Is PETA racist? New campaign compares slaughterhouses to slavery.

[BurtWorm]

After apologizing earlier this year for comparing their cause to the Holocaust, PETA is touring an exhibition that is provoking outrage among African-Americans who say the animal rights organization is exploiting another holocaust. No apology from PETA seems forthcoming.


http://www.tolerance.org/news/article_tol.jsp?id=1266


PETA's traveling "Slavery" display, which began a 10-week, 42-city national tour last month, supposedly aims to foster public sympathy for the plight of animals.

But in some places, public outcry over the campaign, which directly compares the enslavement and lynching of blacks to the harsh treatment of farm animals overshadows any such aim.

A showing of the exhibit this week in New Haven, Conn., for example, fueled a protest so heated police were called to monitor the situation.

"I am a black man! I can't compare the suffering of these black human beings to the suffering of this cow," protester Michael Perkins was quoted by the New Haven Register.


...





Ingrid Newkirk's (Pres of PETA's) response:

http://www.ingridnewkirk.com/archives/2005/08/we_are_all_anim.html


We Are All Animals, So Get Over It


"How dare you compare my ancestors' subjugation to the subjugation of cows prodded down the slaughter line to their deaths?!" I can, because it is right to do so and wrong to reject the concept. Please open your heart and your mind and do not take such offense.


Generally speaking, mustn't rhinos think that rhino suffering is more important than vervet monkey suffering and vervet monkeys think that their suffering is more important than songbird suffering? I'd imagine so, for a monkey mother who must choose between rescuing her own baby or a squirrel baby from drowning would surely pluck the monkey baby from the water? Just so, humans who define themselves by religion or culture or nationality or skin color think that their suffering can never be compared, no matter how factually, with any other human or animal's suffering. To do so makes them feel belittled, reduced. But perhaps that's just our primitive biology crying out to protect and save our own kind, the more narrowly defined the better, and the rest be damned. I reject that. Or I try to. Only supremacism makes us think that "our kind," our narrow view of ourselves as Protestants, Muslims, white, black, a woman, a man, a human being, is more important than the rest. But a broader definition of ourselves is simply that we are all animals. Our indignation at injustice to fellow whatever we are should go further-to indignation at injustice to anyone. Otherwise, what are we, but selfish little supremacists.

[jobycom]

1. I thought I read that they had "rethought" that campaign?

[BurtWorm]

5. Not if Ingrid Newkirk's blog reflects current policy

(See the bottom half of my OP for her response. I added it after you posted this, I think.)

[jobycom]

13. Hmmm. Sad. I had read a headline somewhere, and thought they were

softening up. It gave me hope. Now the hope is gone.

[yewberry]

23. You did.

www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5208016,00.html

[jobycom]

26. Thanks. Hopefully they'll do the right thing. Although, this cheat/retreat

tactic is getting old. They blast out the most inhuman garbage to get attention, then coyly mutter "We're sorry," then do it again a few months later.

I keep wanting to like PETA, but until they stop this, they are the enemy to me. The enemy of humans, and of animals. They could do three times the good by respecting the people they were trying to win over.

[China_cat]

25. That was the 'holocaust' campaign they rethought.

And replaced with this one.

That is NOT going over well here in SC.

[formerrepuke]

2. Sounds like PETA needs to chill: animal 'suffering' as they define

it is neither slavery nor a holocaust. Using that kind of terminology does not advance their cause; rather, it further establishes them in the minds of non-activists as extremist kooks (which recalls a recent letter to the editor in my area -no link- which protested KFC cruelty and asserted that chickens are 'loving, intelligent beings'...'nuff said).

[Ian David]

19. If chickens are loving, intelligent beings, then don't let Santorum know

Not only will he claim gay people want to marry chickens, he'll also take broken eggs home from the supermarket so his children can cuddle with them.

[H5N1]

3. No, PETA is intense about their love of animals

PETA does a lot of good.

[jobycom]

8. Except human animals

[BurtWorm]

12. Some of their points are well taken.

What is a bit hard to take is their retooling of the Holocaust on a plate campaign that they withdrew, apparently admitting that their comparison was offensive. If that was, why isn't this one? If it's legitimate for PETA to make this comparison, is it legitimate for anti-choice groups to make the same comparisons?

