on dad and wake him up.

It could be a story of how she listens to Michael Rosen every morning while making pancakes and now she has memorised all of the words to No Breathing in class. My daughter’s response to my suggestions was, ‘I don’t want to be a poet‘. “What do you mean, you don’t want to be a poet?” I asked. “That’s not what I want to do for a living, I want to work in an orphanage”, she replied.

I asked her if she needed to, “want to be a poet”, just to tell a story? She wasn’t sure, but she was certain she didn’t have to tell a story as it wasn’t her professional calling. We walked and talked and what came out of the discussion was how problematic the seemingly innocuous question of What do you want to be when you grow up was . My daughter had been asked that question at school, by family members and at various clubs, and it was always asked in the context of, what job do you want when you grow up. So at the tender age of 7 years old, this is all my daughter understood that question to mean. How sad, I felt. A question like, what do you want to be, could be a broad, bold question that floods the mind with possibilities. Just imagine all the things that you could possibly be! What kind of person do I want to be? Do I want to create art and music? How do I want to treat others? What kind of relationships do I want to have? What do I care about and why? How will I take care of myself and the planet? Do I want to travel? What do I want to study? The possibilities of that questions are endless and it’s just so sad that it has become narrowed to a question of ‘do you know what employment you want’.

Last week I was talking to a friend who sent me a beautiful poem that she’d written, it was just fantastic! She told me that when she was a child she had told her mum she wanted to write a poetry book and her mum said “Poetry doesn’t sell. If you want to write it needs to be a novel.” This completely put my friend off. In her words, “who has the patience to write a novel!”. I felt it was tragic my friend had been given such poor advice by her mother who had unintentionally squashed her daughter’s creative ambitions. Like all of us, her mother had no doubt been taught from a young age that ambitions and aspirations for our futures must include potential for employment.

Image: https://www.kqed.org/mindshift/50429/how-to-help-older-kids-develop-a-sense-of-imagination

In our lifetimes we’re going to be many things and we’re going to do many things and employment is one of them. So, I said to my daughter, the next time somebody asks you, what do you want to be, ask them, are you asking me what kind of person I want to be? Or are you asking me what job I want to do? Let’s start teaching our children and ourselves to make that distinction, and open up our minds to all the possibilities of what we can be.

Is the Earthshot prize really necessary? We have the know-how to tackle the climate crisis, let’s get on with it!

Today’s news that Sir David Attenborough and Prince William have teamed up to launch the prestigious Earthshot climate award has been greeted with enthusiasm. In an interview for the BBC, Prince William said ‘The aim (of the award) is to find “new solutions” that have a positive effect on environmental change and improve living standards globally, particularly those communities most at risk from climate change.

Image: Earthshot

While efforts to further raise the profile about the urgency of the climate crisis are welcome, it is baffling that Prince William and Sir David felt an award designed to encourage innovation was the most appropriate way forwards. William told the Today programme:

“The key thing about the Earthshot Prize is that positivity. It’s the idea we need to find solutions to be able to live our lives and enjoy our lives and not feel guilty and bad about some of the things we do. That ultimately has to change. Because I also worry from a mental health point of view, the anxiety and the worry that many of these younger generations are going to have, hearing about what we’re talking about. It’s going to weigh on them. And they don’t want to inherit a world that is going to be full of doom and gloom”

So, here’s something to really get excited about. We already have the technological and intellectual know-how to tackle the climate crisis. (1) How amazing is that!

We have the tools for the job, we just need to bloody get on with it! We have green energy solutions, Knowledge and expertise to build carbon-sequestering homes, knowledge of localised food systems and an understanding of the need to consume less meat; research to support smooth transitions to low carbon economies, skills for re-wilding, Policy solutions such as the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill and The Green New deal. It’s all there, and examples of these solutions and their effectiveness can be seen all over the world. Isn’t that something to get excited about!

Image: Sierra Leone youth Climate event.

The issue is not one of knowledge but of political will. The Earthshot prize ‘which aims to find solutions to repair the planet by 2030’, is in danger of perpetuating the myth that if only the right idea or invention could come along, we’ll all be saved. This thinking serves the business as usual approach favoured by the Government as it tells people we’re not ready yet, we don’t have any real answers, therefore we can’t take the action needed. In their coverage of the EarthShot project the BBC asked, So where will the potentially planet-saving ideas they want come from? The answer, they continued, “is we just don’t know – you might have an idea that, with a bit of publicity and cash, could reshape our world”.

