“Sociologist Professor E. Melanie Dupuis has studied the historical links between milk-drinking and manifestations of white supremacy in society,” George Washington University Law School Legal Writing Professor Iselin Gambert writes in a new research paper of the supposedly nefarious consequences of milk-drinking on American society.
According to Gambert, milk is a “symbol and tool” of “white dominance and superiority.”
Milk is one of the most ubiquitous and heavily regulated substances on the planet – and perhaps one of the most contested. It is tied closely to notions of purity, health, and femininity, and is seen as so central to human civilization that our own galaxy – the Milky Way – is named after it. But despite its wholesome reputation, milk has long had a sinister side, being bound up with the exploitation of the (human and nonhuman) bodies it comes from and being a symbol of and tool for white dominance and superiority. The word itself, in verb form, means “to exploit.” It is also a word at the center of a decades-old, multinational battle taking place in courthouses, the halls of congress, on social media, and in the streets.
The crux of arguably the dumbest research paper that Breitbart News has covered is Gambert’s argument in favor of a widespread adoption of “mylk,” a plant milk replacement that she argues has the potential to cure society’s issues with bigotry and exploitation of animals.
The paper dedicates a significant amount of its whopping 75 pages to attempting to make a connection between the consumption of milk and bigotry against women and minorities. In another section of the paper entitled “Milk and patriarchy,” Gambert argues that the consumption of milk is directly related to the oppression of women. “A number of scholars have written about Western patriarchal society’s consumption of and relationship to milk as being “rooted in gender stereotypes, inequalities, and injustices,” she writes.
In another portion of the paper, Gambert suggests that the exploitation of cows by dairy farmers directly leads to the exploitation of women.
“Speak to your cow as you would a lady.” So went a popular motto among Wisconsin dairy farmers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. While seemingly benign at first glance, this motto is revealing for the ways in which the male-dominated dairy industry viewed both cows and human women: as fragile creatures requiring a particular way of being spoken to.
A study released August 22 of 2018 argues that drinking milk in the morning can help the body manage blood glucose. Despite academics raving against milk, scientists continue to back up its place in a healthy diet.
Date Written: March 2018
Posted: 22 Aug 2018
Abstract
Milk is one of the most ubiquitous and heavily regulated substances on the planet – and perhaps one of the most contested. It is tied closely to notions of purity, health, and femininity, and is seen as so central to human civilization that our own galaxy – the Milky Way – is named after it. But despite its wholesome reputation, milk has long had a sinister side, being bound up with the exploitation of the (human and nonhuman) bodies it comes from and being a symbol of and tool for white dominance and superiority. The word itself, in verb form, means “to exploit.” It is also a word at the center of a decades-old, multinational battle taking place in courthouses, the halls of congress, on social media, and in the streets. This article explores the contradictions inherent in the substance as well as the word “milk” and examines the legal, political, cultural, and linguistic forces behind the “milk wars” between dairy milk and plant milk advocates in both Europe and the United States. It examines the US-based battle over the word “milk” through the lens of letters and citizen petitions to the FDA, class action lawsuits, and a 2017 bill called the DAIRY PRIDE Act, as well as the EU-based battle through the lens of EU regulations, a 2017 decision by the European Court of Justice, and a 2014 lawsuit filed by Sweden’s dairy lobby against small-scale oat milk producer Oatly. This article argues that while plant milk should not be legally prohibited from being called “milk,” it may not be a word worth fighting for given the entanglements of milk with the oppression and exploitation of women, people of color, and nonhuman animals. It explores plant milk’s potential as a “disruptive milk,” one that can break free from the exploitation and oppression long bound up in dairy milk, and argues that an act of verbal activism – replacing the “i” with a “y” to create “mylk” – may present plant milk advocates with an opportunity to reclaim and reinvent the word for the “post milk generation.”