[Ian David]

17. Sometimes it seems like PeTA is run by a bunch of college interns

They seem to do the sorts of things a college freshman would do to "stand out from the crowd" and "create dialog."

Well-intentioned but trying to be shocking for the sake of being shocking and ending up going way overboard sometimes.

Either that, or they're protein deprived.

In any case, they still do a lot of good, especially where they reach compromises with companies like Petco.

PETA and PETCO Announce Agreement
http://www.helpinganimals.com

[K-W]

4. Difficult for anyone to relate to, yes, insensitive, yes, racist, no. EOM

[jobycom]

9. That may be true. They are jackasses to all humans.

[Beaverhausen]

27. What the heck does that mean?

care to elaborate?

[jobycom]

32. It means

they have no respect for humanity. As I said above, I agree with their attitude towards animals. It's there attitudes towards humans I despise them for.

[Beaverhausen]

33. They respect all living things.

[jobycom]

37. So mocking Jesse Arbogast while his parents were waiting to see if

he lived or died was respecting Jesse and his parents? Mocking slavery and the Holocaust is respecting humans? Telling African Americans that their pain and offense weren't legitimate because PETA knew better than them what should offend them is respecting humans?

If their mockery of Jesse Arbogast was respect, then Bush respects Cindy Sheehan.

[JackieO]

38. They are not mocking slavery, just the opposite.

If it offends people so greatly to be compared to other sentient beings who feel pain and suffer just as humans do... well, I think they are getting right to the heart of the matter.

[BurtWorm]

40. If it offends some people more than others--say, African Americans

more than European Americans--is it aimed more at African Americans? Or is it aimed at people who agree with PETA and can see, as you do, into the heart of the matter?

[JackieO]

43. It's comparing treatment of humans to the treatment of animals.

I've only seen the online exhibit.

Here it is: http://www.peta.org/AnimalLiberation

[jobycom]

44. Wow.

Here are the words of the president of PETA to a black person who felt offended by the exhibit: ""How dare you compare my ancestors' subjugation to the subjugation of cows prodded down the slaughter line to their deaths?!" I can, because it is right to do so and wrong to reject the concept. Please open your heart and your mind and do not take such offense."

Anyone who tries to tell a person they have no right to be offended does not respect that person as a human being, a sentient being, or an equal in any way. That letter drips condescnesion and scorn, exactly the way Bush does to Cindy Sheehan.

[JackieO]

46. You're putting words in her mouth.

She doesn't say they have no right to feel offended. She asks that they open their heart and mind. Read what you quoted.

[jobycom]

59. "I can, because it is right to do so and wrong to reject the concept."

I read it, you read it now.

[JackieO]

61. She is correct.

Deal with it.

[Beaverhausen]

41. They aren't mocking slavery or the holocaust

nor are they saying their pain wasn't legitimate.

I look at the living conditions of animals in factory farms and slaughterhouses and I see intense pain and suffering.

That doesn't mean I think that slaves or those imprisoned or killed in the holocaust were not also subject to unthinkable horrors.
I too can have compassion for all living things. It's not one or the other.

Remember, many murders have a history of torturing and killing animals.

I'm not familiar with Jesse Arbogast.

[BurtWorm]

42. I just wonder if pissing people off is effective advertisement for

the ethical treatment of animals. PETA has a knack for obscuring its message, the way "right-to-lifers" do.

[jobycom]

45. They are mocking the pain people feel now

Here's PETA's response. "How dare you compare my ancestors' subjugation to the subjugation of cows prodded down the slaughter line to their deaths?!" I can, because it is right to do so and wrong to reject the concept. Please open your heart and your mind and do not take such offense.


That's mockery, and arrogance in the extreme.

[JackieO]

62. Where is the mockery?

To mock means to make fun of. Where is she making fun of anyone's pain?

[Ian David]

6. PeTA did the same thing with The Holocaust a few years back

Take the Holocaust off PETA's plate
PAULINE DUBKIN YEARWOOD
Chicago Jewish News

As a longtime animal rights activist and sometime member of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), I have not always been in favor of that organization's high-profile public campaigns on such issues as fur, product testing and vegetarianism.

