PETA/Tom Green/Andy Kaufman: Entities that called attention to themselves and gained the respect of the few and the derision of the many.
It’s gotten to the point that when one mentions PETA, the response is usually: “Oh, come on.” They’ve undermined their own credibility to the extent that some folks think, If PETA’s against it, then I’m for it.
Not many groups have been able to convince the populace of that same group’s buffoonery through their own ads.
Well…maybe the Democratic party. 
Is that right? I thought dairy cattle were specific breeds, and different from the muscular breeds raised for meat. Besides, I think dairy cows lactate all the time, pregnant or not.
Even if they only lactated when pregnant, surely the pregnancy could be simulated with hormone shots - much cheaper and less risky than keeping the cows pregnant all the time. Besides if every dairy cow in the U.S. were kept with child all the time, we’d be up to our armpits in calves by now!
I loathe Guliani.
I like animals. Even the ones that aren’t cute.
I like PETA (still) better than Guliani.
But I think it’s tacky in the extreme to exploit a persons medical problems that way. Attack his ideas. Hell, burn him in effigy in the street for his ideas but leave his poor ass out of it.
All they’re doing is re-enforcing many people’s idea that belief in animal rights goes hand in hand with increased callousness to human beings. Which, I think, gives lots of people a justification for not listening to their argument (something people are likely to seek out if they are being asked to do something they don’t like- ie give up meat and milk.)
Beyond that, is the ad getting their argument before the public? Their argument is that using animals as our slaves, for food, is immoral. What do health risks have to do with that? Do people get prostate cancer as punishment for their sins?
PS Anybody seen the PETA anti-fur ad (I haven’t, I only read about it second hand) where they show a woman’s crotch, in a bikini, with pubic hair showing outside the bikini. The tag line was something about “Who says fur is attractive?” Alienated a lot of feminists with that one. Real coalition builders, those PETAs.)
People
Eating
Tasty
Animals
Mmmm. Baby back, baby back ribs.
And from a real baby too! YUM!
Not many groups have been able to convince the populace of that same group’s buffoonery through their own ads.
Well…maybe the Democratic party.
**
[/QUOTE]
The anti-abortion groups come to mind.
You’re right, Annie. Them, too.
RTFirefly wrote:
I hate to break this to you, RTFirefly, but corporate officers are flesh-and-blood human beings.
(Although, technically, so are politicians. So I suppose my argument doesn’t carry much weight.)
Phil, the term “pregnant” is incorrect, 1) because it infers there’s a calf inside; and 2) A female doesn’t produce milk until AFTER the birth (e.g. because there’s no need, seeing how there’s no baby to feed.), so a pregnancy wouldn’t make sense. Once a female mammal (including humans) gives birth, milk producing hormones kick in. She will continue producing milk, on a supply and demand basis, until she no longer produces the hormones necessary to produce the milk. This usually occurs when the baby is weaned. Or, in the case of a cow, ad infinitum, since there’s really not a baby but a milk pump.
The dairy industry exploits this condition, if you will, by making sure that they milk the cow on a regular basis. Whether farmers give the cows hormones to stimulate more milk I don’t know, though there was a debate in Congress about whether to allow it years ago.
My uncle used to own a dairy farm and I must say that the cows seemed pretty darn content. They were given a nice green pasture to laze around in all day until it was milking time. As far as being mistreated, I personally so no evidence.
I’ll grant that. But I always make it a point to wait for solid results. Even then, if we avoided everything that was supposed to be bad or cancer-causing for us, we’d be huddling in bunkers.
I’m just unwilling to give PETA credit for anything. If you give them some respectability, they’ll go even further, IMO.
If they’re becoming this tasteless, what next?
A picture of Audrey Hepburn saying “Got colon cancer?”
To me, that’s like showing a picture of Magic Johnson saying “Got AIDS?” and showing a condom, or something like that.
It’s in extremely poor taste.
I don’t like Guilani, but that doesn’t mean I’m glad he has cancer.
It’s been better than 20 years since my parents worked on the dair, and it was a fairly small herd, so things probably are different now, but their cows were pregnant.
I asked my mom about it recently, and she said that, while a cow can calve throughout its life, it wasn’t practical. After her 3rd or 4th calf, a cow is more likely to suffer from “milk fever,” which is really a magnesium defeciency, or other complications. So after 3 or 4 calves, they would auction the cow off. The male calves would also be auctioned off, and the females kept to replenish the herd.
Kat, I’m not really sure what you’re trying to say. Were the cows always pregnant in the sense that there were little calves growing inside? Wouldn’t they eventually get too big to carry?
In any event, it’s pretty clear that PETA thinks that all animals should be treated decently – except the human animal.
Well, I didn’t see this thread and opened a pit thread already in case anyone feels like swearing
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=36481
I do have another point of view,though- Not reagarding the “Got” ad (that is just wrong), but rather about the chickens and McDonalds. I really did not know that they debeaked chickens or treated them like they do just to get eggs. I rarely eat eggs- I usually only use them for cooking- but I will likely start looking for “free range” chicken eggs now or I’ll find a local farmer to provide them. I am not doing this because of the “UnHappy Meals” stunt (which I don’t remember- I must live under a rock), I’m doing it because I read about it in the newspaper. You can raise awareness without being a psycho.
Zette
This is the reaction I don’t understand. In the “Unhappy meals” campaign Ronald McDonald was shown with a bloody butcher knife. What’s so psychotic about that? Unless killing animals is psychotic.
It’s psychotic 'cuz everyone knows that the Hamburglar is the one who likes to chop animals into little pieces. Ronald’s the one that likes deer hunting. Duh! Everyone knows that!
. . . Wouldn’t a de-beaked chicken look just like a smiley face?
Well…don’t they have to debeak them? I thought chickens would peck each other to death if they’re not debeaked?
They aren’t allowed access to other chickens. They each live in a box cage barely larger than their body.
I am a fairly open minded individual. I enjoy that people believe a myriad of things (many of which I find ludicrous … like the belief of a flat earth). I enjoy engaging in serious debate about topics as I find this helps me gain a better understanding on my own beliefs and can often help me refine or redefine them.
That said, the type of tactics I see exposed here, as being used by this PETA organization are tasteless and vulgar to me. I even took the time to write them a letter expressing my opinion and my disgust.
If someone wants to talk seriously about the treatment of animals and the problems this causes, then fine! More power to you! I would even be happy to debate that with anyone. However, to use the pain and suffering of a man and his family to attempt to further your cause is irreprehensible and should be penalized by the society we live in. Sadly, I imagine that it will not. As many believe that politicians are not people and can be used and abused as they are here to dance for our pleasure. I worry more for Mr. Guilliane than I do for the world’s population of cows. Call me a humanist if you like (not that I am even sure of an accurate description of one).
'nuff said
I’ve noticed this, tracer. And I have nothing against corporate officers, stockholders, etc. speaking out in favor of the corporation’s positions on their own time, and with their own resources if they choose to spend any. That’s their right, and their business. But my belief is that the legal entity of the corporation should not be allowed to spend a dime to influence what the public believes, beyond selling its products and burnishing its image in a most general way. They’re not people, and I don’t believe they should have the same sorts of rights that people do.
Where the line might be drawn is a subject for another debate, but I remain committed to my position that much, likely most, of the bad treatment of livestock while alive is due to corporatization of agriculture, and that those who deplore such conditions are best advised to take a stand to drastically reduce corporate influence in our political system.