PETA Condemns Pokemon For Promoting Animal Abuse 418
SchrodingerZ writes "PETA, the same group that last November protested Mario for 'wearing fur,' has condemned the Pokémon media franchise and video game series. In light of the recent release of Pokemon Black and White Versions 2, the activist group is protesting that the Pokemon game series 'paints a rosy picture of what amounts to thinly veiled animal abuse.' As many of us know Pokemon is about young children who capture wild animals for the sole purpose of having them battle in non-fatal sparing matches. 'Much like animals in the real world, Pokémon are treated as unfeeling objects and used for such things as human entertainment and as subjects in experiments. The way that Pokémon are stuffed into pokéballs is similar to how circuses chain elephants inside railroad cars and let them out only to perform confusing and often painful tricks that were taught using sharp steel-tipped bullhooks and electric shock prods,' says a statement from the group. Ironically within Pokemon B/W 2 there an organization known as Team Plasma , which deals with taking Pokemon and retuning them to the wild. PETA is so up in arms that they have even created an anti-pokemon parody game in which you play as an escaped Pokemon battling your trainer. I recommend trying it, just for the laughs."
Funny (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Funny (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I think this is an excuse to make a silly game and get lots of free publicity from tons of geeks doing what many of them have probably want to have done for years.
Re:Funny (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Funny (Score:4, Interesting)
No one tell them about CLOP [foddy.net].
Re:Funny (Score:4, Funny)
I like PETA too, in fact I am a member of the People Eating Tasty Animals club.
Re:Funny (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Funny (Score:5, Informative)
Clams, oysters, scallops and mussels are also mollusks, and very tasty!
Re:Funny (Score:5, Interesting)
No they do NOT stand a chance in the USA (Score:5, Insightful)
People forget what PETA really stands for. They want ALL animals to be free, includings pets such as cats, since "owning" a cat is abuse in their eyes.
If you wanted to show the American voter is willing to go that far, you would show laws aimed at REALLY protecting kids most dangerous enemy, the average driver. You don't. The greatest child killer in the USA goes free and unchecked.
People are willing to do a lot of meaningless things to feel good but they won't do anything real. That is why PETA will fail.
And as a cat owner, good riddance to them.
Re:No they do NOT stand a chance in the USA (Score:5, Funny)
Cats do not need protection from PETA, because the cat owns you.
Re:No they do NOT stand a chance in the USA (Score:5, Insightful)
PETA is not an organization that loves animals.
They have repeatedly demonstrated that, via various acts that have been harmful and frequently fatal to the very animals they were "rescuing". They operate under the assumption that (despite daily evidence to the contrary) that animals fear and despise humans universally and unconditionally. This isn't even true for wild animals, much less domesticated ones. One of the biggest problems the filmers of the "March of the Penguins" documentary had was that the penguins kept wanting to socialize with the people who were trying to film them. In Alaska, wolves have been recorded bring their pup to the side of the highway for no apparent reason other than for people to admire them. Even skunks have shown a preference for living around humans on occasion.
PETA is an organization that hates humans. The animals are just a justification. If they really loved animals, they'd do their homework and learn what the animals themselves really want.
Re: (Score:3)
I think I have to agree, it seems true at least in the case of our house cat. She seems perfectly content, and she takes care of us just as we do take care of her. She's pretty good at killing insects that occasionally get inside. She seems to know quite well when one of us is sick, and if something hurts she'll curl up over the spot and stay there, sometimes for many hours. She loves being scratched, and can lay under my arm and purr for an hour while I browse /. and scratch her. It's easy to tell when she
Re: (Score:3)
It's called 'prayer'.
Pray you aren't modded offtopic. Why do you antitheists insist on injecting religion into every thread? Religion has nothing to do with PETA or Pokemon and has no reason to be in this discussion.
Re: (Score:3)
So nothing wrong with surgically ripping out their reproductive organs? I'm sure you got your cat's approval first, right?