Not because I don't agree with their stance on those issues. I do. As one of the pioneer animal rights organizations in the United States, it has been tremendously effective in raising public consciousness about animal abuse. The organization also works efficiently behind the scenes and has been responsible for a number of major victories, such as persuading cosmetic companies to stop testing their products on animals.

But some of PETA's public relations campaigns, I believe, are misguided because they draw more attention to themselves than to the animals they are trying to rescue.

With this in mind, when I heard that PETA was planning a campaign against meat and factory farming using images and metaphors from the Holocaust, I feared what would come next. Now that the "Holocaust on Your Plate" campaign has been made public, my thoughts are painfully divided.

More:
http://www.jewishaz.com/jewishnews/030314/take.shtml


The following satire from Saturday Night Live really "nails it."

We gather together
For yams, beans, and cranberry sauce.
But have you given much thought lately
To the turkey holocaust?
200 million noble birds
Slaughtered every fall.
Ainüt no difference between Hitler, Stalin,
And the folks at Butterball, Butterball.
So set your tables, America
From Birmingham to Branson.
But when you carve that turkey
You're a finger lickin' Charlie Manson.
Enjoy your pumpkin pie,
Your buttery Idaho spuds,
Grandma's chestnut stuffing,
And a turkey basted in blood.
Basted in blood
Basted in blood
Basted in blood
Enjoy your turkey, enjoy...
Basted in blood
Basted in blood
Basted in blood
Basted in blood
Basted in blood
Basted in blood.

More:
http://snltranscripts.jt.org/97/97gupdate.phtml

[bluestateguy]

7. Animal rights has always been more of a white upper middle class movement

Are there exceptions? Yes, but most of the people I have met who were a part of this movement were white and from fairly well to do backgrounds.

[tocqueville]

10. Every being able to feel pain as humans do is a "human being"

That includes praticly all mammals and marsupials witha developed cortex.

The fact that humans have a conscience of pain for whatever reason it is, doesn't make the pain worse than the one felt by a tortured monkey, cat or dog.

so PETA is right

[BurtWorm]

14. Can animals feel offended?

This is about the offense a campaign causes.

[jobycom]

29. So their causing pain and suffering to humans is okay, because they

are against pain and suffering in animals? Man, Robespierre would have loved them.

And don't tell me that exhibits evoking the most painful events in people's lives doesn't cause pain. Whether they are mocking Jesse Arbogast for getting his arm bitten off by a shark, or Jews, and now African Americans, they deal in pain and suffering.

It's not their attitude towards other animals I disagree with. It's their attitudes towards humans.

[EEgrad2003]

63. No, they're not right

Granted, they have a valid reason to be concerned with the unethical treatment of animals, but that gives them NO right to juxtapose their feelings with the plight of different socially oppressed peoples. They have validity in their OWN plights and to compare it with the plight of another group is irresponsible. I wouldn't call it a mockery, but I do think that they haven't fully grasp the feelings of these oppressed groups of people before they put something like this out into the public. You wouldn't tell someone you know how it feels to lose a parent on child, because you've lost a family pet. Not that losing a family pet isn't considered a grief filled event, but it's all about having tact. This ad was tactless.

[tocqueville]

64. the point is not there

based on the old biblical statement "thou shall reign over animals"
people think they are superior to animals.

That's why you have statements "treated worse than a dog" etc...

Other cultures deify them like the American Indians did.

I don't deny that it can be felt as an offense by some socially oppressed groups, but it doesn't change the fact that a standpoint that makes humans and animals equals in rights can be philosophically and morally right.

Isn't it an offense to compare chimps to Bush ? The problem is that the chimps don't speak.

[EEgrad2003]

66. Does it really..

help their cause to offend a group of socially oppressed people? Probably not. They may end up alienating more people with their ads than gaining people that can agree with their cause, because some of those people feel that they don't know the full extent of what they are comparing their plight to. I'm not saying that PeTA is racist or sexist, but maybe they should have rethought their ad campaign. Did they stop and think, "Hey, people might think we're trying to exploit the ills that have been forced upon them to further our own agenda?" or "We may be alienating some people from agreeing with our cause by offending those people"? Probably not. It just seemed that they were more interested in creating a reaction than a positive one toward their cause. Offending some people to present your cause doesn't make it right.

