PDA

View Full Version : Embarrassed by our sub-forum about PeTA?



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

horselesspaul
Jan 30th, 2009, 01:37 PM
I am embarrassed by the fact that we have a sub-forum dedicated to an organisation which kills most of its "rescued" animals and trivialises animal rights by its constant need to use the objectification of women and hyperbole to get its "message" across.
I realise that they are a large organisation and I'm sure they do much good work but it is negated in the mind of the wider public by the two issues I raise above which open us all up to ridicule and charges of hypocrisy.
What do you think about it?

Korn
Jan 30th, 2009, 02:12 PM
Remember it isn't a subforum dedicated to Peta, or 'praising' Peta, it's a section dedicated to discussing Peta...

Mr Flibble
Jan 30th, 2009, 02:14 PM
As most of the posts aren't pro peta i don't feel embarassed by it.

horselesspaul
Jan 30th, 2009, 02:16 PM
Should we not then have sub-fora dedicated to any and all other groups all over the world which work tirelessly to abolish animal suffering?

Mr Flibble
Jan 30th, 2009, 02:37 PM
If there are enough discussions about each to make it logical to group them together then I see no reason why not.

horselesspaul
Jan 30th, 2009, 02:48 PM
To be candid, I am just fed up with the assumption that they speak for us all and felt that this sub-forum reinforces that impression. I am not having a good day since realising that my tax return must be in by midnight tomorrow..and PeTA just p1ss me off!

Roxy
Feb 1st, 2009, 07:19 AM
I got the feeling that most people's view of Peta was negative. I'm not embarrassed to have a sub-forum dedicated to them, as I quite enjoy reading other's opinions of Peta.

AV
Feb 2nd, 2009, 12:40 AM
I applied for a job at PETA once and as part of the application process they made me volunteer to stand on Oxford Street wearing basically nothing apart from my underwear for a whole day in December, to protest against something together with other volunteers. They also made me wear extremely high heels even though I explained that I never wear heels. I thought this was very thoughtless of them, I felt humiliated and was ill for a week. The staff were friendly but the senior management in the UK office was rude and arrogant, although they have been by now removed I was told. Anyway, so I agree PETA aren't the most suitable organisation to support...
I have worked for several other animal welfare charities which do not use silly measures such as women having to strip naked in public, they use respectful campaigning measures and do not humiliate those who support them.

snivelingchild
Feb 2nd, 2009, 03:19 AM
They forced you to strip in public to join, or they forced you to volunteer and that was an opening? Couldn't you have refused?

Roxy
Feb 2nd, 2009, 04:40 AM
Wow! If they forced you to strip and stand in the street as part of the application process, you should've reported them.

Our AR group is doing a naked protest next week against fur, but we also have clothing optional activists. Come join us! You can keep your clothes on if you want to :)

ellaminnowpea
Feb 2nd, 2009, 03:58 PM
ROXY!! Are you going to be one of the naked protesters?

AV
Feb 2nd, 2009, 09:35 PM
As part of the application process I had to spend 3 days working at their office. It came as a surprise to me when they "suggested" that I should join the almost naked protest, it was obvious that if I declined they would take me off their candidate list for the job. At that point I was quite desperate to get the job because I really wanted to help animals as part of my full time employment, now I would know better. Anyway, I decided to never go back there after that day and got a job with a much nicer and more efficient charity.

songlife
Feb 3rd, 2009, 07:10 AM
I say, make a sub-forum about Friends of Animals!! They are awesome. We can call it, "Friends of Animals - a.k.a. PAETA (People ACTUALLY for the Ethical Treatment of Animals)"

horselesspaul - I was also disappointed to see a sub-forum here about PETA. Let's not forget what they've done with KFC Canada.

Every second time someone wants to argue with me about veganism, they bring up PETA. I am so sick of it. By default I agree with a lot of what PETA does but at the same time they go against those very things I thought I was agreeing with them on. They make us all look like hypocritical flakes (in my little opinion) and I don't think that they deserve a whole sub-forum because it only gives them more publicity! :(

Korn
Feb 3rd, 2009, 10:55 AM
To be candid, I am just fed up with the assumption that they speak for us all and felt that this sub-forum reinforces that impression.

With all the critical comments from many of our members (myself included) about Peta, the subforum might as well be called "Anti-Peta".... :-)

Peta don't 'speak for us all' at all, and I'm pretty sure they - for lots of people - serve as a reason/explanation that not more people go vegan. The embarrassing part is IMO Peta, not that we discuss Peta, and if it's true that they have between 1.6 and 2 million paying members, the way they represent animals and veg*n viewpoints is embarrassingly weak.

Peta threads/discussions will always pop up on discussion boards like this, but please suggest a new name for the forum if you think it gives the impression that there's anything pro Peta baked into having such a subforum here.

For now, I'll just add a question to the subforum title...

cobweb
Feb 3rd, 2009, 11:44 AM
I say, make a sub-forum about Friends of Animals!! They are awesome. We can call it, "Friends of Animals - a.k.a. PAETA (People ACTUALLY for the Ethical Treatment of Animals)"

horselesspaul - I was also disappointed to see a sub-forum here about PETA. Let's not forget what they've done with KFC Canada.