Actually, I got the cat with the reproductive organs pre-removed, so that wasn't my call to make.
You do realize that the only reason your cat is so happy to live in your house is because they have been selectively bred, by humans, on purpose, over hundreds of years, to be docile and compliant, yes?
First, cats aren't that docile and compliant necessarily; this one sure isn't. Second, she's not allowed in the house; I'm allergic to cats. She's about as wild as a cat can be while still eating some crunchies (but she lives mostly on vermin) and being pet occasionally. Got her throat ripped up by something once, we put aloe on it and she made it but now she says "meh" in stead of "mao".
Imagine if aliens came here, and started creating lobotomized versions of humans to be pets. I'm sure you'd be the first in line to sign up..?
That is a truly stupid c
Re:Funny (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Funny (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
There's no excuse for being unaware of PETA's desires. Their most extreme positions come up in every discussion of PETA I've ever seen. You might as well be an innocent parishioner of the Westboro Baptist Church.
There is no ALF (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, [animallibe...nfront.com] really? [wikipedia.org]
Re:There is no ALF (Score:5, Interesting)
When a group is attempting to do things that are illegal, it cannot have what would be a normal group structure, but one that is loosely structured with isolated pockets. As far as the violent/nonviolent thing it is just semantics. Legally Arson is considered nonviolent but legal definitions and what common use of those words sometimes do not like up. ALF and ELF use arson when other, safer means are at their disposal. Technically it is not a threat, but torching a green house is a bit more reckless than just spraying the area down with a persistent herbicide. Arson doesn't discriminate and is nonspecific. One of the U of MN research labs in this area was also destroyed along with years worth of data for some kind of disease. It was not a lab that used animals anymore than the physics lab, but was hit by someone claiming the ALF banner.
By the letter of the law no one was harmed and it was non violent, but it certainly it does not have the spirit of nonviolence in how it destroys and the harm it does.
Re:Funny (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Funny (Score:4, Informative)
1988 my friend:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Mario_Bros._3 [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't like fish. But I'd eat a sea kitten.
Re: (Score:3)
What's really funny is they waited 15 years to pull this stunt.
Maybe it's an anniversary gift for Slashdot.
No, not funny, boring. (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, people, why is this story even here? PETA shits out a turd like this once a week. And Slashdot has given them exactly what they wanted.
Re:No, not funny, boring. (Score:5, Insightful)
And Slashdot has given them exactly what they wanted.
A collective, "wtf is wrong with you people"? That doesn't seem like a well considered strategy.
Re: (Score:3)
I see. So the plan is to make 99% of people exposed to their campaign think they're absolutely nuts, so 1% might end up engaged with other parts of their website, where some fraction of that 1% will be won over to their cause and become an asset, who will then have to overcome widespread perception that the organization is batshit insane and don't deserve rational consideration?
Yeah, still a horrible plan.
Re:No, not funny, boring. (Score:4, Interesting)
I see. So the plan is to make 99% of people exposed to their campaign think they're absolutely nuts
If you only go by what Forbes says, yes. If you actually read what they say, no.
No one writes articles saying, say, that McDonalds encourages children to steal with the Hamburglar mascot. Yet they want to say a cartoon campaign by Peta is absolutely serious and literal. Anyway, Peta can handle it either way.
I personally don't agree with their ultimate aims (don't use any animals for anything), but they're right in pointing out a lot of unnecessary cruelty in agriculture.
Obligatory Firefly quote (Score:5, Funny)
Well, my days of not taking PETA seriously are certainly coming to a middle.
Re: (Score:2)
Here, start at the beginning [peta.org]. Then go bleach your brain to get rid of the images.
Re: (Score:2)
Whu?
Baby catfish?
Re:Obligatory Firefly quote (Score:5, Funny)
That whole campaign is only one letter away from brilliance...
