Quicklink: PETA does it again


Categories: ethics & philosophy, gender & feminism

Tags: , ,

14 replies

  1. Yep. Don’t like PETA.

  2. 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?


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

  5. My current endometriosis aches are less painful than that add. 😦

  6. 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: http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/06/please-tell-me-this-isnt-real.html

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

  8. Exactly what Notgruntled said.

  9. 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).

    • @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.

  10. 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.

    • 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.

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

%d bloggers like this: