PETA Information (Pro/Con)

I didnt really have an opinion on PETA until i emailed them asking for one of their free guides to going vegan.

Instead of sending me the guide, they sent me loads of propaganda about fur and jenniefer lopez etc and all the kfc debate stuff.

They still keep spamming my email even though I have countlessly tried to unsubscribe from it.

Reading the messege boards on the PETA website also turned me against them. They encourage people (on the boards) to feed their cats a vegan diet and to get meat/milk banned in schools.

They are too extreme for me.

First-hand account as far as my displeasure of this organization. When my horse was quite ill and hospitilized at the University, I would go and visit him daily.

Daily I would be barraged by PETA supporters passing out horrendous graphic literature about aborted fetuses while they were picketing the vet clinic at the school. They would tell me the best thing I could do was take my horse and release him into the world Yeah right. They also have known ties to activist organizations that make the FBI list- so no thanks- they are not my cup of tea.

I have heard stories from reliable sources about their activities with feral cats that are hard for me to even believe this could happen.

I am not in favor of PETA because they give animal rights activists a bad name. Instead of appealing to peoples' reason they try to cram their ideas down your throat. Their tactics are extreme. IMO they are more about trying to control people and gain publicity than helping animals.

Isn't PETA the group that spray paints people's fur coats? I believe that fur is murder but the best way to get people to stop financing the fur industry is to educate them about the cruelty.

Mainly personal dealings with PETA people who are wholly unable to comprehend that there is another viewpoint, that there is anything that could be improved within the organization and that the ends justify the means. I have a real problem with targeting small children with the message that their parents are murderers because they serve meat. I have a problem with promoting known lies about companies to turn people toward their agenda. I have a problem with gross-out-shock-value as their only means of "debate". If they had a truly viable agenda they could have intelligent conversation about it - but they can't.

Their stance on Feral Cats just makes me cringe. So hypocritical! Thier overall stance is that animals should be returned to the wild, but that feral cats should just be killed because it's cruel to allow them to live...um...in the wild.

I think that what PETA does is basically fan the flames of cotroversey for the "greater good of animals".

I think that they give animal welfare people a bad name with their extreme methods of getting attention.

That being said, not EVERYTHING they say or promote is total BS (though yes, a lot of it is) and that if they stopped, thought about some of the stuff they said, moved a little closer to the "center" of things, they could actualy get a lot of good done, but the way they twist things now really makes me wonder if they're in it for the animals at all.

Allie, that's the sad thing about the extremist groups like PETA, Greenpeace, etc. They may have some truths in their messages, some kernels of enlightenment that many people would listen to, but because of the extreme shock-value means, the end gets lost and many people (myself included) tune out anything they say.

I don't have a good opinion of PETA mostly because they are using sensationalism and emotions rather than reason to support their positions.

I also have serious problems with the way in which they equate animals' suffering to humans'. I remember a few years ago they had a campaign where they drew parallels between how chickens are treated in chicken farms and how jews were treated during the holocaust. To me, this is really wrong. I wont deny that chickens can suffer (from stress, physical pain, illnesses, cruel death) but people in a concentration camp are denied dignity, hope, freedom and often loose their families. Chickens do not suffer from these things (or at least to a much lower level).

I strongly believe in compassion towards animals and of course, I hate animal cruelty... but I am more enclined to join fights for human rights than animal rights. Not because I believe humans are naturally "superior", but because they suffer more greatly because they have more complex needs (for things like education, freedom, community belonging, artistic stimulation, etc.)

(Just to make it clear: I am NOT saying that animals do not need love, a sense of belonging, etc. Just that humans need more.)

