On Lucky Girls and Unlucky Goats

Today’s "The Luckiest Girl," by The New York Times’ Nicholas D. Kristof, underscored the profound shift that will be required in the consciousness of humans before sentient nonhumans will stand a chance of liberation.

Let’s deconstruct:

• Beatrice Biira, a college graduate born to a poor peasant family in western Uganda, credits her success to, as Kristof says, "something utterly improbably: a goat." Some . . . thing.
• Children from a church in Connecticut wanted to donate money to a good cause, so they bought goats through Heifer International, the nonprofit with a mission that I find utterly horrifying. It’s a slave trade organization, and I’m forever surprised that more people don’t see it that way. (Here’s one of several Animal Person commentaries that mention it, with links to others by Eric and Colleen in the comments.)
• "One of the goats bought . . . went to Beatrice’s parents and soon produced twins." By herself? I didn’t know that could happen. I shudder to think what was done to impregnate her, and by whom.
• The profits from the sale of the milk taken from the goat, who was ironically named Luck, was used to send Beatrice to school. A book about the gift of a slave goat to a little girl became a children’s best seller.
• A group of donors to Heifer International helped finance Beatrice’s years in college.

Here’s a question: What amounted to petty cash from the milk taken from Luck sent Beatrice to school. Doesn’t it seem rather odd to breed a sentient slave, ship her miles, during which time she could die or be seriously injured ("In short, millions of things could go wrong" writes Kristof), to further degrade and disrespect her (and that’s when things are going right), only to kill her (do you think she’ll live out her life in peace and freedom once she’s spent?), when the children at the Connecticut church could have saved Beatrice and her family lots of time–(to say nothing of unlucky Luck, as it’s clear the children weren’t thinking about her)–by paying for Beatrice’s education in the first place? Heifer International wouldn’t have benefited, but everyone else would have.

• Finally, Kristof writes: "But Beatrice’s giddy happiness these days is still a reminder that each of us does have the power to make a difference — to transform a girl’s life with something as simple and cheap as a little goat." Each of us does have the power to make a difference. Each of us can choose to not exploit sentient nonhumans and not participate in the nonhuman slave trade. Each of us can choose to admit that goats aren’t simple and cheap little things to be used, profited from and discarded.

Provide the readers of the NYT and Kristof an alternate way of looking at this situation: from the point of view of Luck, maybe. Send your thoughts to letters@nytimes.com or add them to Kristof’s blog, which currently has 32 comments, none of which are at all against the purchase of sentient nonhumans as slaves.

We have a long way to go when children thought this was a good idea, the commenters "shed tears" (#16) because the story was allegedly so heartwarming, and there is no hint of dismay about Luck’s lot in life, or the system and a consciousness that has a place for an organization like Heifer International.