This is not accurate. We do know

We need to grow what we have. All the wonderful green innovations, technologies and policy solutions that are already here, let’s use them to actively replenish the planet and our communities. The changes needed won’t be easy. Sir David argues, however, that through curbing the excesses of Western Countries, not only will we restore the natural world, but we will be happier for it.

What we need now is for Governments to act on that knowledge. Our role as citizens is to force the Government to act. Force them to Scale down what is ecologically disruptive and socially useless and grow activities that are green, useful, and necessary. This isn’t a left vs right issue, it requires cross-party consensus and cooperation. Both the major UK parties have failed to protect the environment and both must be bold in their climate commitments now.

Image: https://www.brusselstimes.com/opinion/55168/tackling-climate-change-citizens-vote-increasingly-green-but-politicians-slow-on-meaningful-action/

High profile and ongoing exposure to the climate crisis is brilliant, and rewarding green initiatives and instilling hope in our young is an absolute necessity; but let’s make sure our efforts are channeled in the right direction. Prince William said urgency+optimisim=action, we must ensure that action is meaningful.

(1) https://hbr.org/2010/01/can-technology-really-save-us-from-climate-change

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/07/artificial-intelligence-climate-change/

https://www.2030vision.com/news/climate-crisis-how-digital-technology-can-help

https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/25/18744034/ai-artificial-intelligence-ml-climate-change-fight-tackle

What we did next…

Note: This piece draws on the work of, Dreams of a Low carbon-Future project, The Intercept’s, A message from the Future, Rob Hopkin’s, From what if to what next and Christina Figueres and Tom Rivett-Carnac’s, the future we choose; Naomi Klein’s On Fire, The burning case for a Green new Deal, and my own imagination. All of the projections discussed in this blog are rooted in social and technological realities.

Image: Dreams of a Low Carbon Future.

In this post, I imagine a future where the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill (CEEB) has been passed and explore some of the incredible innovations and transformations that have taken place and pulled us back from the brink of Environmental and Societal collapse. Because at this time, more than ever, we need imagination. Because nothing ever existed, that didn’t first exist in someone’s imagination. We need to nurture a mindset of Stubborn optimism and active hope and remember that there was a point where people believed Apartheid would never end, that the Slave trade would never end, yet these injustices were toppled, by individuals just like us.

The year is 2050, 29 years since the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill (CEEB) was made Law. It was the first of many of its kind and opened the Overton Window of what was possible once there was the political will. It called for a Citizen’s Assembly which began in Ernest in May 2021 and the first order of business was Emissions reduction. After hearing all the evidence about how the burning of fossil fuels had accelerated global temperatures and the repercussions of this, coupled with the realisation that so much time had already been wasted, the Assembly agreed an ambitious and legally binding target of 10% emissions reduction each year for the next decade. There were a number of ways this was to happen.

Firstly, a two year phase out of investing in Fossil fuel companies. Businesses were supported in moving their investments to Green industries. Organisations were set up to deliver clean up programmes in Areas of High Ecological Destruction (AMEDs). These programmes included regeneration projects such as; Rebuilding Soil, Restoring water, Planting trees, and were to be managed by indigenous communities who had local expertise in land upkeep. It was recognised that climate justice went hand in hand with social justice, so working with local people who had been the most heavily impacted by the ecological destruction of their communities was crucial.

Image : Common Dreams; A declaration on climate crisis, energy transition and extractivism in Latin America.

Around the same time that the CEEB was passed into law and for the first time in American history, a federal regulatory agency had put out a report recognising climate change as a major threat to the economy.

The report highlighted Physical risks like flooding, socio-economic risks such as health impacts and low productivity due to extreme heat. Then there was “transition risk,” the idea that companies that aren’t preparing for the transition to the carbon-neutral economy are setting themselves up to lose money because their assets could lose value rapidly’. There was a strong call for regulatory action.

Donald Trump lost the Elections later that year and his successor, Democrat Joe Biden, was quick to use the recommendations of the report as a policy road map. Biden heavily taxed carbon and pushed through emergency legislation that began a long process of dismantling the Oil Giants.

Fossil fuel companies had two years to wind down their operations, at which point they would be broken down and restructured. 50% of their operations needed to support regeneration and green infrastructure efforts including building Biopylons for artificial photosynthesis and expanding existing technologies that pyrolyes waste to generate energy and create biochar in a closed loop system. While the other 50% had to move towards renewable energy in two years. Companies that didn’t comply were fined heavily with money going back into green subsidies.

