tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33983561682714723162024-03-14T08:00:12.915-07:00Vegans Against PETAThis is a blog for animal rights activists who are concerned about the misogynist, racist, homophobic and transphobic tactics used by PETA.The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-73882060699622700412010-07-22T19:17:00.000-07:002010-07-22T19:45:52.111-07:00Don't befriend sociopathsHoly fucking hell, it's like I ate a poison apple and fell asleep for....well, however long you fall asleep when you eat a poison apple in those fairy tales. I guess in my case, two months. And luckily, I didn't even have to have some schmalzy prince come and wake me up with a kiss. Victory!<br /><br />Anyhow, I apologize for my crappy posting record lately -- shit's been crazy, plus I had a minor crisis last summer when it turned out I'd made friends with a sociopath. Better yet, she was somewhat active in the animal rights movement, so it lessened my enthusiasm for this blog considerably, and in the meantime I got involved in other activities, which means I now have even LESS time than I did before. I guess the moral of this story is don't make friends with sociopaths, and don't expect a better posting record from me. Ha. Now I sound like a total asshole.<br /><br />Also, I absolutely have to share this with y'all -- it's <a href="http://www.easyvegan.info/2009/12/09/defensive-omnivore-bingo-game-on/">Defensive Omnivore Bingo</a> (I found it because one of the spaces links here). If you're not familiar with this phenomenon, just look at it and imagine yourself putting down bingo chips as you converse with an omnivore and they share their vast knowledge of veganism with you. Trust me, you've totally had this conversation before. The cards should probably be called Déjà Vu Bingo. Earlier great bingo cards in this vein include <a href="http://i-dreamed-i-was.livejournal.com/6105.html">White Liberal Bingo</a> and <a href="http://hoydenabouttown.com/?p=431">Anti-Feminist Bingo.</a> Actually, if you go over to <a href="http://thecurvature.com/">Cara's place</a>, she's got a whole list on the far right hand side, underneath her blogroll. Enjoy!<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-64197393068032469152010-07-22T06:33:00.000-07:002010-07-26T13:53:38.964-07:00Thanks PETA, now I just spit all over everything.<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiS1bkm59OMxj6J2arzTs9nK0KEFBgr6EAx9jUmAhacqq5fasBDBl6xCeun2UyKPveZ3d2VDmLpwJj9WlEnu_5AWhoFHMxKr642pfwkY5N7E5yqDRODeELQX5IyeZyxB6OZn8xY2965NXc/s1600/snowwhite.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 268px; height: 319px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiS1bkm59OMxj6J2arzTs9nK0KEFBgr6EAx9jUmAhacqq5fasBDBl6xCeun2UyKPveZ3d2VDmLpwJj9WlEnu_5AWhoFHMxKr642pfwkY5N7E5yqDRODeELQX5IyeZyxB6OZn8xY2965NXc/s320/snowwhite.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5497626735652405346" /></a><br />All right, I swear to all the gods in the universe that if Sinéad O'Connor turns up wearing some fucking fur I'm going to lose all faith in humanity. Why, you ask? Certainly not because of anything Sinéad's done, first of all. I've mentioned my crazy love of her in the past, but before Sinéad, another female singer had my heart and changed my life with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Jackson%27s_Rhythm_Nation_1814">this insanely amazing album</a>.<br /><br />From the time I was nine years old, Janet Jackson was my idol. I dressed like her, I pissed off every last redneck in my small-town school by spouting the anti-racist mantras I learned from Rhythm Nation, and as an adult, I've cried myself to sleep many a time listening to her amazing song <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haZccCYm-IE">What About</a> (be warned that the video, while powerful, could be triggering) and found healing in songs like Better Days and Enjoy. I still adore the hell out of Janet and credit her with shaping my political beliefs -- without her, it's safe to assume this blog wouldn't exist because I wouldn't care enough about racism, sexism and other -isms to see the error of PETA's approach. Hell, I probably wouldn't even be vegan at all. After all, I was 12 when I became a vegetarian, but I was nine when Rhythm Nation made me aware of the world around me. If you're not familiar with the album, at least <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAwaNWGLM0c&feature=avmsc2">watch the video</a> for the title track. You won't regret it.<br /><br />So imagine my dismay when I found out that Janet is posing for a line of ads <a href="http://www.singersroom.com/news/6063/Janet-Jackson-Goes-High-Fashion-For-Blackglama">for luxury fur company BlackGlama.</a> It's especially shocking because she is (or was, I guess) <a href="http://www.gotham-magazine.com/celebrities/articles/in-control">supposedly vegan.