Using animals after death?

[Aurora]

Originally posted this in the transitioning forum, as it’s part of my journey moving to being vegan but someone suggested it should go here.


So, here is my questions, is it ethical to use parts of animals after they have died from natural causes? As a hobby, I have collected and carved animal skulls since I was a kid. The ones I use are found specimens (only what is legal to collect), and occasionally I will buy from a supplier whose skulls are also found. No money is paid for the skulls themselves and no industry is supported by finding them. I carve them and sometimes do resin inlays etc. then sell or gift some of them. 20% of any profits go towards supporting wildlife related causes.

Obviously, by definition this isn’t vegan as skulls are an animal product. However, I can’t find an ethical dilemma with it myself, but a few of my vegan friends I’ve mentioned it to say it’s not okay.

I know there might be an ‘ick’ factor for some people but I personally don’t think using bones from naturally deceased animals is unethical. I’d be really interested to see what people think on this one? To help me make my mind up about whether to continue with it or not

 

[Vegan Dogs]

no one else has replied yet so i have a go lol..

I see nothing wrong with it so long as not the skulls and part of farm bred and killed animals...meaning if road kill.

why ? well it is bad enough that farm animals were caged exploited and killed...without adding further use of their bodies.

A wild animal killed by a car or died naturally of disease or old age is not the same abused by humans used animal.

however...here is why on balance...i am against your idea.

Trophies on walls...came to mind...and also the fact Berlin in recent years had read human dead body parts in some art exhibition...that caused the same controversy as your suggestion using non human animals for art.

So my view was and is...if the humans and non humans were not bred to be used and killed in the first place...why not ?

Some people find it offensive to not respect dead people...have their parts used or on displays...it is a touchy subject for humans let alone non human animals.

The only problem i find however is...non human animals...are seen so greatly as just "usable things" maybe this use in art is perpetuating that attitude ?

"just a cow" or "just a pig" might well be the view of people seeing their skulls etc.

Wild lions skulls ? i doubt you would afford those lol...but would you use them ? i bet...people would be furious to see you use wild lions skulls in art lol..call you a "cecil the lion hunter killer" even

Pet skulls ? would you use those ? shock pet owners with those ?

or would you just use "farm animals" ?

Because you wrote "naturally diseased animals" i do not think you mean farm animals. Well actually 20 percent of them die before they get to slaughter in fact...they end up in "pet food" so make money not a loss to the animal agriculture business...when people say...oh no animals died specifically for pet food...it is rubbish...apart from rabbits in hundreds of millions all breeds of animals are specifically bred for pet foods by many companies lol...pet food companies...and when bought from slaughter houses 30% of meat is sold for pet food...it is NOT free it is SOLD and part of the SALE and profit of killing an animal. If the 20 percent who died before reaching slaughter were not sellable...the slaughter houses would make a loss on sales of human meats lol...bad enough as it is needing subsidies from tax payers...but for SURE animals die for pet food alone...bigtime...and make big bucks to the animal agriculture business.

Does your action...improve the perception of non human animals or reduce it in importance ? i think for the majority...it reduces their importance...now if you could use HUMAN skulls in your work alongside...maybe try shocking with that to make them equal ? having made comment on that having been done in a Berlin museum worth reflecting on.

Anyway...i have replied.

 

[thinman]

is it ethical to use parts of humans after they have died from natural causes? As a hobby, obviously no.

 

[Vegan Dogs]

is it ethical to use parts of humans after they have died from natural causes? As a hobby, obviously no.

well that is interesting...and why the Berlin art exhibition a few years back caused controversy.

You do not object to them being in museums...the mummies...the prehistoric skeletons...archaeological finds...but if a "hobby" you think it is unethical.

Interesting. Why ? is this on some religious grounds ? the persons are dead so no longer sentient and able to be offended.

I thought...so long as they were not abused in life and killed for food sport or hobby or scientific research...why not ? natural death...just bones in the ground now.

Elephants gather round dead members of their herd a while...and return to the skeletons if there in years ahead i have seen and read...showing some regard recognition of the persons those bones were. So animals do recognise bones as dead animals maybe like that.

i am not sure i find the human attitude towards dead bodies and bones logical or even emotionally or morally objectionable to me personally to have bones of dead people discarded. I see graves and notices flowers on them as communications about the dead person...whether the bones are there or not is largely irrelevant imho

anyway.
just saying

 

[Lou]

IMHO, it is not unethical " to use parts of animals after they have died from natural causes".

One of the keywords in the definition of vegan is the word "exploitation". And I don't see how your practice is exploitation.

I agree with "there might be an ‘ick’ factor for some people". But whatever floats your boat.

My imagination sends me to some kind of Temple of Doom or witchdoctor kind of ornament.
But come to think of it, I used to own pipes made from antler. And I've seen some cool antler knife handles as well.

I, for one, would be interested in seeing what you are doing with skulls. If you don't mind, can you post some pics.

 

[Brian W]

I have no problem with it myself. You just have to question, "who or what is being hurt or harmed by me using the skulls?" If the answer is "nobody and nothing" then why worry?

 

[Danielle]

No animal might suffer but it still gives out the idea that it’s ok to use animals, a vegan would rather avoid using an animal at all.

 

[Sproutskies]

Comment from original post:

It seems like you have an interest in something that is not causing suffering to any living being or animal. Some may argue that disturbing or using the remains for your own use could be seen by some as a form of disrespect. Sometimes this would be tied to someone's religious belief of finding cows, .. etc, sacred. Also profiting off of the remains of a once sacred thing sounds like it is in a vast grey area. If it was more of a memorabilia towards remembering the life.. not tied to financial gain, then it would have a much better vibe to the whole thing.

Personally I have no issue with using skulls for art if you acquired them from credible and ethical sources (unrelated to suffering). When I'm gone.. there would be no moral dilemma, in my mind, for someone turning my long-gone bones into a work of art.

 

[silva]

I think whenever you consider if something is ethical you need to look at the larger picture, beyond your small part.
People have asked about collecting shells that have naturally washed up on the shore. One person doing that doesn't make a dent, but when that "hobby" catches on it can deciate the sands, and cause much harm to many species.
It's the same with anything. Your "hobby" doesn't by itself cause harm, but does show a disregard for the animals lives. Can you see yourself finding a dead human and cutting off a tatoo you really liked? Or if you worked in a mortuary, what would your feelings be of taking random parts?
Of course you can't do that with humans. You can't legally do much of anything that are accepted when done to animals. Think about why that is.

Years ago I read about a tribal people that would collect civet cat droppings as a delicacy. The cats would eat coffee beans and they would be found in their poo, supposedly made a great cup. Tourists eventually came around and would pay them for these beans, and that money helped their community. So far no one was harmed. Word of course caught on and as with so many innocent things, turned into greed and abuse. Now these cats get trapped and caged and fed coffee beans so no one need bother to work for pay to collect it- it can easily be "owned" and the profits all go to the slave owners

I would feel a bit differently if your hobby was simply something you kept to yourself, I can't be okay with it as gifts or sales

 

[Lou]

I had heard of coffee poop. but I had not heard about the trapping of the cats.

We all know about good ideas that go wrong. This might be an example of a bad idea that went wronger.

I really don't foresee ornaments made of animal skulls catching on and causing an issue. I also don't foresee sea shell collectors destroying beaches. But then I did not see the coffee poop fad causing problems.

Now, I don't want to derail this thread. (I think its sort of interesting.) But....
Years ago I read an article by Dave Barry about coffee poop. and I think it is the funniest article... EVER.

So here it is. Hope you guys can enjoy it. But not over a cup of poopachino.

Dave Barry Official Website

 

[silva]

Top coffee's animal cruelty secrets

Animal cruelty during the production of one of the world's priciest coffees is exposed by a BBC investigation.

www.bbc.com

.

Beach Tourists Who Collect Shells May Be Harming the Environment

At one beach in Spain, increasing numbers of tourists have caused a 60 percent decline in shell abundance, potentially disrupting the aquatic ecosystem

www.smithsonianmag.com

Anyway, @Aurora , I tend to get heavy when I've had a hard day at work. Honestly I have no issue with what you do, and I'm pretty sure (unless you display your art on social media or etsy!) that you're not inducting some trend. It's just something to thing about

I thought better about my comment after eating a bag of popcorn I just got from Aldi that's vegan, no BHT, BUT has palm oil. It's something I limit but completely. Felt pretty hypocritical

 

[Aurora]

is it ethical to use parts of humans after they have died from natural causes? As a hobby, obviously no.

Well, I personally don’t think that’s so cut and dried. For me, I actually don’t see an ethical problem with it. Human remains are different from animal remains in the fact that we have burial processes though. Non-human animals don’t have those habits.