In the UK, 2 major reports had come out in September 2020. One, by the World Wildlife fund, looked at thousands of different wildlife species monitored by conservation scientists in habitats across the world. They recorded an average 68% fall in more than 20,000 populations of mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles and fish since 1970.

Another, by the RSPB, showed the UK Government had failed on 17 of its 20 UN Biodiversity targets that had been agreed in 2010 at the Convention of Biodiversity. Reports such as these were becoming more common place and formed part of the Information that guided and advised the citizens assemblies. Everything was publicly available, the Assemblies were live for people to watch online and current affair shows and publications sprung up around the issues that were discussed. Net-zero, once a little known term, entered the national lexicon. The whole country realised the sense of urgency about the crisis, for the first time.

There was an emerging Zeitgeist that if we were going to get through this crisis, we would have to work together. People had already begun local mobilisation to support one another through the global pandemic of 2020. During this time, People were self-organising with incredible efficiency, respect and creativity.“

We saw what could be achieved when we work together. The Climate Crisis now commanded the same efforts.

Community groups sprung up all over the country. A massive network of local groups, exchanging ideas and skills, motivated by a new recognition of what needed to be done. The volatile and unsustainable state of the global food system, soil erosion, Dust bowls, Ocean acidification, rising global temperatures and mass Extinctions, all impact on us and suddenly, these weren’t problems of the future, they were here, affecting us all and presenting the prospect of a very bleak future for our children. This shift in realisation shook everyone out of their collective stupor. There was an incredible sense of camaraderie as we united against this existential threat.

At the Policy level, Farming subsidises were paid on condition of land up keep, regeneration of Soil and re-wilding. Money from large ecologically destructive infrastructure projects such as HS2 was redirected to improving existing train lines, creating cycle routes and better broadband so people could work from home. Over the years, with greater public understanding of how many of their energy needs could not be met on a global scale, communities localised their energy needs.  Thanks to the continuing reduction in costs of renewable energy technologies like wind and solar power, the old economies of scale were turned upside down so that generating and using energy locally represented better value than generating power in relatively few, large, centralised, locations. Fossil fuels were eventually phased out for good. They were no longer a financially viable option.

It all started when The Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill became Law. The whole country saw its leaders taking climate breakdown seriously, and they took it seriously. It was discussed and debated at every level, how climate breakdown affected children’s health, Social justice, peoples’ jobs and the Economy; wildlife and the natural world, housing, food security, public health, education, life chances; The attitude was, treat the climate like it’s about everything, because it is. And people started to realise that their lives could improve in deep and profound ways as a result of the changes required. The myth that the changes needed to save the planet would mean hardship and stifle progress, was just that, a myth. So many amazing innovations sprung up. Solar paint, Biopylons and methods for turning waste into building materials were evolved. During the Global pandemic, the UK economy shrank by a record 20%! Governments needed to invest and quickly realised that investments that are good for the environment are also very good for getting us out of the recession we’d found ourselves in. Mass retraining programmes started to skill up individuals and communities for all the new Green jobs that needed to be done. In schools, children were taught how to make and mend and grow their own food. Community gardens sprung up everywhere and these projects massively reduced mental health problems and loneliness amongst the elderly as people came together with a shared sense of purpose. People were healthier as they were eating better, moving more and breathing cleaner air. And what became clear was the interconnectedness of all of our social ills. The Climate crisis, Mental health Crisis, The Migrant Crisis, the Obesity epidemic, the Systemic oppression of marginalised groups, of women, of Animals, they were all linked; We realised; climate justice was Social Justice.

In short, There was a Scale down of what is ecologically disruptive and socially useless and growth was created through what was green, useful and necessary.

Image:Allen’s Cross Community Garden. Birmingham

There was a group called Extinction Rebellion. They fought for the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill to be made Law. They made the Government Tell the Truth about climate breakdown. They made the Government Act and they demanded a citizens assembly.

Our future is unwritten

“This is the most consequential decade in human history.” Christiana Figueres

“What happens next is up to every one of us” David Attenborough

There is still time. But we must act now.

Write to your MP and get them to back the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill.

Join XR today

A Call to Action

The actress Lily Tomlin famously said.

“I said “Somebody should do something about that.” Then I realized I am somebody.”