Sex kittens talk to each other through squeaks, squeals, and other low-frequency sounds
Like their surface-dwelling cousins, the land kittens, sex kittens enjoy being petted.
Some sex kittens tend well-kept gardens.
they often gently rub against each other as a sign of affection.
While this is not particularly easy to do underwater coherently, female sex kittens don't generally seem to mind.
Re: (Score:3)
I find it gratifying that in the whole world with internet access, only 7,400 people are nuts enough to have signed the petition on that one.
Re: (Score:3)
> People with 'causes' such as PETA need more to do.
Couldn't agree more. Take Heather Mills, a few years back she decided to tell us that we should all be Vegan and drink Rats milk to prevent global warming. This was on behalf of VIVA! a Vegetarian & Vegan pressure group.
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/76247-drink-rats-milk-says-heather [metro.co.uk]
Despite the obvious logistical problem of getting enough milk from rats, cats, dogs or whatever she was ranting about, my main problem with this is that she delivered this
Fucking Retarded (Score:4, Informative)
Look, we all eschew mistreatment of animals, but aside from the deceit and near criminality of PETA as an organization . . . they're just downright fucking retarded:
The way that Pokémon are stuffed into pokéballs is similar to how circuses chain elephants inside railroad cars and let them out only to perform confusing and often painful tricks that were taught using sharp steel-tipped bullhooks and electric shock prods,'
No. No, they are NOTHING ALIKE. For one thing, elephants are real and pokemon don't actually fucking exist.
Re: (Score:3)
The way that Pokémon are stuffed into pokéballs is similar to how circuses chain elephants inside railroad cars and let them out only to perform confusing and often painful tricks that were taught using sharp steel-tipped bullhooks and electric shock prods,' No. No, they are NOTHING ALIKE. For one thing, elephants are real and pokemon don't actually fucking exist.
Firstly, I've not watched Pokemon for well over a decade, so I've no idea how Pokeball technology has advanced in that time, but I've always likened them to genie lamps. If you watch Disney's Aladdin, the inside of the lamp is very well set, with lounge furniture and ornamental adornments throughout. The genie is shrunken down, without any observable discomfort or harm, to fit well in this diminutive abode.
I also liken Pokeballs and Pokemon to genie's lamps and genies respectively because, as you have righ
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, their shameless media manipulation *is* retarded as is the media who just eats it up every time.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I just wasted their bandwidth by playing their stupid game, and completely ignoring (as in, not even loading when it prompted) their video. /dev/null, as I have one of the few actually unlimited internet accounts still in existence. (Yes, it's grandfathered. No, you can't get it anymore.)
I think I'll write a script to continually download the game over and over again, piping it to
Re: (Score:2)
two words: sea kittens. QED, PETA are 'tards.
Re:Fucking Retarded (Score:5, Informative)
The flash game serves as an artistic analogy (see: dictionary), and it's actually a very poignant and well-placed one. Everyone understands the Pokemon universe and yet few have questioned the role of the animals in it. Are battles like cockfights? Or are they like baseball games? What rights does a Pokemon have? We don't think about these questions because we're not thinking about Pokemon (animals), we're thinking primarily about humans in our very self-absorbed way.
You don't condemn or boycott a fucking analogy. Also, you have sympathy for animals, because they actually exist in the real world and computer characters do not and if you don't have sympathy for animals in the real world, you aren't going to have sympathy for computer characters and will never relate one to the other. Also, in such a case, you'd also probably be a sociopath.
OFFTOPIC. But...
You are incorrect, but continue with your political correctness, if you like.
"Retarded" is polite and kinder word the medical community adopted to replace cruel words like "stupid" and "lame" and "dumb" and "imbecile". Those words were hurtful and cruel *and* they were used medically. Since the word "retarded" came to replace the other words, those words have since been brought into every day usage without unintended insult to those who were now clinically "retarded" and no longer clinically "stupid", "lame", "dumb, "imbeciles".