PETA uses silly tactics to prove their point. Personally, I would not deal with them. But in the Philippines, PETA seems to be a major information source for the largest animal welfare group PAWS (Philippine Animal Welfare Society). I am not a member of PAWS but I know they listen to PETA.
Anyway, last year, a city veterinarian began electrocuting dogs in the pound as a means of animal control. Although this practice was stopped, this same veterinarian convinced his fellow government vets to propose electrocution as an approved method of euthanasia. This is now what we animal activists are fighting against and we need lots of ammunition. PETA although not as loud as in the west, has been helping out. PETA has a branch in Hong Kong and I believe sends a rep regularly to Manila.
What I am saying here is that when animals are really suffering and when the pro-animal army is small (like in the Philippines) organizations like PETA sure come in handy.

Anti PETA site:

http://petakillsanimals.com/

Katie

I never realized how bad PETA was until I was involved with some discussion and debate on this board. It was shocking to me to go from being a person who just thought PETA was a little wacky, but didn't do any harm, to believing they are animal murderers and really don't do much of anything good. They are opposed to TNR, if you really read the lit you'll see that they are against pet ownership/adoption, even though on the surface they seem to support these things. A couple of them got in trouble recently for killing adoptable puppies and kittens and dumping them in a dumpster outside a supermarket because they thought euthanasia was better than adoption. Newkirk does not believe that what those two did was wrong, only that it was wrong to dump their bodies. Newkirk also wrote a really bizarre living will that stipulated how her various body parts should be dismembered and sent to various people she doesn't like. If you do a site search here you'll find some pretty lively discussion as well as links about the animal killing and living will. I don't like the fact that they target children. The lettuce ladies incident is offensive to me. I was so angry when they had a campaign promoting beer drinking instead of milk drinking on college campuses. I consider acts of property damage to be acts of violence and thus oppose their tendency of throwing paint on women wearing fur and dumping chicken crap in the middle of high ways. I wish I still had links to most of this stuff, but I don't. I was vegan for a long time, so I can understand some of their arguements, but even when I was vegan I was never involved with PETA, except for volunteering for them at a Warped Tour concert once.

As a research scientist in the biomedical sciences, I strongly disagree with PETAs stance on animal testing. Don't get me wrong, horrible things can and have happened to research animals. However, the sheer advances we've been able to make in medicine would never had happened if not for animal research. For example, did you know bone marrow transplantation was tested on dogs? I believe that the research community needs to police itself regarding experimental animal welfare and to end unnecessary suffering. But we shouldn't give up animal experimentation. I cannot agree with the head of PETA, who said she'd rather save an experimental animal's life then develop a cure for AIDS.

What about their stance on cosmetics testing? Cosmetics, being a purely non-essential luxury item, I definitely am 100% wholeheartedly against using animals, period. As far as pharmeceuticals go...I'm on the fence, honestly. It would depend on what drugs were being developed, for what purpose, what tests were being run and how the animal was treated when not undergoing tests.

I can't speak for other places, but where I work holds a "fundraiser" every Christmastime to buy toys for the research animals. In all honesty you get "better" or more physiologically "true" results if the animals are well treated. As marie-p stated earlier, there is a difference between the suffering of humans and animals. I am entirely fine with animal experimentation *as long as the animals are well treated* because ultimately the suffering of a human with a devastating disease outweighs that of the animal.

See, THAT is what I'm having trouble with. The idea of trying to qualify one species' suffering over another. I don't think there's truly any way to know how and how much animals feel their emotions, including suffering. Do I think that they think and feel in ways that we would find familiar? No, but does that make it less important? I mean, we can't save them all, human and animal alike. But would a dog or cat choose or understand this? THESE are the issues that I really have trouble with.

But yes, I still think PETA is full of *(&***&^ for the most part. Because dumping paint on people's fur coats is truly the way to elicit change. Ultimately, the person is just going to go buy more furs and more animals will die. You can't shift a paradigm by making people mad. The only way a large scale change of thinking will happen is by education, awareness and most of all, necessity. A lot of priorities will have to change. And dumping chicken ($%^ out on the highway won't change most peoples' priorities. It just ticks them off and sets you back even farther.

Remember, the animal research benefits the animals, too. If not for that research, we would not have the vaccines that protect our furbabies from leukemia, distemper, rabies, parvo, etc.