I love this statement. It’s a beautiful reminder that we have the power to make the changes we want to see in the World.

This need to be part of the solution has led me to Extinction Rebellion, and I wanted to share my call to action in the hope it will inspire others to get involved.

Like so many decisions we make it was a process. Moments of realisation that lead to an eventual Eureka! moment.

For me, it was while watching Sir David Attenborough’s One Planet with my children.

You see, when I was a child I used to love watching the nature show, Wildlife on One with my family. Okay, that’s not strictly true. What I loved was that it was on past my bedtime, and feigning an interest in the show meant I got to stay up later once a week. My parents were happy for me to watch it..it was educational! I did enjoy seeing all the animals and exotic locations although I recall finding David Attenborough’s soothing tone a bit boring.

And while I remember appeals to protect the natural world being a regular feature of the show, I don’t remember much focus on the impact of climate breakdown. Although you may be surprised to learn that “Nearly everything we understand about global warming was understood in 1979!” The year I was born. “By that year, data collected since 1957 had confirmed what had been known before the turn of the 20th century: human beings have altered the Earth’s atmosphere through the indiscriminate burning of fossil fuels” – NY Times 2018. Despite this knowledge, the pusillanimous leaders of the day did very little beyond some tinkering around the edges. It was tomorrow’s problem, it was convenient to believe.

Today’s nature programmes, on the other hand, heavily focus on climate breakdown and the dangers of our continued failure to act.

It is so difficult to all at once watch the awe-inspiring spectacle of the mass migration of caribou across North America, while instantly learning that this phenomenon is a mere fraction “(70% less) of what it once was due to climate breakdown”. Or the terrifying spectacle of a breakaway Iceberg the size of a skyscraper. “A phenomenon that’s happening twice as fast as it was ten years ago and contributing to significant sea level rises.”

How heartbreaking it is that every story of species and planet is instantly a story of a species in decline or a habitat lost. Especially when watching with my children. What it must feel like to be a child at this point in history.

Recently while watching One Planet my 13-year-old left the room. She said it was ‘too depressing’. She knew climate breakdown was happening but she didn’t want to watch it. My 7-year-old commented on how people “knew what to do to save the planet, they just weren’t doing it”.

That broke my heart. As a family we recycle, are Vegan and vegetarian and we had attended a couple of demonstrations for climate action too! But the fact that despite these things my 7-year-old still felt that people weren’t doing anything made me wake up to what I already knew…I wasn’t doing enough.

Everyone faces a choice every day that carries a climate cost. Do we walk or drive to work? Eat bacon or porridge for breakfast? But these individual choices alone are not enough. There’s no bag for life-ing our way out of this mess. It’s important to recognise that “arguments around individual choice shift the focus to individual action as opposed to lobbying governments against fossil fuel companies who counteract individual efforts every day. For example, “more than half of all global industrial emissions since 1988 can be traced to 25 corporate and state-owned entities.”

All these things led me to Extinction Rebellion. Their demand that Governments “Tell the Truth” about climate breakdown is crucial to counteract decades of delay and denial and strategic campaigns by fossil fuel companies to deceive and distract the public, dismiss the message and distort the facts. These are the reasons we now stand at the brink of the highest global temperature considered safe. Consider this: The last time the global monthly temperature was below average was February 1985.

That means if you are 30 years old or younger, there has not been a single month in your entire life that was colder than average.

Extinction Rebellion demands the Government “Act now”. Climate change is here. We don’t have the time or the luxury to do nothing. There have already been too many wasted decades of inaction. My generation, now in their 40s, had “adults around them who knew, and did nothing”. Now we’re the adults, what are we going to do?

Extinction Rebellion demands that decisions on climate justice go “beyond politics”, as over the decades politicians on both sides of the political spectrum have failed to take decisive action.

The Truth

“We are facing an unprecedented global emergency. Life on Earth is in crisis: scientists agree we have entered a period of abrupt climate breakdown and we are in the midst of a mass extinction of our own making”.

I need my children to see that people care and people are doing something. That I care and I’m doing something. That is what led me to Extinction Rebellion. Because “climate breakdown is not only the crisis of our lives, it’s also the crisis of our species existence”.

This was my call to action. What will be yours?

Please Join Extinction Rebellion today.

For if not you, then who? And if not now, then when?

