Anti-Ags are Mocking Sexual Violence Victims
Today I would like to talk about something that’s hard to discuss: sexual assault. The reason I’m bringing this up, is because I’ve recently seen several anti-ag protestors claim agriculturists sexually assault livestock.
The following column includes three “points” I want to make on this topic. It does include the mention of sexual violence and rape, so fair warning, if that’s something you’re sensitive to. Some of the images I’ve included are explicit, but, they’re what anti-ags are saying about the dairy industry so I believe agriculturists should see them.
Point #1: Intent
When I hear or read that agriculturist sexually assault livestock, images and scenarios play out in my mind that haunt me. It’s truly sickening, however, what I (and probably most of you reading this) picture is actually bestiality.
The definition of bestiality is, “Sexual relations between a human being and a lower animal.”
By definition, sexual assault is “Illegal sexual contact that usually involves force upon a person without consent or is inflicted upon a person who is incapable of giving consent (as because of age or physical or mental incapacity) or who places the assailant (such as a doctor) in a position of trust or authority.”
So there’s a grey area here.
On one hand, if someone were to commit bestiality, there’s no way of knowing the animal in question’s consent. Because of this, the act could, in fact, be considered assault.
On the other hand, there’s a difference between a human having sexual relations with an animal and a human using artificial insemination (A.I.) technology for livestock breeding or milking a dairy animal — and that difference is intent.
See, the intent behind a goatherder milking a dairy goat is to provide milk for human consumption, plain and simple.
The intent behind a pig farmer breeding a hog via A.I. is to produce a healthy and powerful offspring.
The intent behind an anti-ag holding up a protest sign, like the one pictured above, is to place the image of bestiality in the minds of consumers in hopes to associate sexual assault with farmers and ranchers everywhere.
It’s all about the intent of one subject to another, in scenarios like these. And the intent of agriculturists is to create a healthy herd; the intent of anti-ags is to further their propaganda by any means necessary.
Point #2: Mother Nature
IF farmers and ranchers are breeding animals without their consent, then neither are animals who breed naturally.
Animals breed with one another, it’s a fact of nature. I trust y’all have seen the Discovery Channel where they show animals mating — it happens, it’s what they do, and they do it without consent from their “partner.”
Lots of farmers and ranchers buy male animals with the intent to breed them to their female animals. For example, my dad sells bulls to people who want said bulls’ genetics in their herd.
The buyer will purchase a bull, turn him loose in a pasture full of cows, and the bull will then breed with the cows. It’s what the bull naturally does, and it’s what the cows let him do because that’s what THEY naturally do as well.
Another level to this scenario is the aspect of EPDs. EPD stands for “expected progeny difference” and is basically a report on livestock. In cattle, EPDs will report data such as weaning weight, birth weight, docility, dry matter intake, calving ease, etc.
Ideally, ranchers pick out bulls and semen from bulls (for A.I.) that have a low birth weight and a higher value of calving ease so cows and heifers will have an easier time when giving birth — and a lot of times they pay MORE for sires with optimal EPDs such as these.
But in the wild, it doesn’t matter what the EPDs say, animals will breed with one another no matter what.
Basically, animals are going to breed whether they’re in a fenced in pasture, being A.I.-ed, or out in the wild. It’s going to happen, whether some anti-ag with a poster wants it to or not. If an agriculturist has control over the environment (such as selecting sires for “natural” breeding or by A.I.-ing an animal themselves) it’s actually much safer for the animal being bred than if they were to conceive naturally out in the middle of nowhere to some wild animal.
Point #3: The Mockery of ACTUAL Sexual Assault Victims
Anti-ags are using words such as sexual assault, sexual violence, and rape to describe ranchers and farmers who A.I., milk their livestock, and even assist in the birth of livestock (much like a midwife would).
They are calling agriculturists rapists and sexual predators, and I personally believe this is desensitizing and mocking sexual violence victims everywhere. These accusations are strong, venomous, and can put someone behind bars for decades.
By using the word “rape,” when describing the breeding and medical practices agriculturists use to keep a healthy environment around their farm or ranch, you are mocking real life, human victims of sexual assault and you should be ashamed.
It’s funny, these anti-ags want us to “treat animals like humans” but by associating sexual assault with ag practices, they’re not even treating humans like humans.
In 2015, the National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC) reported one in five women in the United States experienced completed or attempted rape during their lifetime. That same source sites nearly a quarter (24.8 percent) of men in the U.S. experienced some form of contact sexual violence in their lifetime — they are victims.
The cows in our pasture who are set to calve this spring are not included in those statistics. Neither are the pigs in the show barn at the state fair, the hens in your neighbor’s coup, nor the smiling cartoon cow you see on the side of your milk carton.
Hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens have experienced some sort of sexual violence in their lifetime. They are people; they are intellectual beings; they are non-consenting children and adults; they are victims — and anti-ags are making a mockery of these victims.
So to everyone holding up signs, posting YouTube videos, and sharing statuses comparing agricultural practices to rape: HOW DARE YOU.
How dare you use a word as powerful as “rape” to describe what agriculturists do to create a safer and healthier environment for livestock.
How dare you accuse the people who feed you of sexual assault.
How dare you mock the victims of sexual violence by desensitizing a horrific experience they had, all to further your movement.
Shame on you, apologize to ACTUAL sexual violence victims, and have some dadgum decency.
