PETA: a good cause, or an organization that goes too far?
I’m not a full-time vegan or vegetarian, but I dabble with both of those health philosophies from time to time. The reasons why I like to occasionally go vegan or vegetarian are numerous, and one of them is for the treatment of animals.
Horrible things happen to animals who are raised inhumanely. Chickens that can’t move an inch and never see the light of day are one of the most common images available to the public. Watch any documentary – Food, Inc., anyone? – and you will see just how truly awful it gets. It’s a terrible way to treat any living creature.
That’s why it’s good when organizations are created to protest again the maltreatment of animals. But I can’t get on the same side as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).
PETA, in my opinion, takes it just a little bit too far. They are well-known for having controversial advertisements, such as this one:
…and this one:
…and this one:
Many of PETA’s ad campaigns are related to sexuality, violence, discrimination against how people look, and dominance over women. We studied their practices in one of my rhetoric classes, and one article in particular really stood out for me. It essentially argued that PETA goes to such extreme lengths because the organization wants to illustrate that if it is wrong to exploit women in the way that women are exploited in their ads, then it is also wrong to exploit animals.
I thought that was a decent argument. Although it didn’t shift my position in disagreeing with the way PETA goes about doing things, I felt some measure of respect that they were making such an excellent use of rhetoric: show people how wrong it is to treat women and animals the way they are treated, and the people will (hopefully) react accordingly.
But then I came across a number of articles recently, in light of the news that PETA is launching a porn site. Porn site aside (although that certainly made me shake my head), I was rather shocked at this statement from one article, made by PETA spokesperson Lindsay Rajt:
We live in a 24 hour news cycle world, and we learn the racy things we do are sometimes the most effective way that we can reach particular individuals.
What?! The way PETA does things really is just to “reach certain individuals”? It all comes down to simply being racy? There isn’t some excellent explanation based around the rhetoric of women-as-animals? (And besides all that, what is a spokesperson doing making a statement like this?).
PETA has had some wonderful victories in saving animals. The rhetorician in me also applauds them for their tactics in commanding attention. But I don’t think all of their techniques are appropriate, and I don’t think it is right to exploit women in such a way as they do in their campaigns (especially if they aren’t even doing it to make a point!). I am also concerned that A) some of their technique might turn people off of the idea of fighting for animal rights because people might not want to be associated with such a radical organization, and B) people might be too distracted by the sexuality of PETA’s campaigns to think about the importance of animal rights at all.
How do you feel about PETA? Do you think they’re doing the right thing with their type of campaigning? What are your thoughts on their new porn site (which is reputed to be very graphic)? Am I just being overly-sensitive about the exploitation in their campaigns? Do you think PETA could have made the same victories if they had used a different campaign strategy?
Oh, PETA. How I shake my head at your tactics and your occasional idiotic causes!
It’s hard to take them seriously at times.
A porn site?? Really??
Sheesh.
It’s impossible for me to write a comment that isn’t going to be terribly nasty, so I won’t say anything more!
Am in agreement with your sheesh!
while I enjoy porn quite a bit…PETA has always taken things just a bit too far. After seeing Food Inc. I am of the firm belief we can treat animals ethically and sensibly while still using them as a food source.
Porn? Really? This is pretty surprising to me.
I’ve always believed in PETA and I know they do a lot for shock value which is usually okay with me as it gets them attention but I don’t know about this one…
I’m not a vegetarian but I want animals to have a good life and be treated humanely by people so I do my part by shopping carefully and growing what I can. I’m just an average person and I would not want to be associated with PETA and the assumptions that could be made based on their more radical acts.
I don’t agree with their porn site idea. However, I do think that their radical techniques have a point. Sometimes you have to grab people and make them see the horrors of animal treatment instead of just telling them. If they go “too far” and people meet them halfway, that is a victory. I am a mostly vegan, sometimes vegetarian. Mine started just because I have never enjoyed the taste or feeling of meat. Then, when I learned of the abuses that our food animals go through, that just solidified it in my mind. The argument of “but that is what they are raised for” is not valid. That does not mean they don’t have feelings just like a petting zoo pig or cow. Why should a living, breathing, sentient being live a miserable life and die just so I can have a hamburger?
By the way, 2 other videos to watch if you can stomach them are “meet your meat” and “farm to fridge”
A couple of more reasons to at least cut out meat from a diet for the socially conscious is that raising cattle and other food animals takes away valuable food for starving people, and the pollution that their waste causes is horrible.
….sorry for the rant…. I am truly not a radical, just love expressing my opinion. I don’t mind when family and friends eat meat, it is a personal decision. I just like it when people are fully informed.
As many organizations and even countries, PETA has lost its way! My views on the ethical treatment of animals and people remain unchanged and I do not need to ignore a good message despite a twisted messenger.
PETA is ridiculous. Their means will, in the end, justify only their means. Their message gets lost. I never click on their offensive ads.
I don’t agree with either the ads, the porn site, OR their rationale behind them. They want us all to take the responsible path and not eat meat….then why can’t they take the high ground, too, and be the advertiser that stops beating the “sex sells” mindset?
For example, the ads exploiting women would have been just as effective had they shown your dog or cat with the butcher cuts labeled on them. Point being – you wouldn’t chop up Fluffy or Fido for food so why do it to a pig or a cow. Same point – but no exploitation/discrimination against people.