By organizations for the cause, I am told that the correct term is no longer "retarded", but "intellectually disabled". Therefore, "retarded" no longer applies to those who used to be medically "retarded" (and before that, medically lame or stupid or dumb, etc). Therefore, "retarded" now holds the same place that those other words do. No longer applicable to anyone as a medical term and now relegated to a general word slighting another person with regard to alleged intellect.
TL;DR: "Retarded", no matter what some shitty commercial during an episode of Glee tells you, is now linguistically equal to "stupid" and "lame" and "dumb" and "imbecile". If you find one hurtful, then for consistency, you should find them all hurtful.
Re:Fucking Retarded (Score:4, Informative)
Euphemism treadmill (Score:5, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism_treadmill#Euphemism_treadmill [wikipedia.org]
That's exactly what the euphemism treadmill is.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure the analogy is still there, I mean they look like cute fluffy bunnies after all but most of the time the relationship is shown as voluntary and symbiotic. Pokemon isn't promoting animal abuse, it's promoting slavery through stockholm syndrome.
Re: (Score:2)
of basically magical spirit-creatures, little demons and angels or fairies or whatever.
Re: (Score:3)
Here's the original:
http://www.torrentroom.com/torrent/3237847-Pokemon-The-First-Movie-MetP-Dual-Audio-and-Subs-mkv.html [torrentroom.com]
Re: (Score:3)
The pokemon movies are commonly cited as examples of heavy editing in the US release - not just
Blaziken and Houndoom (Score:4, Insightful)
Are battles like cockfights?
Whether battles are like cockfights or like dogfights depends on whether you've brought a Blaziken or a Houndoom.
1999 called and wants its headline back (Score:5, Insightful)
Trolls (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Trolls (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What you need is some troll stench and bright UV lights on a 4x4, see 'troll hunter' on netflix (warning: fuzzy foreigners speaking gibberish, requires reading).
YOU ARE DEAD TO ME (Score:3)
"Wearing fur"? Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean damn PETA come on, this is why people start thinking you're just a bunch of nutjobs....
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure I'd want to be anywhere near a four foot ...er... amorous racoon...
Re: (Score:2)
He's not "wearing a racoon suit, cosplay style,"
What if he was wearing a raccoon suit, cosplay style? I mean raccoon is good eatin' and why would you waste the fur?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:"Wearing fur"? Seriously? (Score:5, Informative)
They are referring to the Tanooki suit [mariowiki.com].
I support PETA... (Score:4, Funny)
I dont know why PETA want cows extinct? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
you mean the cuddly cud-chewing prarie puppies?
Re: (Score:2)
Probably 99% of animals are eaten alive. We need to kill all whales to prevent them from eating billions of plankton!
(and guppies from eating worms: kill all guppies!)
Next shocking truth: 100% of animals are dying alive!
Holy shit.
Re: (Score:2)
And also dead, because most of them would end up ripped to shreds by predators, who would flourish if cows and other herd animals were allowed to roam free.
Re:I dont know why PETA want cows extinct? (Score:4, Insightful)
but that's exactly what is happening, we've been cooking those bovine for hundreds of thousands of years. we are their predators. it's natural, it's right.
Re: (Score:3)
Are we a species (one with a culture and morals) that would torture a defenseless creature in a tiny, isolated cage, barely large enough to fit its body, for years on end, milking its body, subjecting it to surgeries and growth chemicals, and denying it socialization and sunlight, only to conclude its life with a live mutilation of its throat, letting it bleed out slowly?
Now you're making me hungry AND turgid.
Re: (Score:3)
I didn't know tarantula hawks had a culture that produced systems of morality and ethics (maybe you should reread the AC's post). The example from nature is neither here nor there, or perhaps you think that because the preying mantis exists women should devour their partners (after obtaining the seed, of course)?
There is no inherent meaning in nature. If you believe that the methods of industrial meat production are acceptable, argue that instead of bringing up something unrelated.