Every second time someone wants to argue with me about veganism, they bring up PETA. I am so sick of it. By default I agree with a lot of what PETA does but at the same time they go against those very things I thought I was agreeing with them on. They make us all look like hypocritical flakes (in my little opinion) and I don't think that they deserve a whole sub-forum because it only gives them more publicity! :(



what did they do with KFC? :confused:

horselesspaul
Feb 3rd, 2009, 11:44 AM
That's great Korn.
Thanks for the question mark too.

Vegan_Steven
Feb 5th, 2009, 11:48 AM
Frankly my oppinion of PETA is currently up in the air. Their eccenticities and alienation of the general public who support them seems to currently leave room for criticism. I feel that they could perform their tasks in more constructive ways.

If we could raise as much money as PETA how many of us wouldn't spend it in the form of animal sanctuaries, buying stock in animal products companies to gain some control of them, hire lobbyists to further the cause etc, etc, instead of advertising and pissing off every McDonalds chowing maze rat and right winger ?

I don't oppose them, any group that supports animal rights is one more group that adds to the strength of the cause but currently I'm not going to blindly follow PETA. I'll try to observe their future agenda with a wait, see attitude.

Korn
Feb 5th, 2009, 12:02 PM
any group that supports animal rights is one more group that adds to the strength of the cause
Why?

pat sommer
Feb 6th, 2009, 10:31 AM
Good attitude, Steven. Open mind.

It's just human nature that tells us we would run things better if given the chance. Not being privy to the negotiations and investigations of an organization, how do we make judgments?

We judge based on the most superficial, media buzzed campaigns ignoring the masses of educational outreach, high-risk undercover ops and legal work.

Face it, by enjoying this forum we are sitting on our backsides doing nothing for animals (myself included). I ain't knocking anyone who does more.

horselesspaul
Feb 6th, 2009, 11:56 AM
I disagree.
Firstly, PeTA's operations are almost entirely made public and the killing of rescued animals is something they attempt to justify rather than deny. They have bought stock in meat industry companies, they are proud of it. I personally do not judge on the most superficial media buzzed campaigns alone as that would plainly be moronic, but one has to weigh up how much good they do against how much harm they do, as one would with any quantitive assessment of anything in life.
As for this forum being about sitting on our backsides doing nothing for the animals, this forum is a valued resource for vegans and those considering and researching veganism. How it is perceived in the wider world and the encouragement it gives must surely do something for the animals. I tend to keep the other things I do for the animals private for a variety of reasons.
I find your post simplistic and glib and slightly insulting to Korn and the members of this forum.

snivelingchild
Feb 6th, 2009, 01:02 PM
They don't "attempt" to justify killing animals, it is their stance! It is the same as the RSPCA and the humane society. It is also the position of the vast majority of sheltors because there are simply too many animals. You can argue for no-kill shelters is you like, but don't blame them for being the same as the majority of animal organizations. I happen to support euthanasia for animals who cannot be taken care of rather than them running stray, but you can see tons of those posts in another thread.

For one, I do not blame or scorn Peta at all. In my mind, the campaigns that most people hate simply align with the masses and pop culture of society. Should be hold themselves to higher standards? Maybe. Because they don't doesn't make them horrible in my mind. Just as I don't think pres Clinton was the DEVIL for getting a blowjob. No one is perfects, and frankly I just feel that Peta is too large and corrupt. I dare anyone to make an international animal rights organization as large as them without becoming corrupt. With opinions as strong as those that revolve around AR, there are bound to be people that vastly differ in their opinions.

I still think Peta is by far above the "average" morals of pretty much every society, so I still think they should keep going. They're nowhere near perfect, and never will be, but they're trying.

I would NEVER blame a single person who does a campaign that I think is in the wrong direction, but trying to attain something I want. I would hope they change, but never blame. Blame is never helpful or constructive. Peta lead so many campaigns based on letter writing, that I'd imagine a campaign to THEM for change would at least be heard. lol, maybe we create a second org dedicated to reforming the first. :rolleyes:

aubergine
Feb 6th, 2009, 01:05 PM
PeTA aren't a Vegan organisation, and as such I end up having to explain their rampant stupidness to non-Vegans.

*sigh*

pat sommer
Feb 7th, 2009, 04:06 AM
My sympathies to you, Aubergine, they are American and therefore a little rampantness is to be expected....

No offense intended, Horseless Paul, this is an informal forum and I speak in my usual direct German manner. However, I do find some comments above Naive.

Not that I don't agree with so much said but Devil's Advocate is my nature: only open mouth if we can do better.

For those interested in the bigger picture:
http://www.peta.org/feat/annualreview/numbers.asp

Back to the original post: AR/Welfare is a family and as such we are embarrassed at times by family members. Sorry that you have experienced negative consequences as a result.

Roxy
Feb 7th, 2009, 08:33 AM
ROXY!! Are you going to be one of the naked protesters?


No, I am in charge of the clothed activists and making sure everyone behaves appropriately infront of the TV cameras.

pat sommer
Feb 7th, 2009, 09:20 AM
I got naked once Peta Deutschland and Ingrid Newkirk: we were wearing toe tags (symbolizing dead bodies) and I don't think that objectified me. I wouldn't have taken offense though if anyone had accused me of being sexy. Not much chance of that now but I'd strip or any other silly stunt to get the message out.


To paraphrase Paul Watson 'I don't care, I don't work for them; I work for the whales'

Let's keep it clear who we support