I have an idea for a new thread...

[gummibear]

      GIF

[gummibear]

[geomark]

[Gen]

Don’t be too quick judge. The whole campaign was done tongue in cheek. Mainstream media rarely ever want to report on animal exploitation, so PETA launches these types of campaigns with ‘out there’ statements to draw attention.

 

Do I think it’s an effective way to raise awareness? No. PETA is a divisive organisation, among vegans and carnists alike.

The problem I have with organisations like PETA and any person that feels strongly about certain beliefs/way of life is that they try force it onto others..the moment they do rubbish like that I just become anti.

[Fruity]

[Odinson]

I cannot help wonder how much of this type of publicity seeking is aimed at self promotion and raising funds for the organization. I have a sneaky suspicion that the anti whaling peeps do the same.

 

No organisation operates on thoughts, prayers and well enthusiastic pats on the back. Everyone from Oxfam to your local SPCA needs money to keep the lights on. Not quite sure how fundraising by anti-whalers is a bad thing. Should we then be promoting it or sit with our hands folded whilst whalers decimate whale populations? 

 

sounds a bit like the EFF

 

I can see certain parallels in approaches. Different means objectives, though. 

 

The problem I have with organisations like PETA and any person that feels strongly about certain beliefs/way of life is that they try force it onto others..the moment they do rubbish like that I just become anti.

 

There's a bit of psychology behind what you're saying. However, I would have to say that such kind of thinking is a easy way to sit in your comfort zone and not be challenged by new perspectives. 

 

When Arrive Alive runs a 'Don't drink and drive' campaign, do you see it and figure '**** that, don't tell me what to do!' or when the SPCA campaigns for people to not set off fireworks during New Year's/Diwali do you also think '**** that, don't tell me what to do!'. Take a minute to understand the message, digest it and then make up your mind. Yes, Peta's methods are often abrasive and confrontational and many don't agree with it and you don't have to, but they are one voice in a sea of millions. 

 

Societal changes require facing uncomfortable truths. Would women have voting rights if the suffragettes didn't make a peep, out of fear of upsetting the fragile patriarchal egos of men? Ending the meaningless exploitation of animals is not being campaigned to satisfy someone at Peta's need for virtue signalling, it's being done because the ethics and science show that the current status quo is untenable and is vastly detrimental to human and non-human animals' health and welfare, as well as the environment and future of this planet. 

Edited November 26, 2018 by Odinson

[Patchelicious]

I cannot help wonder how much of this type of publicity seeking is aimed at self promotion and raising funds for the organization. I have a sneaky suspicion that the anti whaling peeps do the same.

...... Whale Whores

[Patchelicious]

No organisation operates on thoughts, prayers and well enthusiastic pats on the back. Everyone from Oxfam to your local SPCA needs money to keep the lights on. Not quite sure how fundraising by anti-whalers is a bad thing. Should we then be promoting it or sit with our hands folded whilst whalers decimate whale populations? 

 

 

I can see certain parallels in approaches. Different means, though. 

 

 

There's a bit of psychology behind what you're saying. However, I would have to say that kind of thinking is a easy way to sit in your comfort zone and not be challenged by new perspectives. 

 

When Arrive Alive runs a 'Don't drink and drive' campaign, do you see it and figure '**** that, don't tell me what to do!' or when the SPCA campaigns for people to not set off fireworks during New Year's/Diwali do you also think '**** that, don't tell me what to do!'. Take a minute to understand the message, digest it and then make up your mind. Yes, Peta's methods are often abrasive and confrontational and many don't agree with it and you don't have to, but they are one voice in a sea of millions. 

 

Societal changes require facing uncomfortable truths. Would women have voting rights if the suffragettes didn't make a peep, out of fear of upsetting the fragile patriarchal egos of men? Ending the meaningless exploitation of animals is not being campaigned to satisfy someone at Peta's need for virtue signalling, it's being done because the ethics and science show that the current status quo is untenable and is vastly detrimental to human and non-human animals' health and welfare, as well as the environment of the planet. 