How ironic (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
If anybody at PETA had actually bothered to play Pokemon Black and White for more than five minutes, they'd have met a group of villains named Team Plasma.
If you'd looked at the game link for, like, literally one second, you'd have seen the Pikachu-holding-a-sign-saying-"I support Team Plasma" graphic.
Re: (Score:2)
Yet the real message of the story is learning that catching a pokemon isn't just about stuffing it into a ball and forcing it to fight: It's about building a bond of trust and mutual friendship between the pokemon and trainer, which if properly fostered allows them to accomplish anything together
Which is just another form of animal abuse to PETA.
They believe no one should have a pet, and that domesticating animals is just another form of abuse.
Hell, some PETA members even think that damaging insect habitats during construction is akin to genocide.
PETA is nothing but a gaggle of whack-jobs.
But, they put naked chicks on parade, so I give them a pass.
eat 'em (Score:2)
Wow. In a completely unrelated note, I just read yesterday in, I think, a wiki on pokemon, that the original backstory points out that in the pokemon world there are no conventional farm animals. Zero. So what do the human inhabitants eat? Apparently, they eat Pokemon. Hopefully, the more appetizing-looking ones. Let's see what PETA does with that.
But more on-topic, I think I shall create an anti-anti-pokemon game, where you beat up children, take their pokemon, release same into the wild, and see how
Re: (Score:2)
Models supporting PETA? (Score:5, Funny)
Will they be nude?
Re:Models supporting PETA? (Score:4, Funny)
Pikanude! I choose you!
Attention whoring (Score:3)
This reminds me of when groups like Greenpeace complains about something popular just to get attention. It's just some activist noise making about something topical to bring attention to themselves. What I find funny is that by pulling these stupid stunts, all they are doing is making themselves (and their cause) look bad. Maybe the next time someone hears about an actual legitimate issue in animal welfare they'll think of this and pay it no mind ('Hey, isn't that the same stuff those wackos who complained about Pokemon were going on about?') . The way they trade credibility for publicity (not that they had much credibility to start with) makes me think PETA cares more about their own 15 seconds of fame than actually bringing any benefit to animals.
And by the way, Pokemon are clearly partners, not slaves. The games make generally that pretty clear and go on ad nauseam about poke-friendship or something like that, in fact, something about humans being mean to their Pokemon was even a central part of the plot of the last games, not that any of this is relevant if causing a fuss is your only actual goal.
Talk about stupid... (Score:2)
Ok, now to point out, what everyone that has watched even 1 episode of Pokemon or actually played any of the Pokemon games for more than 10 minutes, it's about caring for your pokemon and building a relationship with them.
As to stuffing them into balls, considering something the size of an elephant or more can fit into one of those little balls and still not weigh more than a few ounces, they aren't being "stuffed" in. It's apparently some kind of pocket dimension.
On top of that, IT'S A CARTOON AND VID
Hypocrits. Fuck PETA (Score:5, Informative)
PETA's Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad History of Killing Animals [theatlantic.com]
In 2011, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) behaved in a regrettably consistent manner: it euthanized the overwhelming majority (PDF) of dogs and cats that it accepted into its shelters. Out of 760 dogs impounded, they killed 713, arranged for 19 to be adopted, and farmed out 36 to other shelters (not necessarily "no kill" ones). As for cats, they impounded 1,211, euthanized 1,198, transferred eight, and found homes for a grand total of five. PETA also took in 58 other companion animals -- including rabbits. It killed 54 of them.
NB that in Virginia, stats only need to be kept for animals taken in with the intent of putting them up for adoption.
Think that's a fluke?
Get this:
PETA's "Thank You" for Killing Shelter Pets [slashdot.org]
When the No Kill shelter in Shelby County, Kentucky, recently announced that they had run out of space -- and were hence going to have to start killing healthy dogs and cats -- officials received a nice basket of gourmet cookies, with a note signed by PETA: "Thank you for doing the right thing for animals."
