More Porno "State of the Union" Shenanigans From PETA

Permalink

• 1.

  Comment by bryzee86 on January 29, 2008 7:47am:

  god, with every advert Peta make me hate them more and more.
• 2.

  Comment by Vegan_Noodle [www] on January 29, 2008 7:11pm:

  Oh Peta frustrates me to no end!! Argh!
• 3.

  Comment by Sarah_is_vegan on January 29, 2008 10:14pm:

  hating them is futile. It won't stop the naked ads. I think the best recourse is writing a letter to Ingrid explaining that stunts like this have caused you to rethink your ties with PETA and you will no longer be volunteering with them. And (this is the key part) go volunteer with a more focused AR group. This will help the general public see that vegans can be normal rational, dressed people. I think the thing to remember is PETA is just doing what they think will get more vegans, they don't really care what people who are already vegan think about their tactics (cause we're already vegan). So try to accept that PETA will continue with many more shenanigans to come and focus on what we can do for animals without associating ourselves with PETA.
• 4.

  Comment by champurrado on January 30, 2008 8:28am:

  Frustrated emails may not change much, but I sent one anyway, which I am pasting below:
  Dear PETA,
  This is to express my outrage and disgust at your recent "State of the Union Undress" video. Apparently you cannot recognize that the idea that this video promotes—that women are objects to be used for the pleasure of others (usually men)—is the very same mentality that leads people to objectify and mistreat non-human animals. This degrading attitude is what you are supposed to be fighting against, not encouraging. Because PETA is clearly willing to compromise its fundamental ethics for a shallow publicity stunt, I will no longer be supporting the organization through volunteering or through financial contributions. I sincerely hope that you will revoke this video and focus your future efforts on more thoughtful (and less humiliating) endeavors.
• 5.

  Comment by elainevigneault [www] on January 30, 2008 11:44am:

  I have no problem with PETA's naked ads.
  
  My problem however is with the lack of diversity in their naked ads as well as the use of the male gaze and the coupling of sexual stimulation with violence. PETA's violent videos of tortured animals (at the end of the vid) spur some of us into action to fight against that violence, but for others it's simply desensitizing them to violence. And coupling this violence with women's objectification and the sexual excitement of those turned on by naked women is dangerous. PETA should take a bit more care in their messages.
  
  HOWEVER, I think the vast majority of criticisms against PETA's naked ads are poorly thought out and are simply reactions to perceived pornography. Given our prudish society and many people's anti-porn feelings, this results in expressions that are more anti-sex worker and anti-women than intended or deserved.
  
  For example, Sarah implies above that actresses, models, sex workers, and strip-teasing interns are not "normal" or "rational" people. And well, that's pretty degrading, in my opinion. Others, elsewhere, say these stunts are "tacky" "tasteless" "classless" "shallow" etc. which is just another way to degrade the decisions of the people who've gone nude for PETA.
  
  The fact is, women should be able to stay clothed or go nude or wear miniskirts or head scarves and:
  1. their choices should be respected
  2. their voices should be heard
  PERIOD.
  
  For more, please read my most recent post on the topic here:
  http://www.elainevigneault.com/state-of-the-union.html
• 6.

  Comment by Sarah_is_vegan on January 30, 2008 5:22pm:

  I don't think its rational to do a strip-tease to get someone to see your point of view (unless the topic for debate is strip-teases, and then it makes perfect sense). To me that gives the impression that the person doesn't have much of an argument. Can you imagine a lawyer taking of her/his clothes while giving their closing argument, with hopes of swaying the jury?
  I agree that women, and men, have the right to wear as much or as little as they want.
  I think in this ad the nudity was highly sexualized (paired with innuendos, tone and facial expressions). I'm not opposed to nudity in advertising. Some of the PETA "I'd rather go naked..." ads are very artistic and stunning.
  I'm sure it took a lot of courage for this woman to do this film and hopefully she wont take criticism of the tactics as an attack on her.
• 7.

  Comment by keramel on January 31, 2008 12:26am:

  Ugh, it's disappointing. . .that's for sure. I'm guessing the PR people at PETA have numbers supporting the "success" of these types of tactics, but I think it obfuscates the issue.
  
  But on a brighter note, the song/video is Goldfinger's "Free Me," which is totally on point and awesome!!! :)
• 8.

  Comment by mushroom_blotter on February 4, 2008 2:14pm:

  Can't watch videos here, but it sounds funny from the descriptions. Isn't the point of those kinds of things, for any cause, about the ridiculousness of what is meant to be considered 'normal' behaviour in the first place? It's meant to stick in the mind isn't it, force a reaction like all activist art does.
  Like I say I can't view it here but Id be suprised if it was done in a tacky degrading way because it sounds more empowering - it bothers people because they're used to only seeing nakedness as being for oogling over and only if the person looks a certain way; but to take that and turn it around so anyone oogling (projecting a certain type of crassness & disrespect in their observation, or indeed trying to do so) feels uncertain about themselves for so doing then that's a plus.
  
  Culturally there's a mass-acceptance of people going through the motions of things (especially in politics) that we all know are a load of bs. So why does it continue - who does it serve?
• 9.

  Comment by stevejust on February 5, 2008 2:26am:

  Oh effen' A. This is ridiculous because some where out there, there's going to be someone that gets a fetish that involves some mixture of animal abuse and sex. Isn't that the origin of "abnormal" sexual fetishes? Sexual arousal + scenes that become associated with it? Some sort of imprinting that takes place like a trauma (such as maybe your mom walking in on you when you're watching this video)?
  
  I think PETA could ironically be encouraging animal abuse by mixing sexual arousal with sex. I'm sure I could find a shrink to slap some highly technical terms into this lay-person analysis.
  
  I can't wait until the casting couch vids come out and show Alex Pacheco with these girls. Are he and Dov Charney buddies?