« Big mouth dog expert, heal thyself ' s dog | Main | Virginia charges Vick with killing, torturing, and fighting dogs »

24 September 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


"makes us wonder why so many members of the general public continue to get sucked in..."

The internet sites that explain the sinister side of PETA are the only information that I've seen that would give the general public any BIG reason to avoid PETA. There are occasional news items about them doing something extreme or causing a scene - but it's "on behalf of animals" (fur, circus animals, etc.), and I just thought that they were people who loved animals who had some members who went overboard in their methods. I didn't truly believe some of the info on anti-PETA websites because there are "hate" sites for every good group or company. This site pointed out some links that led me to see the pervasive theme of their anti-cat/dog philosophy, and their deceit in not explaining this philosophy in their fund-raising letters filled with photos of starving and abused dogs.

As a feminist, I'm turned off by the ads mentioned in this article, but I know that "sex sells", and if they were a group that was doing good work, I would understand the reasoning behind the ad campaign. I wouldn't approve, but I would understand.


What makes you think this is the tipping point? Many of us here wrote off PETa a long time ago. This is just one more thing on the list of "Things that make PETa a disgusting organization." And makes us wonder why so many members of the general public CONTINUE to get sucked in to their PR propaganda.


Forgive me for being insensitive to hot naked women causing other women to have body issues and men to have unrealistic expectations, but why is this the tipping point for bailing on PeTA?

If sexy ads are what it takes for you to finally dump PeTA, fine. But it's sad that the EVIL and VILE things they do and their radical, bizarre, and hypocritical positions weren't enough.

"OMG, they have naked women and that makes me have body image issues!!!! Now I've had enough!" "JESUS! They exploit hot models who get paid a lot to look hot, real men should reject these models and the causes they represent."

It seems to me that such positions are as shallow as the ads.


Any credibility they still had is going right out the window.


Christie Keith

Thanks, Elaine! I had linked to the BlogHer article... it's the last line of my post.

Elaine Vigneault

Thank you for writing about this.

By the way, here's the link to the BlogHer article:



PETA? Hypocritical? How unusual!


Wanted to respond to Christopher and his assumption that the scantily clad women were a tipping point for recommending that people avoid PeTA.

I have been uncomfortable with PeTA's approach from the gitgo. The fact that they targeted women wearing fur and not men wearing leather has always struck me as a sexist act. The reason I blogged about it on Sunday is the Alicia Siverstone ads...it was topical and in the news and so I thought I would blog about an issue that I have been thinking about for over 20 years... definitely not a tipping point...just tying into the news of the day.


The comments to this entry are closed.