Home

Grief

There is a scene in the film Interview with a vampire that I have been thinking about a lot lately. In this scene, we see the transformation of Louis (Brad Pitt) from human to Vampire. After his transformation, Louis describes the sensations of seeing the world through his new ‘vampire eyes’. He describes this feeling as though ‘The world had changed but stayed the same’.

This sentiment, of the familiar becoming suddenly strange and unfamiliar, very neatly encapsulates the way I have been feeling over the last few months in the wake of the Covid pandemic and ensuing lockdown. In the gaps between the practicalities of the days. The homeschooling, I use that term loosely, the relentlessness of housework; daily reminders to myself that I’m so lucky to be safe, well and with my family during this difficult time; It is a privilege many don’t have. But in between all these things, are moments of deep and profound grief. And I suppose this short blog post is an effort to process and articulate that. And find some positivity.

A few weeks into lockdown I was in turmoil. Social media is no friend to the struggling mind. I consumed a daily dose of memes along the lines of, ‘Your grandparents fought the Nazis, all you’re being asked to do is stay at home, you’ve got this’. Yeah! It’s only a global pandemic the likes of which we’ve never seen in our lifetime, with constraints on personal freedoms I’d only read about in Orwell novels. Suck it up, snowflakes!

Another very popular sentiment doing the rounds on social media was this. ‘Things shouldn’t return to normal because normal wasn’t working’.

 

 

Now on a Macro level, I find myself in complete agreement with this statement. The current Neo-liberal paradigm fails the majority of people that live within it. A pervasive and toxic ideology that ‘sees competition as the defining characteristic of human relations and redefines citizens as consumers’. It maintains that “the market” delivers benefits that could never be achieved by planning. Until the shit hits the fan, then losses are nationalised. While Primatologist, Jane Goodall recently warned that If we do not do things differently (after Covid 19) we are finished,” “We can’t go on very much longer like this, she wrote. Referring to our destruction of the natural world and its impact on disease and climate breakdown. 

This is normal right now, normal has to change…. for everyone’s sake.

However, on a micro-level, I am happy. I have a lovely life, friends and family whom I cherish, a roof over my head, and the luxury of being able to pursue interests that are deeply important to me, like writing this blog. However, I am acutely aware of how my lovely life comes at a cost. All of us are embedded in what Dr. Melanie Joy calls ‘multiple systems of oppression’. From our diets and clothes to our mobile phones, others are exploited so we can enjoy comfort and convenience. Most of us sit somewhere on the spectrum of recognition and acknowledgment of these difficult truths that have become increasingly transparent. This pandemic, coupled with Environmental and Social movements like Extinction Rebellion, Me Too, and Black lives Matter, force us to see the world through new eyes, viewing our everyday choices through a lens of exploitation (of people, animals and planet). In the book, Political Ecology and Environmentalism in Britain, Prendiville and Haigron write; Western lifestyles were built on exploiting limited natural resources and excessive consumption- to satisfy artificially created cravings’.

In Interview with a Vampire, Louis thought he wanted change. But once faced with it, he is in turmoil, fighting against his new reality. It is harder still because everything he knew is still there but transformed and inaccessible. As Louis and his maker and companion, Lestat try to maintain the charade that all is as it was, Louis remarks, ‘They watch us dine on empty plates and drink from empty glasses’.

Whether we welcome change or not, it is inevitable. Our choice is how we influence and respond to it. Most of us are cognisant that we’re living through a historically significant moment. A global pandemic coupled with The climate crisis, Brexit (remember that?) The migrant crisis, a problematic term in itself, and shitlords, Boris and Trump, using chaos and confusion as a Tool of Governance. 

It’s scary, I have moments where I crave normality, but recognise It wasn’t working. So I grieve.  Grief is intense sorrow to the loss of a person or thing. And that is what it feels like. Like I’m mourning the loss of the way I believed my life and the lives of my children would be. Mourning because I know it was never right; our lives built on the backs of others. And by exploiting nature.

I grieve so I can let go, of destructive attachments and ways of living that harm, and move forward, positively, in love and solidarity.

As Nelson Mandela said, “To be free is not merely to cast off one’s chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others. Can I honestly say that my life does that?

But I want it to.

And I have the power.

We all do…

Personal choice and the normalisation of meat.

