Article written by :: (RSS)

tigtog (aka Viv) is the founder of this blog. She lives in Sydney, Australia: husband, 2 kids, cat, house, garden, just enough wine-racks and (sigh) far too few bookshelves.

This author has written 3457 posts for Hoyden About Town. Read more about tigtog »

14 responses to “Quicklink: PETA does it again”

  1. Mindy

    Yep. Don’t like PETA.

  2. Mary

    Some of the notes/re-tumbles (I don’t know Tumblr conventions, I’m not sure what they’re called) on that are the typical icky pushback though: comments about force-feeding meat to PETA members as punishment for the ad and so on.

    PETA: ew. Some anti-PETA folk: … uh, don’t decry oppressing women and then suggest violence and abuse as a suitable response WTF?

  3. Boganette


  4. mimbles

    Ugh. I feel sick.

  5. Notgruntled

    The PETA game plan: 1) Tie a campaign to a hot current issue. Gain attention, spark outrage, or preferably both. 2) ????????? 3) Animal liberation.

  6. Napalmnacey

    My current endometriosis aches are less painful than that add. :(

  7. Perla

    Damn PETA. They make it harder out here for us vegans! There is absolutely nothing they will not try and capitalise on. They were even once “inspired” by Dr George Tiller’s murder:

  8. The Amazing Kim

    These [redacted] are the main reason I don’t tell people I’m vegan.

  9. blue milk

    Exactly what Notgruntled said.

  10. Michelle

    The female body isn’t shameful and the willing participant in this ad was obviously proud too.

    Sometimes I wonder how many people realize they promote body shame unintentionally when they attack an image of a free-willed women.

    I wasn’t aware that we didn’t have adverts where men didn’t have their tops off.

    On a side note – I hate peta (no caps for them).

  11. tigtog

    @Michelle, you don’t think that’s an actual person who posed especially for this ad rather than simple Photoshop manipulation of a stock image, do you?

    The point about this PETA shit being objectionable is that they are indulging in fat-shaming of women who don’t live up to that beauty standard (and misinformation (hey, I know some fat vegans – it’s not a magic pill for weightloss)).

    I wasn’t aware that we didn’t have adverts where men didn’t have their tops off.

    I simply cannot make head or tail of whatever point it is that you think this sentence is making.

  12. lauredhel

    The point is much bigger than that, to me, though it includes that: the clear implication is that the only reason anyone would be concerned about going through the scanners is because they’re ashamed of their fat. Which is a giant punch in the face to people with disabilities, trans and genderqueer people, people concerned about the health risks of scanners, sexual assault survivors, and all the other marginalised groups who have been affected by abusive airport security measures. To which we can now add: people who menstruate. People who have DAMN GOOD FUCKING REASON to be scared.

    To trivialise that as LOL fat shame LOL go vego FIXED!!! is oblivious, mean-spirited, and off the mark, as well as being fatphobic and just plain incorrect.

  13. tigtog

    All excellent points – it’s about so much more than OMG they’ll see your fat rolls, and I should have remembered all those. I wasn’t quite thinking it through well enough.

  14. Mindy

    @ tigtog – can be hard to think through all the cranky. Unlike PETA who either don’t think or don’t care.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.