Surely I'm joking here. This must be a weak stab at satire. Many people have written about Ingrid Newkirk's vicious pet-killing program -- her organization has personally liquidated over 27,000 animals -- but PETA has always responded with hurt and outrage (and lawyers). People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals don't celebrate killing, goes the lie -- they see it as a regrettable necessity.
Surely Newkirk wouldn't be so foolish as to express her ghoulish agenda in this way, as a naked statement accompanied by a gift. No group of self-styled vegans would publicly wed their name to the Pro-Kill Equation: butchery = the right thing.
Well, Nathan Winograd (who developed the somewhat different No Kill Equation) reported on this in detail, and I suggest you examine his photographic evidence. A lovely basket of "Allison's Gourmet Cookies" -- shipped fresh from California -- with a handwritten note signed: "The PETA Staff." If you'd like further evidence, and to read the reverse side of this charming note, Shelby County No Kill Mission has produced an affecting video about the episode.
To understand just how grotesque this is, you have to know a little bit about Shelby. This is not simply one of America's fifty-one No Kill communities. It has a special significance: Last year's save rate sent Shelby County to the top -- it is now one of the most successful examples of No Kill in the nation.
The last animal killed for lack of space in Shelby County was on May 27, 2008. Since then, they've enjoyed a save rate that is almost precisely the inverse of PETA's kill rate. Whereas PETA slaughters 97% of the pets delivered to their hellish "Shelter of Last Resort," in 2011 Shelby saved 98.52% of the cats and 94.46% of the dogs in their care.
Shelby County runs an open admission shelter: They do not turn animals away. They have an impeccable history -- despite PETA's dire predictions, their No Kill community has never been associated with hoarding or animal abuse of any kind. (In fact, none of the legitimate No Kill organizations has been guilty of these crimes, but that's another story.) The Shelby program has a tiny budget: $147,000. Compare that to PETA's annual plunder: over $32.3 million from unsuspecting donors.
Re: (Score:2)
Pokemon Black and White (Score:4, Informative)
Critical problem (Score:5, Funny)
PETA needs to turn its attention toward the care and feeding of abandoned Tamagotchi [wikipedia.org]. These were purchased for children who, after having grown up, have abandoned their pets to the bottoms of toy chests or the back of sock drawers. PETA needs to fund a reserve for forgotten Tamagotchi.
Right after they get their Save the Skeets [cartalk.com] campaign off the ground.
What about Carrotmon (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
PETA is passe (Score:3)
This is an organisation whose time came and went, but doesn't realise it and is futilely thrashing at anything that'll generate a headline containing their name. People are more aware of the issues they once touted, but are filtering out their sensationalist over the top antics that often obscure their message.
Has beens, right up there with the *AA.
Abusing humans (Score:3)
PETA Kills (Score:5, Informative)
Read the rest at the link. If you want to know more get Penn and Teller's Bullshit! on DVD and watch the PETA episode.
Re: (Score:3)
You're quoting an article based on a report from one strident advocacy group (Center for Consumer Freedom), published in one of the Britain's least trustworthy media outlets (The Daily Mail), criticising another stident advocacy group (PETA).
It's sad that such a cesspit of sources rates as "informative".
Every bloody time there's a PETA article (Score:3)
It's such a crock. PETA have responded to these accusations any number of times, the gist of their response being that the animals are so severely injured or traumatised that it's better they be put down. I don't see a problem with this response. I know PETA's a favourite whipping boy for Slashdot folk (along with Greenpeace and v
subject (Score:3)
I've never played Pokemon, but PETA just gave me an awesome idea. Capture REAL animals, cram them into metal balls, and force them to fight. Thanks, PETA!
Please Execute These Assholes (Score:3)
PETA seems to protest everything except actual animal abuse. Their record for their owned animal shelters in the US isn't any better than other groups. In fact, they apparently terminate more animals than the "average" shelter does, rather than see the animals "abused" by new owners.