I am attempting Veganuary…… again. Going Vegan for the month of January. Although I want this to be the start of a life long commitment. I have been a vegetarian for over 20 years. I had about 6 years where I ate fish. My midwife advised me to eat fish while I was pregnant as I was anaemic and to be honest, I loved the taste. I continued to eat fish for a few years after giving birth so my youngest daughter eats fish too. Ultimately, I struggled to reconcile my belief that animals have as much right to life as me with my fish consumption, especially when my older daughter got to an age where she could ask the question; ‘why do we not eat animals but we do eat fish?’ I didn’t really have an answer. It was time to stop.

And now I feel it’s time to take my convictions further. I was 13 years old when I made the decision to stop eating meat and at the time I knew nothing beyond a strong belief that I liked animals and had no desire to eat them…why should they die for my dinner? 27 years on and I understand a lot more about the environmental, health, political and social dimensions of meat consumption; vegetarianism doesn’t feel like enough anymore. I know too much.

So, I’m trying Veganuary…again. It’s a process. Yesterday (at the time of starting this blog) I ate leftover Christmas chilli cheddar and crackers until I had to go have a little lie down somewhere dark until the sweats subsided. It’s a process. It opens dialogue. I get to have lots of discussions. Everybody has an opinion about what they eat. I live in a bit of a bubble with many of my friends already vegetarian/Vegan or at least in agreement with its virtues.

One of the conversations I do find myself having often is with vegetarian parents who have decided to bring their children up eating meat. I must start by saying I have two daughters, one I raised vegetarian, the other, as mentioned previously, eats fish…occasionally, but otherwise a vegetarian diet.

However, when discussing the decision to bring children up as Vegetarians with my fellow veggie parents, I learn that most of them choose to give their children meat. There are various reasons for this decision; one parent is a meat eater, protein, a concern that the child won’t be able to digest meat in the future, are some of the reasons cited. However, the most common reason that people offer is one of personal choice, allowing children to make their own decisions. So I was keen to pick this argument apart a little.

I want to do this by looking at two points, firstly the way meat is framed and meat consumption is justified within our society and secondly, how this framing serves as a backdrop to the idea of personal choice.

How meat is framed.

In her book, Why we love dogs, eat pigs and wear cows, Professor of Psychology and Sociology, Melanie Joy, talks about the three N’s of justification for eating meat. Those are that eating meat is normal, natural and necessary. She goes on to explain why these three N’s of justification are myths. I highly recommend her lecture available here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pujzQq91b7I

However, for the purpose of this discussion, I wish to focus, not so much on the myths, but why we feel the need to justify meat consumption to ourselves at all. Firstly, Joy argues that most of us, when questioned, have compassion for animals and do not wish to see them suffer. If we are faced with the suffering of animals we are outraged. Remember the ‘cat bin’ woman? In 2010, Mary Bale from Coventry became reviled around the world, receiving abusive phone calls and death threats from as far afield as Australia when a video emerged of her dropping a cat into a wheelie bin. The story was widely reported by the media.

Yet if you type farm animal cruelty UK into YouTube there are hundreds of videos exposing violent and disturbing abuses of animals that make being dropped into a wheelie bin seem like a trip to a day spar! Yet where’s the public outrage? The vast media coverage?  And what’s more, why are so many of us supporting such an abusive system through our consumer choices?

In her book, Evil, the science behind humanity’s dark side, Dr Julia Shaw discusses ‘the meat paradox’. Shaw argues that people have a need to reconcile the psychological conflict between their dietary preference for meat and their moral response to animal suffering”. That “bringing harm to others is inconsistent with a view of oneself as a moral person. As such, meat consumption leads to negative effects for meat-eaters because they are confronted with a view of themselves that is unfavourable: how can I be a good person and also eat meat?”

On the one hand, we love animals and view ourselves as decent and compassionate individuals but on the other hand, through our consumer and dietary choices we support a system that exploits and abuses animals on a colossal scale; we need to justify to ourselves why we do it. And telling ourselves that meat is natural, normal and necessary is part of that justification. So that is one part of how meat is framed, however, food choices are also shaped by cultural norms. The dominant ideology supporting meat consumption has been described as implicit or invisible because the underlying beliefs are commonly perceived as the ways things should be.  While Sociological research published in 2011 documented how UK newspapers discredit veganism through ridicule, with vegans variously stereotyped as angry, militant, self-denying, sentimental, faddy, or joyless.