[durutti]

11. Read this article.

http://www.counterpunch.org/wise08132005.html

[BurtWorm]

15. Excellent article!

(From what I've read so far.) :thumbsup:

[yewberry]

18. What a dick!

Y'know, I have some serious issues with PeTA. Some of their campaigns go way too far. They do, and they do it on purpose. It's just not something I'm comfortable with. At the same time, they do a lot of good. Stuff you never hear about.


For Wise to say, about me and others who've sweated blood to take care of animals (PeTA-affiliated or not,) "...I have long wondered what is more important to the animal rights molvement: actually ending animal experimentation, and other blatant cruelties, or being able to preen about as moral superiors, who gain self-esteem by looking down their noses at others..." tells me pretty much all I need or want to know.

Fuck him.

[progdonkey]

16. I don't think they're racist...

I think they honestly don't believe humans are any better than farm animals, or deserve anything better.

I'm definitely an animal lover, but humans are not simply animals. We came from lesser animals, but we've evolved to the point of being able to reason. Animals aren't human, and humans aren't entirely animal. Animals are deserving of proper care and treatment--especially those closest to us on the evolutionary scale and who share our homes--but only absolute fools like these PETA morons would raise a cow up to the level of Einstein, and lower Shakespeare to the level of a squirrel.

PETA does believe blacks are no better than beasts of burden, but they are not racist, since they believe all people are as well.

[jobycom]

21. Well, except that they don't believe that

If they really believed there was no difference between themselves and animals, they would recruit animals to help them in their campaign. Any time one group feels they must liberate another, without the help of the other, they are showing an attitude of superiority.

PETA doesn't really believe all humans are no better than beasts. They simply believe that all animals other than their enlightened selves are no better than beasts. They are the taskmasters for us all, in other words.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again--they are a typical right-wing organization, but with a left-wing cause.

[Ian David]

24. ...but they are not racist, since they believe ALL people are as well

"PETA does believe blacks are no better than beasts of burden, but they are not racist, since they believe all people are as well."-- progdonkey

That's very well put.

So PeTA is a bunch of self-hating humans!

Sorry, I'm just being snarky.

Whether they're being racist or not, it still offends the same raw nerves that are sensitive to racism. Rather than drawing attention to the suffering of animals, it puts the focus on whether or not PeTA is racist and/or insensitive.

Instead of, "Oh, those animals are suffering!" people are saying, "Oh, those PeTA people are pissing me off by belittling my people's suffering!"

In any case, if anyone is truly offended by the latest PeTA campaign, then I suppose you could host a veal cook-off party in protest.

[Catholic Sensation]

20. no, just very very classless

[Beelzebud]

22. I recmmend watching Penn and Teller's Bullshit episode about PETA

They are so fringe it is scary.

They make the animal rights movement look like a bunch of crazies.

[Beaverhausen]

28. Oh yeah...I'm really going to let Penn and Teller tell me about PETA

NOT.

:eyes:

Did you know they are freeps?

[Book Lover]

34. Penn is a hard libertarian, not a freep

Just to clarify. I don't know anything about Teller's politics.

[Beaverhausen]

35. well then he is even worse

libertarians are way out on the right fringe.

so again, why would I listen to them when it comes to animal rights?

[Book Lover]

39. OK

I was just clarifying. It's my inner copy editor. I'm not trying to persuade you one way or another.

[K-W]

48. True libertarians are on the left. EOM

[Beaverhausen]

50. well now that would be a whole other thread

so I won't go into it here.

All I know is Penn supporter Bush. That's all I need to know about him. :puke:

[mondo joe]

56. Where did you get that? All I've read is he felt there was no difference

between Bush and Kerry. I don't agree with him - but that line of reasoning isn't typically "pro Bush".

[Beelzebud]

51. Is anyone that doesn't agree with you a FREEP?

They are not freeps.

Their shows on The Bible, Mother Teresa, and Intelligent Design are proof of that.

Not many freeps take the stand that the Bible is bullshit, Mother tereasa was a horrible person, and Intelligent design is garbage.

PETA falls in the same bullshit category as all 3 of things I mentioned.

I don't like Kool-Aid drinkers from any side...

