I so feel like I should catch the reference…
Daniel
:: offers a jelly baby ::
The NJSPCA can’t even get it right. The issue shouldn’t be about “It’s OK to harm animals”.
The issue should be “its cruel to make candy that makes light of the fact that an animal died for no purpose.”
I think your comments about animal crackers and pinatas can’t refute that point. Food shaped like animals are just expressions of animals and no more imply harming the animal is an issue than a gingerbread man implies cruelty to humans. Pinatas are not effigy objects; they are artistic expressions for a game where the object isn’t to harm tweety bird but to get the candy out of the object shaped like tweety bird.
But “road kill” candy pretty much spells out that the animal is killed and for no reason. What the hell is that celebrating?
Road kill candy may not be the end of civilization – but it is gross. When you’ve seen dead animals on the road who were obviously hit deliberately, it’s kind of sickening. No, it’s really sickening. It would be a funny novelty candy item if it didn’t represent human cruelty.
So what’s next, “kick the kitten” stuffed animals, wherein the eyes pop out?
But roadkill gummi bears are gross. Have any of you ever seen road kill? It’s guts and blood and tiny bits of tissue and dirt. . .
Why would you want candy with its viscera ground into the asphalt?
This coming from a woman was afraid to eat her box of Bertie Bots Everyflavor Jellybeans-- but gladly fed the vomit ones to friends and family.
For the same reason you sing “Great Green Gobs of Greasy Grimy Gopher Guts” or collect Garbage Pail Kids (god that probably dates me).
The conspiracy theorist in me says that Kraft paid the society to protest; you can’t buy publicity like this. The realist in me thinks that General Mills will be hit next for having Count Chocula promote the occult to kids.
So much for my conspiracy theory- Kraft kaved.
My post was more of a “related thought” than specifically on-topic.
Ohh… the pun! The pain!!!
Ah, I see that their legend is growing. BTW they take pride in knowing they fight for what’s right in whatever they do.
Re Jelly Babies
Lela. Face Of Evil- “It’s true then? You eat babies?”
I understand what you’re saying, but I still think the NJSPCA is wrong.
They are the New Jersey chapter of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. As far as I know, however, there is no Society for the Prevention of People Thinking for Themselves.
As noted above, kids sing comically graphic songs about death (animal and human), dismemberment, bodily functions and all kinds of socially unacceptable things. That doesn’t lead to animal cruelty, arson, murder or any of the actions described in those songs. If a kid really is cruel to animals, he’s probably not even socialized well enough to be singing these songs with the other kids. And I hardly think novelty candy would be any more influential than a song.
How can you tell when they’re hit on purpose? I’m just curious, do you call CSI or something?
Marc
Oh for CRYING out loud. Kids are not precious little glass angels to be bubble-wrapped against even the slightest “bad thing”. Yeah the candy is kinda gross. Hello, do you HAVE kids? KIDS are gross.
Whenever my son used to go into a temper tantrum, all I had to do was mention some bodily function, or something like “oh euuuuewww, the dog farted” and he’d start cracking. Two or three comments later, he’d have come full circle from tantrum to giggling fit.
This is just ridiculous beyond the pale, as someone said above, kids ARE able to distinguish fact from fantasy. Something as innocuous as those candies is not going to make a difference in that and “make kids think it’s okay to harm animals”.
Good grief, like the OP, this is so ridiculous, I can’t even work up a good head of steam about it. It’s just dumb.
Just wanna clarify my last post.
The NJSPCA wanted the candy off the market because they feared it would make kids think a certain way. We’re getting into Orwell territory here, folks.
Uh oh! I like Sour Patch Kids… i’m pretty sure this will lead to me dunking the heads of helpless children into sugars and citric and tartaric acid, and then biting them off…
Oh I just meant human children. So animal rights folks don’t care. Nor does anyone else…
Its just as well. I love devouring those Kids.
Before I read this news story I had no idea Road Kill gummi candy even existed.
Thanks to the Animal Rights activists I am now aware of this candy and I have bought four bags of it online. Not for my responsible adult self, but for two young children.
Good job, Animal Rights activists. Good job.
Anyone else want some?
I can’t believe, in a thread about disgusting candy, no one brought up those lollipops with insects encased within. Insect candy makes road kill gummies look like, well, candy…
FWIW, I always feel a bit creepy when I buy “bullwrinkle” (smoked bull penis) snacks for my dogs. I hate to think that there are emasculated cattle wandering around out there because of me, but, damn it, the dogs love them so!
Why is it that when a corporation is doing something really evil, like contributing to genocide in Irian Jaya, people can protest until they’re blue in the face without changing anything, but when it comes to something harmless like roadkill candy it only takes one little statement being issued by some mental patients for the corporation to completely back down?
Because the company measures its response not by the egregiousness of the action itself, but by the likely effects on the company’s public image. They know that most people couldn’t even find Irian Jaya on a map, let alone know or care what is going on there. The candy thing, on the other hand, gets immediate publicity and the company decides to nip it in the bud by caving in, rather than risk being subjected to an ongoing campaign by the NJSPCA.
For the record, i’m a vegetarian who is strongly opposed to animal cruelty, and i think the NJSPCA has a stick up it collective ass on this issue. I’m almost tempted to buy some road-kill candy just for the sake of it.