 

It does, but by pissing the people off who's support you are actually needing or asking for you aren't actually going to change the status quo.

[Napalm]

Societal changes require facing uncomfortable truths. Would women have voting rights if the suffragettes didn't make a peep, out of fear of upsetting the fragile patriarchal egos of men? Ending the meaningless exploitation of animals is not being campaigned to satisfy someone at Peta's need for virtue signalling, it's being done because the ethics and science show that the current status quo is untenable and is vastly detrimental to human and non-human animals' health and welfare, as well as the environment of the planet. 

 

What pisses me off about organisations like PETA, is how they have the money to spend millions on advertising campaigns, yet they don't have money for their own animal shelters and end up killing 80-90% of the animals. 

[Tuxstir]

I cannot help wonder how much of this type of publicity seeking is aimed at self promotion and raising funds for the organization. I have a sneaky suspicion that the anti whaling peeps do the same.

 

Kinda like the story of the Ady Gil

[Odinson]

It does, but by pissing the people off who's support you are actually needing or asking for you aren't actually going to change the status quo.

 

Like I said, Peta is a very large, but very divisive organisation. They're as unpopular among vegans as they are among meat eaters. They are not representative of the 'vegan norm', if you will. 

 

The loudest voices catch the most attention. The Daily Mail isn't going to run a story about 'Cornwall man goes vegan and doesn't shove it in anyone's face'. They're going to run a story about crazy ol' Peta, cause that gets them all those nice clicks. 

[Patchelicious]

Like I said, Peta is a very large, but very divisive organisation. They're as unpopular among vegans as they are among meat eaters. They are not representative of the 'vegan norm', if you will. 

 

The loudest voices catch the most attention. The Daily Mail isn't going to run a story about 'Cornwall man goes vegan and doesn't shove it in anyone's face'. They're going to run a story about crazy ol' Peta, cause that gets them all those nice clicks. 

 

So they use the PETA method.

[Odinson]

So they use the PETA method.

 

They're all playing the same game; just different teams. 

[Fruity]

[Patchelicious]

No organisation operates on thoughts, prayers and well enthusiastic pats on the back. Everyone from Oxfam to your local SPCA needs money to keep the lights on. Not quite sure how fundraising by anti-whalers is a bad thing. Should we then be promoting it or sit with our hands folded whilst whalers decimate whale populations? 

 

 

I can see certain parallels in approaches. Different means objectives, though. 

 

 

There's a bit of psychology behind what you're saying. However, I would have to say that such kind of thinking is a easy way to sit in your comfort zone and not be challenged by new perspectives. 

 

When Arrive Alive runs a 'Don't drink and drive' campaign, do you see it and figure '**** that, don't tell me what to do!' or when the SPCA campaigns for people to not set off fireworks during New Year's/Diwali do you also think '**** that, don't tell me what to do!'. Take a minute to understand the message, digest it and then make up your mind. Yes, Peta's methods are often abrasive and confrontational and many don't agree with it and you don't have to, but they are one voice in a sea of millions. 

 

Societal changes require facing uncomfortable truths. Would women have voting rights if the suffragettes didn't make a peep, out of fear of upsetting the fragile patriarchal egos of men? Ending the meaningless exploitation of animals is not being campaigned to satisfy someone at Peta's need for virtue signalling, it's being done because the ethics and science show that the current status quo is untenable and is vastly detrimental to human and non-human animals' health and welfare, as well as the environment and future of this planet. 

Arguing people into submission is not the best way to convince them, no matter how strong and solid an argument is, the delivery is what sells it at the end of the day.

Edited November 26, 2018 by Patchelicious

[Odinson]

Arguing people into submission is not the best way to convince them, no matter how strong and solid an argument is, the delivery is what sells it at the end of the day.

 

 

Worth a listen: 

 

https://youtu.be/Z3u7hXpOm58

 

I've posted it a page or three back, but for those who missed/skipped it.