If Newkirk were truly serious about PETA's stance, she'd quit injecting herself, with her daily dose of insulin - developed through (gasp) ANIMAL RESEARCH. Can you spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E?

BTW: the first heart transplant was done on a German shepherd.

I have never been a fan of Peta either. When the court proceedings were commencing against Sheba's killer I got a copy of a letter that PETA sent to the DA's office. It was basically a form letter with the the correct names and addresses listed. Its doesn't help an animal abuse case at all. I went to their website and tried calling one of their animal abuse people-no answer of course.
They were not a group I wanted to get involved Sheba's case. As I had posted Sheba's case on pet-abuse.com I'm thinking maybe that is where they got the info or perhaps they have some other monitoring system. They never contacted me personally-if they had I would have had a few choice words!!
I might still have the letter in case you are interested.

My words exactly.

I don't know about other European countries, but here in Finland the AR scene is quite sceptical of PETA. I suppose they mean well, but IMO their unreliability and showmanship harms the cause. I also think it's weird that the largest (correct me if I'm wrong) AR group in the USA is in the hand of a one person. That can't be right.

I was really interested in PETA when I became vegetarian in the mid-90s, mostly because they were the most vocal group at the time. I learned more about them and was completely turned off by their organization after a few years. I think their tactics harm the message they're trying to send. It seems that PETA is all about shock value, which probably works for a small percentage of people but on a large scale is really ineffective. It starts to rub a lot of people the wrong way - not the best way to try to educate.

Through my job I've had the opportunity to meet some PETA representatives (they didn't know who I worked for, it was an informal situation with a wide variety of non-profits) and I was not impressed. They were pompous and presumptuous; it was the nail in the coffin for me regarding PETA. There are other organizations out there with a similar mission but better tactics. I keep hoping that Hollywood celebs will stop speaking for PETA and go with other animal rights programs, but alas...

Regarding the animal testing bit, I work in administration for a non-profit biomedical research institute. I've also worked in an oncology center. After those two experiences, I've come to a place where I can accept what goes on with animal testing. I've learned a lot about what the IACUC committee requires of our scientists who work with animals (we have rodents). The technicians who work with the animals have the animals' care and comfort at the forefront of their responsibilities. We also have someone who does a lot of work in animal enrichment to provide the best environment possible. I realize that a lot of people oppose all kinds of animal testing and they're entitled to their opinions. For me, I've seen both people and animals in great agony - as well as those who've been cured by methods stemming from animal testing. My feeling is that as long as the scientists/techs are following the established protocols there is a lot of good that can come from testing.

I've been hesitant about adding my 2 cents here. I'm a member of one cat rescue organization, actively work in another, although I'm not an official member for personal ("political" or "social") reasons, and donate to other ones, but I throw whatever literature/appeals I get from PETA in the trash. The reason is that PETA all too often goes overboard. I live in Germany, and am married to a German, who was born several years after the end of WWII. I really resent actions on PETA's part comparing animal shelters to Nazi concentration camps, among other things, and simply can't understand how PETA members can euthanize, and wantonly discard the corpses of, animals that may very well have had a chance of adoption if accommodated in no kill shelters. I wonder if PETA members realize what a disservice they do to shelters/rescue organizations that don't share their radical agenda? PETA does far more harm than good, IMO. Ditto the organization's advocation of any vegan lifestyle for carnivores - it's simply irresponsible. PETA needs to "get real", and until I see any signs of that happening, I won't support the organization through donations or appeals for support. PERIOD.

I dislike PETA because they indulge in outrageous inflammatory rhetoric, much of which is based on truths that are blown totally out of proportion, truths blown out of proportion and sprinkled liberally with lies, or just outright lies altogether. They support environmental terrorist organizations (ALF). They justify their behavior because it's "for the good of the animals". In other words, "the ends justify the means". Well, I disagree. I prefer the Martin Luther King, Jr. method of civil disobedience. I don't support the blowing up of buildings, even if they are empty. I have seen some of the literature their members have handed out to children leaving school yards, without either the school administrators' or the parents' knowledge, that features bloody cartoons, graphic images of dead or diseased animals, and language telling the kids that their mommys and daddys are murderers (this one was about fur). None of that is acceptable. Yech!