What I can't understand is why they get any press. Or is the press just because they seem to have more nubile young women in their protests than most organizations, making for good eye candy backgrounds while their representatives speak during interviews?
Re:I think PETA exists solely . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
The "Westboro Baptist Church" style of marketing? You're actually probably a lot more right than you know. Groups like this stay relevant by generating ever more insane news clips. Oh sure, they probably believe (most of them, anyways) their basic message, but they do and say the really stupid stuff like this because it gets them noticed. And they thrive on attention. They're like children throwing temper tantrums (probably with the same level of maturity). The absolute worst thing you can do to them, and the best thing you can do for society, is to studiously ignore them. It might get worse for a while, but it will be vastly better once they learn that saying things like this won't get them noticed.
Of course, I live in a country where the Kardashians are popular, so that'll never happen.
Re:I think PETA exists solely . . . (Score:5, Funny)
The "Westboro Baptist Church" style of marketing? You're actually probably a lot more right than you know. Groups like this stay relevant by generating ever more insane news clips. Oh sure, they probably believe (most of them, anyways) their basic message, but they do and say the really stupid stuff like this because it gets them noticed. And they thrive on attention. They're like children throwing temper tantrums (probably with the same level of maturity). The absolute worst thing you can do to them, and the best thing you can do for society, is to studiously ignore them.
When WBC came to protest at UW-Madison, we gathered sponsors.
The sponsors donated $X for every minute that WBC protested.
The proceeds were used to fund LGBT student organizations on campus.
WBC is welcome to come back and raise more money for LGBT causes any time.
Re:I think PETA exists solely . . . (Score:5, Interesting)
But being a target for hate is a valid role, albeit a rather painful one. People expend their vitriol on PETA and other animals rights groups wind up looking better by comparison. "Hey," they say, "we're not PETA. You can talk to us and consider our suggestions rather than just dismissing them out of hand." Ultimately, partly thanks to PETA acting as lightning rod, the goal is furthered.
Re:I think PETA exists solely . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
But being a target for hate is a valid role, albeit a rather painful one. People expend their vitriol on PETA and other animals rights groups wind up looking better by comparison. "Hey," they say, "we're not PETA. You can talk to us and consider our suggestions rather than just dismissing them out of hand." Ultimately, partly thanks to PETA acting as lightning rod, the goal is furthered.
In my experience it's just the opposite. You approach someone as being interested in animals rights/welfare, and immediately get, "Oh, like those nutbars who think fish are sea kittens." Then you've got to try and convince them that you're not like PETA, and defining yourself by what you're not never works. Consciously or sub-consciously, they think, "You wouldn't need to deny it if there wasn't some truth to it."
PETA don't act as a lightning rod to draw away hatred, they act as a copper dome all of us, drawing in hatred.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is just false. At best it's ridiculously naive, and at worse, it encourages animal cruelty.
If you self-identify as having any specific concern for animal welfare, you first have to jump the PETA hurdle. They're a severe detriment to their own supposed cause, and everyone else with similar interests. Many of those other folks really are rational, decent people.
As such, a dollar donated to PETA is a dollar donated in support of animal neglect and abuse. There's no way around it.
Re: (Score:2)
They used ink from irritated octpuses
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Animal abusers are sick. (Score:4, Insightful)
How someone treats another living thing when that living thing is powerless to
defend itself is a very good test of the mental wellness of that person.
Anyone who thinks it is "ok" or "cool" to abuse animals needs to be removed
from society.
And all you little jerkoffs who think all this is something to joke about
need your nuts kicked so hard they come out the top of your little dickeating
skulls.
.
The ability to tell the difference between a fantasy game and reality "is a very good test of the mental wellness of that person."
People who think other humans should have their "nuts kicked so hard they come out the top of your little dickeating
skulls...need to be removed from society."
FTFY