1/2 - Whether one is a mink exploited for its fur or a chicken fattened for its flesh, the life of animals in industrial breeding farms is by no means a luxury existence. Following the launch, last June, of the campaign “Poule de luxe, sérieusement?” (“Luxury hen, seriously?”, a “poule de luxe” referring in French to a prostitute with expensive tastes), Michel Vandenbosch, the president of the Belgian animal defense association Gaia, tells more to Le Boudoir Numérique about its fight for their right to live with dignity and without sufferings.

By Ludmilla Intravaia

Le Boudoir Numérique: On June 24, you launched the “Poule de luxe, sérieusement?” campaign (see the video below). What are you denouncing in this campaign?

Michel Vandenbosch, President of Gaia: This campaign aims to shed light on the shameful conditions in which broilers live, crowded by tens of thousands, in dark and unsanitary housing, in the majority of the intensive breeding farms where they are fattened. These fast growing chickens, genetically selected to produce as much meat as possible, will reach slaughter weight in just 6 weeks. From a small chick of a few hundred grams, they will grow to weigh more than 2 kilos. From the 3rd week, their situation becomes catastrophic. The lack of space does not allow them to move around, especially since their weight becomes too heavy to carry. Their paws cannot support their obese body. Chickens limp, suffer from joint pain. Fluid surrounds their organs, heart, lungs, making it impossible to breathe. The closer they get to the end of the fattening period, the more these chickens experience extreme discomfort.

So, nothing to compare with a luxury situation...

Exactly. We can hardly say that these animals live a luxury existence, when we know the conditions under which they are bred. The idea for our campaign was to point out this antinomic association between “poule” ("hen", AN) and “luxe” ("luxury", AN) so that people become aware of this problem, by a symbolic nod to this expression of our language. We even sent letters to the French Academy asking it to either remove the term “poule de luxe” from the dictionary, or add an explanatory note about the problem with this expression. The French Academy responded by arguing that as long as people use this expression, it should not be deleted from the dictionary. The fact that the Academy didn't want to add an explanatory note either shows how much it just doesn’t want things to change. For our part, we are satisfied to have been able to create a discussion on the subject, by making the public reflect on this social debate. The next step is to make the political world aware, in order to take the necessary measures to change the situation. At the same time, we are working with supermarkets and chicken meat producers to change their minds too.

Le prix réel de votre filet de poulet (version 6') from GAIA TV on Vimeo.

Do you think that our language conveys symbolic violence inflicted on animals that perpetuates their exploitation by humans? In other words, are we harming animals by using expressions like "birdhead" or a "dog's life", for example?

Harming animals, concretely, no. But indirectly, yes. Because this type of expression reflects this mentality which tends to reduce the animal to an object, while denying the reality of its nature, namely that it is an active subject. The use of certain terms that demean animals can reinforce the idea that they are meant to be exploited. PETA in the United States has campaigned on this specific issue (see here). I don't think Gaia will go that far, even though our “Poule de luxe, sérieusement?” campaign fits into this context of language. Still, whatever our campaigns (see here), we try to be creative, using different communication approaches to arouse people's curiosity and convince them to take action for animals.

As we have spoken about the expression “poule de luxe”, luxury, and fashion more generally, are economic sectors which use a lot of animal-based products, such as feathers, leather, fur, silk, etc. What actions do you take to make people understand the suffering of animals organized by fashion and luxury?

In Belgium, people have understood. Even the political world has understood. I have been fighting against fur farming since 1987. I collaborated in the creation of the first anti-fur association in Belgium and it was only almost 30 years later that we succeeded in passing the legislation which puts an end to the breeding of animals for their fur, in the 3 regions of Belgium. Gaia's first demand, since its creation, has been that animal welfare be withdrawn, at the federal level, from the hands of the Minister of Agriculture because we understood that he was always going to put forward the interests of agriculture and breeding farms, before those of animals. Thanks to our efforts, in 1999, the Minister of Public Health became responsible for animal welfare. But that was not enough because we wanted animal welfare to become the competence of a specially dedicated minister. We had to wait until the 2014 elections, when animal welfare was regionalized, each region, Brussels, Walloon and Flemish, now having its own minister for animal welfare. From that moment on, a new dynamic took hold which allowed us to make the public and the political world understand that making animals suffer for fashion was not worth it and that breeding animals for their fur no longer had its place in our society for ethical reasons.

What happened?

The Walloon region was the first to decide to ban fur farming, in 2015. The Brussels region followed (in 2017, AN). The Brussels and Walloon regions did not have any breeding farms, but Wallonia was nevertheless entertaining plans to establish mink farms on its territory. Thanks to our fierce struggle, we convinced the authorities not to issue permits for these activities. Thus, the dynamic of regionalization has pushed the regions to take similar prohibition decisions, the most recent being that of Flanders which, by 2023, will have closed its 18 animal farms that are still active (17 farms of fur animals and a producer of foie gras, by December 1, 2023, AN). At that point, we will be abble to say that there is no longer any breeding of animals for their fur in Belgium.

Alter-leathers based on food waste, biofabrication of mushroom mycelium or artificial spider silk ... Many innovative materials have been developed in recent years, as alternatives to animal-based products used in fashion and luxury. What do you think of these new materials to help end animal exploitation, in fashion and luxury?

As far as I am concerned, I do not wear leather. My shoes, for example, are made from recycled vegan materials. As the quality of innovative materials, such as alternatives to leather or fur, increases, people realize that it is quite possible to meet their clothing needs, without making animals suffer. In this sense, innovative fashion, and more broadly innovative technology, help to change mentalities about animals. It is innovative technology, as well as science and empathy, that will accelerate this transformation of values, so that animals are no longer seen as commodities but as sentient beings in their own right.

* Read the second and last part of Michel Vandenbosch’s interview, in this Boudoir Numérique article : "Let's think about ways of consuming that reflect more empathy towards animals".

* Discover the campaign “Poule de luxe, sérieusement ?” here.

* More info on Gaia on the website of the Belgian association for animal defense, here.