The language around meat consumption is also problematic. When we eat beef, chicken wings, hot dogs or spaghetti bolognese, we do it in denial. Already by referring to what we eat as “beef” instead of “cow”, we have created a distance between our food and an animal with abilities to think and feel. Philosophers and animal rights activists have long claimed that we avoid thinking about the animal we eat, and that this reduces the feeling of unease.

As Paul Mccartney famously said, ‘If slaughter houses had glass walls everybody would be vegetarian’. And while Vegetarian and Vegan describes not just a dietary choice, but a particular philosophical position, Joy argues that the language used to describe meat-eaters is problematic as it’s often divorced from a belief system or ideology. This means that views about meat consumption as something natural, have become deeply entrenched. Only in the last few decades has a constructive counter-narrative emerged; and even where people do discuss alternatives they often do so within the constraints of a carnist hegemony.

This normalisation of meat consumption means that as a society we frame being vegetarian or vegan as a choice, an alternative to the norm. And eating meat as the default position. My child can choose not to eat meat then if they want. However, both meat consumption and vegetarianism/veganism represent particular dietary and philosophical choices, and the choice to consume meat requires as much explanation as vegetarianism.

In his recent lecture for Rutgers University, animal rights activist, Earthling Ed, challenges this notion of personal choice. He asks, “Can we justify what we do to animals by saying it’s down to personal choice? Whose choice is it? Do we factor in the trillions of animals that die each year?  Their desire for life?’ When it comes to our food choices, there are no personal choices. Our choices have wide-reaching environmental, social, political and ethical implications. It’s time we stop treating meat consumption as the default position and start recognising that meat consumption is as much a choice, with moral and social implications, as vegetarianism and veganism.

In his latest documentary, Apocalypse cow, Journalist and environmental campaigner George Monbiot remarks, “as a society, we care about animals, we teach children to be kind to them and make them the heroes of our stories”. He highlights the extent to which animals and in particular farm animals feature in children’s literature. Britain was the first country in the world to start a welfare charity for animals, as early as 1824. We consider ourselves a nation of animal lovers.

Now we need to challenge how we frame meat and re-conceptualise meat consumption. Even those of us who have made conscious decisions to not eat meat still fall victim to this carnist hegemony, where we teach our children, explicitly or implicitly, that meat consumption is normal and necessary and other dietary decisions can be made later when they’re ready if they choose. As Joy states, ‘we need to make the connection between ourselves, other beings and our core values. Joy refers to this cognitive dissonance as Knowing without knowing…we know but don’t fully make the connection, and this gap in consciousness robs us of the ability to make a choice freely.

Why dry?

Merry Christmas everyone! It’s boxing day; the last of the Christmas day nut roast has past through my guts and I’m already contemplating the New Year. This year I’ve decided to give the ‘Dryathlon‘ a try. Going booze free for the month of January to ‘get healthier and raise money for charity’. I wholly admit that this is more an exercise in self restraint than it is a charitable endeavour. You see, I am what you would call a heavy drinker. I drink to relax in the evenings. I drink for social lubrication. I drink because I love the taste of an ice cold French Sauvignon. I drink because it helps the creative process. I find that alcohol can help provide what the Greeks called “Entheos“, the buzz of inspiration they associated with poets and other artists. Sure enough I have a glass of dry white next to me at this very moment, along with some scented candles, after a long day it’s just bliss. Above all, I drink to take the edges off reality. Life is terrifying! Time forces us along at a steady rate of one second per second, against our will. Past and future extended infinitely on a plane of sequential moments to a point of nothingness. Yet non of us live a linear existence. Rather we exist in a constant state of flux; oscillating between what we were, and a future of uncertainty. After all, ‘Man is nothing but what he makes of himself’. And as ‘modern day George Carlin’, Louis C.K puts it,  ‘Everyone’s gonna die and then you’re gonna be dead for way longer than you’re alive. Basically, you’re just dead people who didn’t die yet’. I may just pour another glass.

So anyway, I’ve decided to try Dryathlon. I won’t be asking for sponsorship. I think the idea of people giving you money for not doing something is a bit ridiculous. Although, I guess donations in exchange for completing a challenge are acceptable. I’m pained to admit it will be a challenge. It shouldn’t be I know. While I enjoy drinking, I’ll admit to an element of self-medication. Like Plato’s ‘Allegory of the Cave‘ it can often feel safer to stay in the shadows, even when we realise they’re just that….

