Peta's Portrayl of women on Strip Quiz Offensive? Y/N?

Peta seems to have a policy of using the "cookie cutter" female bombshell to push their vegetarian ideas ex. the lettuce ladies...It's just one form they portray, not the myriad of beauteous shapes and sizes available) I find this somewhat insulting and feel it's irresponsible and possibly helping the propagation of a whole other problem. I was curious how many people respond positively to this exploitative sexist advertising? After all, Playboy magazine's success was formed with the same marketing model. Heffner and friends wanted to propagate their own political views but knew that most people wouldn't be interested, unless...they put naked girls in the magazine. Bingo. Think of Beer ads. etc. PETA is using advertising in it's most classical form: Attach biological desire/need fulfillment to product/idea in consumers minds.

I'm still a little off my rocker over this one because of the youthful portrayal of the woman. It was on the Peta website a few months ago and was posted as a game:

There was a woman dressed as a trashy school girl. Typical "porno" music played in the background laced with female moaning sounds. The more vegetarian multiple choice questions you got right the more silly, sexually laced, supplicating comments would pop up on the screen and she would also remove an article of clothing. I'm not against nudity/sexuality, but, I feel like actions like these and portrayals of women like this can help to propagate this dangerous mindset that leads to our rape and cruelty culture.

I mentioned some of my PETA concerns to some vegetarian/vegan people and wanted to do a wider poll.

My question is posted here because this is an organization that supports and propagates some form of vegetarian/vegan culture. So I figured some off ya'll may be familiar with what I'm referring to and would be the best folks to poll, so thanks for the input:

DO you think PETA's "sexualized female form" based propaganda (ex lettuce ladies, school girl striptease quiz) is good (it's a way to get the message out and heard) or bad (it's causing more problems somewhere while it's attempting to aliviate something else) or do you not care (does it pass you by like any other ad?

 

i think a lot of stuff peta does is really irritating

i have not seen what you are describing

but since they are so puritanical about food, it is sorta weird

[as well as offensive]

 

Thanks for the reply. Good to know there are different views regarding them, than what I have encountered as I've mingled through my area. It got to the point where I had to give up some activities that I really enjoyed contributing to because of the fervor/unswerving love in some of the PETA followers. The idea that anything should be necessary to promote their views because of the horrible undeniable injustices being done to animals. I think they've chosen a very subtlety tender nerve to press regarding women. I am trying to keep in mind my ethics clearly are subjective. However, I feel that there is a differently between the young woman who got in the way of the animal lorries and eventually was run over and the woman who dresses and promotes and pedals her femininity in that way with ulteriar motives. Is one less warrior than the other? One makes me profoundly sad (a life lost) and but the other a tidge mad, as I've had to walk home past strip clubs late at night and am treated poorly...

'Puritanical' is an interesting word you choose as well. I think one can easily recall the ferver/havoc that was been unleashed by other puritanical organization's, such as some churches.

Another example was after the Greyhound tragic event in Manitoba PETA attempted to run adds in the nearby communities to the horrific event (Portage la Praire's paper was one I recall) and draw a parallel between the murderers actions and people who ate animals for sustanence. The papers thankfully refused to run those ads and deemed them in poor taste. When confrounted PETA said something along the lines of, and I parphrase, "well there was really nothing we could do for the family anyhow." Inferring that they were free to captialize off of the insane event as they saw fit. "How 'bout flowers," I thought, if they did actually care for a suggestion that is? And, on the church puritanical fervor frount: the same time this was going on a pack of goofs from a biblically based church in the states atttempted to "crash" the funeral and stage a demo. Their messge was that this event was a sign of god punishing canada, of all things! A counter demo had to be organized to keep them away from the greivers. A disturbing synchronicity could be draw between thier actions perhaps?

Strange times. Thanks for the word. Puritanical indeed.

 

they have made a lot of people really angry in eastern montana

why, i have no idea, as far as i can tell they have not staged an event within 1000 miles of here [i could be wrong, i am severely media-challenged]

i feel like the only vegetarian in town and keep my mouth shut

[there must be others, but just as secretive]

 

yeah. cool to know that one vegetarian is smelling that something is afoot. Thanks for the replys. Your the only one to attempt to touch this stinking can a worms I opened.

I be taking this one to rest then. I reckon that vegetarians are kinda scarce in most parts. Some more than others

 

is that an official moderator hint?

 

kay there are scads of peta threads, I was hitting the feminist angle...but after looking at all the other peta threads I hope this just gets closed...there will be no discussion that will matter clearly...even the mods can't handle it...

Sorry I started it. Please forget this thread.

 

Damn it I accidently hit the no concern one... I ment the not good lol !!

Women have the right to make the decisionif they want to show their bodys or not ... but I think its wrong that Peta is exploiting women to get their point across.
Idk ...

 

I agree with Peta on most issues, but exploiting women to promote animal rights is not the way.

 

I don't do PETA. There's respect for non-human animals, and then there's putting other species first. I'm sorry, but Homo sapiens is my main concern, second to the planet in general. We must worry about our own species first.

 

what will you think when all that's left is us, dogs, cats, kentucky-fryable chickens, and beef cattle?

[and rats and cockroaches, lots of rats and cockroaches]

 

I like rats, and do the KFC animals still count as chickens?

I don't think that it will come to that. There's still ecology, and evolution. We still need a diversity of species for Earth to survive. However, I will not sacrifice the needs (note: I didn't say "desires") of humanity to protect the crested guppy or whatever species is the ticket victim this week.

Where there is a rational choice, I will conserve. I'm vegetarian because I don't HAVE to kill an animal to live in the 21st century. I don't support factory farming if I can help it: I buy eggs from a local chicken farmer (he LOVES chickens) and am looking for free-range milk. Happy animals do make better tasting food.

I have varying thoughts on animal testing. I don't wear makeup anyway, but if we're worried about what the chemical will do to a dog, then WHY are we considering putting it on our eyes? In our hair? On our teeth? For medecines, I prefer homeopathy because I have strange reactions to chemicals (see cosmetics ), but if the treatment may save a human life or two they can dip as many baby rabbits as they like in weird chemicals.

As for "exploiting women," do you honestly think that the women are forced to make these commercials? Is it exploitation if the woman exercises her feminism-given right to choose and uses her sexuality to benefit herself and her cause?