On a more amusing note, their other shock tactics are just useless. There was a PETA protest against fur downtown in the city I work in last week. Three very attractive young twenty-somethings wearing nothing but black undies and sitting on a mattress draped in pink gauze (Valentine's Day, don't you know). They held pink hearts in front of their chests that said not to wear fur. They had pamphlets. They were SURROUNDED by young men, some construction workers on lunch break and some men in business suits oogleing them. None of those guys wanted a flyer, they all just wanted to stare at the girls. The women just rolled their eyes and ignored the scene. Lots of the men had their camera phones out. I saw ONE guy accept a flyer and then say,"So can you pose now?". *shakes head* How many people do you suppose were persuaded not to wear fur because of this stunt? Any? I suspect that the only thoughts they provoked were R-rated!

Yes i know hot topic. but i wanted to share. my day. I was at a function with my demo company, today. the Function is a large pet event, called Pet Expo, and is family oriented...imagine my shock,when i get there and see a very large Peta section...and we are RIGHT next to them. I keep to myself, and just observe..

Well, their videos...well....cripes. far from family friendly, and the same darn loop over and over, actors yapping, than elephants being mistreated, a pig getting a block dropped on its head..i dont know what was happening to the chicken but it wasnt pretty...

Than, my fav non family friendly one..Cats mateing, alot...and alot..with some very porn like music.

Than they had a fake doll lady in a fure coat, with a sign around her neck "Only SKANKS wear fur" I couldnt belive it. but than i thought..wait its Peta yes i can. but this its as a FAMILY event. My supervisor, was VERY upset about it, and he let the promoters know, the sign was taken down for a while but towards the end of the night, it was on again. So he told the promoters again.....but this time one of the PETA ladies heard it, and she got really snotty and started saying "Oh yeah wheres your booth!" she watched him come back to our booth, and hes now worried somethings gonna be done to the booth. At least we will know who did it..

They were also pushing vegetarian stuff HEAVILY...i walked around on my breaks, and declined the pamphlets 6 times. all by the SAME person. I was overly annoyed. I am not against eating that diet, but its not for me. and I dont like having stuff shoved in my face like that. and being told i am a Murderer..for not taking it. Nice huh?

Than i noticed a little girl with a booklet, looked like a coloring book or some sort of story "The life of a chicken" given to her by a PETA rep...I dont know since i havent seen the book..(i am going back tommrow to work. so I am gonna get one than.) but..I am gonna say i am sure that parent wasnt happy when they got that home.

There were alot of people covering their kids eyes with the darn cat video....all in all...

is what i have to say.

for getting thru that...

thanks..and i have a whole nothing day tommrow..to deal with it. I have half a mind to bring in athena with a bandana..."Bassets against PETA propaganda" LOL

Bash some heads? PETA is a bunch of fools...

I don't agree with PETA for the reasons that are mentioned here.

I don't like it that they force their views down people's throat. God created man to have dominion over the animals, not the other way around. I eat meat and no one has the right to tell me I can't. And as for feeding my cats a vegan diet?? No way! Cats are meat eaters!! In the old days, people trapped beaver, fox and other animals for their fur. People would have frozen to death if they didn't have furs to keep them warm.

All in all, PETA is not the way to go. Not if they say to "release" a domesticated animal to "fend" for themself and that they would be happier. All the poor animal would do is starve and wander why their people abandoned them. That is animal cruelty.

I just could not understand why they would show such stuff and do such stuff at a FAMILY show...

LOL I would buy some KFC or burgers and eat it in from of them... Too bad you couldn't bar-b-q and have a fan to blow the smoke their way..

LOL I am bad..... shove it down their throats like they are doing to you.