Speculative Futures for Mindful Meat Consumption and Production

The stuff of food constantly shifts register between matter and meaning; animal and meat; calories and flavours, stretching and folding the time/spaces of here and now, ‘us’ and ‘them’, producing and consuming in complex and contested ways (Probyn, 1999 in Stassart and Whatmore, 2003, p.450). Meat consumption has entangled our human histories and lived experiences with those of other animals and humans unlike any other food. This co-evolution of experiences finds itself in deeply embedded sociocultural materials such as feasting and fasting rituals, religious dogma, gendered role divisions, ethics discourse, animal domestication, slaughter procedures, and government policies the world over (Fiddes, 2004; Pollan, 2006; Smil, 2002). Such materials have designed meat’s status as a coveted luxury, a symbol of supremacy, a delicious meal, another life, a cheap nugget, and an unnecessar indulgence; igniting impassioned debate over the ethics and procedures of killing and eating other animals for centuries (Preece, 2009; Spencer, 1996; Zaraska, 2016). Yet the draw of profit, progress, and power has moved humans over the course of history to continually develop new methods, tools, and systems to make meat’s acquisition easier at the expense of other animals, human communities, and environments (Lymbery, 2014). At long last, the far-reaching ethical and physical implications of intensively raising billions of animals for a meat-hungry and swelling human population of 7.7 billion people has brought attention for a need to challenge normative patterns of meat production and consumption (Bajželj et al., 2014; Machovina et al., 2015). A global crisis and a global opportunity; the question of contemporary meat consumption creates space to disrupt business-as-usual, and make way for more collective and participatory futures of eating and living with other humans and animals

The Constitutionality of Punitive Damages Under the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment

This Note explores whether courts should look beyond the broad language in Ingraham v. Wright and scrutinize punitive damages under the excessive fines clause. Part I sets out the intuitive argument that punitive damages are analogous to criminal fines. Part II analyzes the Supreme Court\u27s decision in Ingraham v. Wright and also reviews the few federal and state court decisions that have dealt with the excessive fines clause in civil cases, most of which have concluded that the clause has no application in a civil setting. This Part asserts that courts cannot rely solely on the Ingraham decision but must examine the history of the excessive fines clause and the penal character of punitive damages. Part III pursues the analysis that is lacking in those decisions which have relied on Ingraham. First, this Part sketches the history of the eighth amendment to determine whether the excessive fines clause should apply only to criminal fines and not civil punitive damages or whether the clause expresses a broader principle requiring proportionality in punishments of any form. Second, this Part questions whether punitive damages are sufficiently penal to implicate eighth amendment scrutiny. Part III suggests that courts apply the analysis outlined in Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez, rather than Ingraham. Finally, Part IV concludes that, since the excessive fines clause is historically linked to civil monetary penalties and since punitive damages are penal in nature, excessive awards violate the eighth amendment\u27s principle of proportionality in punishments. This Note contends that the eighth amendment, unlike other constitutional protections, functions as a restraint on the broader system of punishment rather than simply the process through which criminals are prosecuted. It argues that courts should determine whether punitive damages are sufficiently penal to warrant eighth amendment protection and not whether punitive damages are criminal or quasi-criminal sanctions

Intramural and interscholastic athletics in secondary schools of Massachusetts, enrolling 200 or fewer students

Thesis (M.A.)--Boston University, 1936. This item was digitized by the Internet Archive

In-flight calibration of the Apollo 14 500 mm Hasselblad camera

In-flight calibration of 500-mm Hasselblad camera flown on Apollo 1