 

Slimming World and the subjugation of female bodies

So, here’s my second blog effort and it’s a bit of a topic shift. I’ve been doing a lot of self reflection and I’m really keen to understand all the nooks and crannies of my life. Since my teenage years I’ve been accused of over analysing things so I’ve decided to use this blog and really go with that and analyse the fuck out of everything. And this month it’s my diet; or rather, the ways in which the diet industry is implicit in the continued subjugation of female bodies. My focus will be on Slimming World, because I have recently been attending their groups, so therefore have been exposed to their particular brand of terminology.

I’ve been going to Slimming World for a few months now. Trying to shift post baby blubber and fit into jeans without having to walk around like I’ve just kacked myself.  The first thing that occurred to me at my introductory meeting was the assumptions being made about the members. I was provided with numerous leaflets inviting me to ‘move more’ by ‘getting up to make a cup of tea in the ad breaks’ and ‘leaving a note to myself on the sofa saying ‘exercise now, telly later’. Apparently, being over weight has little to do with eating, and everything to do with too much day time television…I knew it!

The second thing I noticed, and this really bothered me, was the language adopted. In the case of Slimming World they use the term ‘syns‘ (short for synergy)  as a ‘Slimming World alternative to calorie or fat counting’.  “Treat” foods, such as pints o’ cream, fluffy ruffs, sandwich casserole and bonbonbonbons, have a high syn value….they are very synful. This is unhelpful terminology, and in my opinion has negative implications. Why, you ask? Because, as author, Michelle Lelwica observes, ‘Women in contemporary Western societies have inherited a legacy which sees the body as the site of sin which is to be purified and transcended through the denial of physical cravings and needs’. ‘There has been a historical subjugation of women, especially, Lelwica notes, by patriarchal Christianity. The diet industry, and in particular Slimming World, with a language laced with religious connotations, are implicit in this continued subjugation;  women become willing participants in the ‘pursuit of the thin, hungry ideal’. Foucault, who has been highly influential in feminist critique, offers some useful insight in this area ; exploring the ways in which individuals become’ implicit in their own oppression as they participate in habitual daily practices and routines through which they engage in self-surveillance and self-discipline’. Little girls are encouraged to dress up for example; there’s play make up and high heels, there’s anorexic dolls to play with, while the media , through adverts and magazines, peddles insecurity and fills the female mind with lies…”it’s your looks that matter”, they hiss in the background.

The diet industry exemplifies this, ‘through a combination of guilt and blame‘. Successes are publicised while failures are personalised. In Slimming World…success is the result of the programme, while failure is the result of the individual. We live in a society that constantly encourages women to focus on their looks. Now at this point you may be thinking…what about men? There is increasing pressure on men to conform to an ideal too, isn’t there? Indeed. I myself recently purchased a copy of Men’s Health magazine for my partner to try the Hugh Jackman ‘Wolverine workout’ (for a giggle, of course!). The difference, as I see it, is that for men, and more importantly boys, a focus on looks is not the dominant narrative. In fact there are multiple mainstream narratives for men to choose from. It really is a man’s world! Women, on the other hand, learn to become preoccupied with their appearance,  and in this process they learn to’ treat themselves as things to be decorated and gazed upon by another, by an anonymous patriarchal other’. What Langton refers to as a ‘reduction to appearance: the treatment of a person primarily in terms of how they look’. Since starting this blog post I have left Slimming World. It was helpful (I lost a stone in total if you’re wondering). However, the patronisingly patriarchal tone of the meetings was just too much. I’m left with a lingering anxiety about food and my body. I obviously had such worries before or I wouldn’t have gone to the group in the first place. However, now they have equipped me with the tools to slimness there’s no excuse! My relationship with food from this point on should be one of checks and measures. Forethought and denial. Always quietly judging myself and others for food choices. And taking an almost sadistic pleasure in watching ‘The biggest loser’.  Mainly, I left Slimming World because I felt its modus operandi works by exploiting  anxieties about the body and food. ‘Generations of women and girls are growing up absorbing these anxieties. Too often food is a source of anguish, as are our bodies’. I need to show my daughters it doesn’t matter. That the world will judge them by their looks but they are more than that.  They are personalities and they are spirits and that matters. It matters because, as Bartky observes, ‘women in patriarchal societies undergo a fragmentation, when being too identified with their bodies, their entire being is identified with the body, which has been regarded as inherently less human than the mind or personality’. This is what Western Women have inherited and internalised. I can’t shield my daughters but I can talk to them, and make them aware….