Our family members and loved ones perform rituals with our remains, many of which are seen as sacred or have important religious and cultural factors, so human remains are a much more complicated issue. Would I carve human remains if it were legal and I was granted permission? Absolutely!! I would love to.

I find the western traditions of hiding death away to not gel with me as a person. I would love my bones to be displayed. Again though, humans can express their wishes for what they want after death, which further complicates human remains.

I don’t think there is anything fundamentally unethical with using human remains for art though

 

[Aurora]

Top coffee's animal cruelty secrets

Animal cruelty during the production of one of the world's priciest coffees is exposed by a BBC investigation.

www.bbc.com

.

Beach Tourists Who Collect Shells May Be Harming the Environment

At one beach in Spain, increasing numbers of tourists have caused a 60 percent decline in shell abundance, potentially disrupting the aquatic ecosystem

www.smithsonianmag.com

Anyway, @Aurora , I tend to get heavy when I've had a hard day at work. Honestly I have no issue with what you do, and I'm pretty sure (unless you display your art on social media or etsy!) that you're not inducting some trend. It's just something to thing about

I thought better about my comment after eating a bag of popcorn I just got from Aldi that's vegan, no BHT, BUT has palm oil. It's something I limit but completely. Felt pretty hypocritical

Don’t worry! I didn’t find your original reply abrasive at all. You made some good points too!

While it isn’t causing any harm to a living being, it does maybe support the idea that animals are to be “used”. I much prefer my work to be thought of as a tribute to the animal and I include a card on the species etc. but I agree that overall, how I feel might not be the message that others take from my work.

I replied about what I thought in regards to humans above. I’m from Australia and we actually have super strict rules in place to stop hobbies becoming problematic. For example, to collect skulls you need a permit and even then native animal remains cannot be collected. I fully understand about your big picture idea though!

When I start to think really big picture, a lot of the dyes used in the clothes we buy are manufactured in industrial areas where runoff causes mass fish kills. The parts mined for an IPhone cause massive harm to animals and environment.

The Life of an iPhone

This story map will show you the life of an iPhone, from the extraction of the minerals to when it dies (image source: MacRumors)

storymaps.arcgis.com

Same with the palm oil as you point out!

When I start to think really big picture my head spins. Almost nothing is vegan if you trace it’s production back to the very beginning. Off topic!! But that blows my brain in the worst way

 

[Aurora]

No animal might suffer but it still gives out the idea that it’s ok to use animals, a vegan would rather avoid using an animal at all.

Yeah, this is my biggest stumbling block about it. While my intention is to pay homage to an animal, many people probably see it as just an art piece and maybe it does promote the idea that animals can be “used”. And while I don’t see a problem with parts of naturally deceased animals being used, I wouldn’t want that idea to seep over into living animals. Gah! It’s such a hard one.

 

[Aurora]

IMHO, it is not unethical " to use parts of animals after they have died from natural causes".

One of the keywords in the definition of vegan is the word "exploitation". And I don't see how your practice is exploitation.

I agree with "there might be an ‘ick’ factor for some people". But whatever floats your boat.

My imagination sends me to some kind of Temple of Doom or witchdoctor kind of ornament.
But come to think of it, I used to own pipes made from antler. And I've seen some cool antler knife handles as well.

I, for one, would be interested in seeing what you are doing with skulls. If you don't mind, can you post some pics.

Pictures of my work are on my home computer, so I’ll try and post some later! I do a lot of deer skulls (they are not a native animal here) but you can find a lot that have naturally passed. So, often I will carve a silhouette of a deer looking up at the moon or something on the forehead of the skull. To show how the animal was in life. I then do lots of patterns around it.

Yes! Antler products are really cool. They come from naturally shedded antlers too. So, not even a dead animal. The buck literally just leaves it’s antlers on the ground to be found.

 

[beforewisdom]

Aurora,

You may not find any ethical issues with it, but I would bet the money in my checking account that most vegans will give you the cold shoulder over it.

If you come to consider joining a vegan community you might want to wait a while before revealing your hobby.

 

[Brian W]

Yeah, this is my biggest stumbling block about it. While my intention is to pay homage to an animal, many people probably see it as just an art piece and maybe it does promote the idea that animals can be “used”. And while I don’t see a problem with parts of naturally deceased animals being used, I wouldn’t want that idea to seep over into living animals. Gah! It’s such a hard one.