[Beaverhausen]

55. Mother Teresa was a horrible person?

If that's what they think then I have far worse names for them than freep.

[mondo joe]

57. Mother Teresa was a horrible person.

But that's neither here nor there.

[Beelzebud]

58. She WAS a horrible person. Don't belive me? Just read about her.

She enjoyed suffering, and she did nothing to help those in her hospice.

She profitted off of dictators, and all kinds of unethical shit.

Have you ever actually read anything about her?

After watching the Bullshit episode about her, and Ghandi, I did some reading of my own, and found everything that was said about those two in the Bullshit episode was entirely accurate.

Ghandi hated black people.

And Mother Tereasa didn't realy help the suffering.

Myth is sometimes more accepted than fact.

[jobycom]

60. And Bullshit is sometimes mistaken for fact.

Don't believe everything you read. Mother Teresa was a good person in a bad world where she had to make difficult choices. Bullshit is factually and logically challenged--not to be trusted. Penn and Teller have no interest in finding the truth, they are only interested in amusing and shocking audiences, and will twist any facts to do so. I have no doubt you can verify any fact that put forth, but the context of those facts is extremely controlled on that show.

[Ian David]

31. You know, we could do fake PeTA campaign satires...

Outrageous PeTA campaigns that are pure fiction (so far):

1) The eating of yogurt with live cultures in it is like the bombing of Hiroshima.

2) Eliminating so-called "pest" insects from crops and gardens is like bombing the children of Iraq.

3) Putting a dog to sleep is like lynching a black man.

4) Mushrooms aren't plants, they're animals, which means they have souls, so eating a mushroom is like an abortion. Every time you drink a beer or eat bread made with yeast, you're commiting mass murder.

5) Mosquito eradication is genocide.

6) Not only are fossil fuels bad for the environment, it is morally wrong to exploit the deaths of dinosaurs for our own purposes. It's like digging up your grandma and throwing her in the furnace.

Again, the above are fictional PeTA campaigns.

[KittyWampus]

30. Maybe Tone Deaf Would Be A Good Descriptive Term. They Obviously

don't know how to relate to other people effectively.

Reminds me of a 5 yr old who discovers saying fuck gets a big reaction from the grown ups.... and then keeps saying it over and over just to get that reaction.

[JackieO]

36. I think it's a good exhibit from what I saw of it.

Holocaust on Your Plate was good, too.

[donco6]

47. Remember: rat is pig is dog is boy. . . .

. . . is black man, I guess. All the same to Ingrid.

[KingFlorez]

49. They're not racist

PETA always has a way of stating it's opinion in a over the top and sometimes inappropriate ways. They should know better than to make this kind of comparison though.

[shockra]

54. I dunno.

Feminists, like Riane Eisler in The Chalice and the Blade, have pointed out that women were only kept and thought of as chattel after the domestication of animals and keeping of livestock. There's an outgrowth. The way animals are treated leads to an acceptance of people being treated the same. Would slavery ever have happened if we hadn't already thought of animals as mere tools for our service?

The word slavery was coined to refer to human conditions, but the comparison to animals returns to its roots.

[Catchawave]

52. HERE, I save ya'll some time:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1699098

Now ask yourselves, when do progressive issues have to be popular with close-minded people?

[flvegan]

53. Perception is funny.

So many folks, so many respected organizations see a picture of a cow being treated cruelly. It's next to a black man being lynched. They don't bother to even attempt to understand the caption or the intent.

Is PETA comparing that cow to that black man? No. You'd have to be an idiot to think so (or just closed minded). It's the act. It's the intent. It's the reason BEHIND the "hanging" (the subject is a "lesser being" and can be disposed of as pleased by those doing the harm).

No, PETA isn't the one that's prejudiced. It's those that refuse (or just can't) look beyond the knee-jerk personal perception of what they (maybe WANT to ) see. I bet that if this display was done by some college kid in an art class, folks would at least TRY to understand it. But no, not upstanding, forward-thinking people. It's PETA, so it's gotta be bad.

If most folks were honest with themselves, they'd likely realize that they pre-judged the exhibit, especially if you hate PETA and animal rights wackos like me.

[OrlandoGator]

65. It's not racist, just fucking stupid.

PETA is giving animal rights activists a horrible name.