It's perhaps something of a grey area. You have to decide for yourself how responsible you want to be for other people's excuses not to care. At the end of the day, a line has to be drawn for the sake of your own sanity. Those who don't want to care will find an excuse whatever you do or don't do. Anybody who believes that it is not vegan to approve of such is essentially accusing me and many others of not being vegan. It's a grey area and therefore it is your choice. You yourself are not responsible for harming animals. Be vegan but be yourself.

 

[Forest Nymph]

I don't personally see a problem with it, its one way to teach environmental science or zoology to children or even to adults in mainstream natural history museums. For example it was clarified to me that the skeletons and skulls in my local natural history museum where I did my internship were all definitely natural causes cases, donations or replicas. Except for the oldest taxidermy items from the early 20th century, which they could not vouch for, but it was a different time, those are items of historical value, and they don't allow anyone to touch them because old-school taxidermy used arsenic or something horrible and it can contaminate your hands.

There are even tribal people who mostly believe in using "found" animal items or even naturally downed trees. Like they wouldn't just cut down a tree like a modern person would, they considered even that an unnecessary loss of life. That's also why they did things like fishing sustainably or using every single inch of the animal, and thanking them in some kind of honorary ceremony. I am not saying that all tribes were like this. There are common myths that go to both extremes: that tribal people were mostly violent psychopaths who killed indiscriminately and ate meat similar to lions or something (hilariously inaccurate) or that they were all these peace and love earth loving animal worshipers. The truth is that tribal behaviors were varied, some patriarchal, some matriarchal, some very keen in honoring life to the point of being vegetarian or pescatarian, some war-like and hunting more mammals.

That's probably a longer answer than you expected, but like most things to do with generalized issues like this I think the answers are complex, and I like to find common identifiers with people who have similar ethics to vegans who are vegetarian or pescatarian, as I find this more practical, realistic and less zealous than categorizing all non-vegans as animal murderers.

 

[Forest Nymph]

I think whenever you consider if something is ethical you need to look at the larger picture, beyond your small part.
People have asked about collecting shells that have naturally washed up on the shore. One person doing that doesn't make a dent, but when that "hobby" catches on it can deciate the sands, and cause much harm to many species.
It's the same with anything. Your "hobby" doesn't by itself cause harm, but does show a disregard for the animals lives. Can you see yourself finding a dead human and cutting off a tatoo you really liked? Or if you worked in a mortuary, what would your feelings be of taking random parts?
Of course you can't do that with humans. You can't legally do much of anything that are accepted when done to animals. Think about why that is.

Years ago I read about a tribal people that would collect civet cat droppings as a delicacy. The cats would eat coffee beans and they would be found in their poo, supposedly made a great cup. Tourists eventually came around and would pay them for these beans, and that money helped their community. So far no one was harmed. Word of course caught on and as with so many innocent things, turned into greed and abuse. Now these cats get trapped and caged and fed coffee beans so no one need bother to work for pay to collect it- it can easily be "owned" and the profits all go to the slave owners

I would feel a bit differently if your hobby was simply something you kept to yourself, I can't be okay with it as gifts or sales

I agree with you on the environmental impact of shells but I think it's inaccurate to compare animal bones to cutting off the tattoo of a rotting human corpse. There actually are religious people, as well as horror types and medical schools, that collect human bones for medical purposes, education, etc. You'd really hate Catholic relics or the Hollywood Museum of Death.

 

[Ahimsa]

Originally posted this in the transitioning forum, as it’s part of my journey moving to being vegan but someone suggested it should go here.


So, here is my questions, is it ethical to use parts of animals after they have died from natural causes? As a hobby, I have collected and carved animal skulls since I was a kid. The ones I use are found specimens (only what is legal to collect), and occasionally I will buy from a supplier whose skulls are also found. No money is paid for the skulls themselves and no industry is supported by finding them. I carve them and sometimes do resin inlays etc. then sell or gift some of them. 20% of any profits go towards supporting wildlife related causes.

Obviously, by definition this isn’t vegan as skulls are an animal product. However, I can’t find an ethical dilemma with it myself, but a few of my vegan friends I’ve mentioned it to say it’s not okay.

I know there might be an ‘ick’ factor for some people but I personally don’t think using bones from naturally deceased animals is unethical. I’d be really interested to see what people think on this one? To help me make my mind up about whether to continue with it or not

Interesting post Aurora! Personally, I would say that the ethical dilemma lies in the question: would it be okay to do what you do to the remains of human beings? Most people would say not, for one reason or another. In which case, it would be speciesist to do things to the bodies of some creatures and not others, i.e. humans.