</a> Not to mention she's well known for being an animal lover, and her song God's Stepchild even mentions that as a child she often used her "four-legged friends" as a conduit for speaking to God. It doesn't make any sense on so many levels – it doesn't fit the type of style icon she is, it doesn't fit her image as an animal lover, and it doesn't match with her overall reputation for compassion that makes me and others love her so much. And it's pissed off a lot of people -- including PETA. Not surprisingly, PETA's statement is where I start spitting on things and forgetting my disappointment with Janet:</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0.2in;"></p><blockquote>"It's amazing what celebrities will do when their careers are on a downslide, but we didn't think that Janet was this desperate. Surely, she knows enough about suffering and unjustified death to recognize that both occur in the production of a fur coat. We are asking her to think again and to donate these stolen skins to be used as bedding for animals orphaned by other human-caused disasters, such as loss of habitat," PETA spokeswoman Amanda Schinke said in a statement.<br /></blockquote> <p></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0.2in;">Okay, let's start small. That crack about Janet's career? First of all, where the hell are the careers of PETA's celebrity spokespeople? I haven't seen any of them starring in a blockbuster movie, or performing on the finale of American Idol, or headlining the Essence music festival. In fact, it seems to me that the last really big movie Alicia Silverstone starred in was 1999's Blast From the Past -- and I don't say that to insult Alicia; despite her PETA support, I really like her. Also, let's not forget that ageism, misogyny and racism are a big part of why Janet's music career has waned in the last several years -- I really hope I don't need to explain this, but in case you're confused, start by heading to your local beach and counting how many male titties you see casually and uncontroversially on display.<br /></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0.2in;">But what really gobsmacked me was the "unjustified death" comment, which caused me to scream the F word with so much enthusiasm that I accidentally launched a spit attack on my entire desk. Because, PETA, <a href="http://www.womanist-musings.com/2010/07/peta-attacks-janet-jackson.html">are you saying what I think you're saying?</a> I...wow. How do you think Janet's gonna listen to you now, when you're bringing her DEAD BROTHER into this out of absolutely nowhere? (Either that or they're talking about slavery, which doesn't exactly improve the situation.) Did it ever occur to you that this is why nobody listens to you, why you're a water cooler punchline? Plus, given Janet's past commitment to compassionate causes, maybe you shouldn't have gone into this with the attitude that the only thing you have to gain is pissing her off. If PETA approached Janet respectfully, there's a good chance she'd listen, as she did when she stopped using a panther <a href="http://www.janet-xone.com/tours/rhythmnation.html">in her Rhythm Nation tour</a> after animals rights groups protested.<br /><br />And what the hell kind of bizarre-ass phrasing is "unjustified death," anyways? I mean, is that as opposed to justified death, like when somebody breaks into your home to kill you and you whack them in the head with a frying pan? How did we get from fur to killing home intruders anyhow? Now you've made everybody so confused that they forgot what the topic was. Good job, PETA. <br /><br />It also occurred to me as I was agonizing over this that, wait a minute, what about Audrina Partridge, who was a PETA spokesperson before advertising for Carl's Jr? Do you think PETA slams her on their blog, or their favorite spokesobject, Pamela Anderson, who helped at the launch of a steakhouse/strip club in New York last year? Nope, because if you've done a photo shoot for PETA in the past, they'll never criticize you again, it seems. And let's not forget the time Olivia Munn showed up at a PETA event <a href="http://vegansagainstpeta.blogspot.com/2010/04/this-is-what-happens-when-you-sell-your.html">wearing leather boots</a> and the PETA staffers <span style="font-style:italic;">actually defended her.</span><br /><br />It also seems that they won't criticize you if you're a part of, shall we say, certain demographic groups. After all, aren't there tons of celebrities who wear leather that PETA isn't going after? WTF is up with that? Frankly, I'm so sick of the "fur is worse than leather" argument that claims it's worse to wear fur because leather is a byproduct of the cattle industry, and using the whole animal is apparently A-OK as long as it's a white dude doing it. Doesn't it make more sense to say that if we deal a blow to the leather industry, we also deal a blow to the cattle industry? You're taking out two targets at once if you actually try to take on the leather industry. Activist multitasking! (But given PETA's difficulty understanding the connectedness of human and animal struggles, I can't say I'm surprised that they don't get this connection, either.)<br /><br />So, is PETA consistent on the no-animal-skins front? Puh-lease, you do remember who we're dealing with, right?<br /><br />Behold, the dudes whom PETA apparently has no problem with: Vin Diesel <a href="http://www.kiltmen.com/celeb-vin-diesel.JPG">wore a leather kilt</a> while co-hosting MTV Europe Video Music Awards in 2003, and has often been photographed in leather, such as <a href="http://famewatcher.com/2009/12/vin-diesels-leather-jacket-and-pants-bald-guys-are-hot.html">this photo where he's wearing leather pants and a leather jacket.</a> And with how often Nathan Fillion wears leather jackets, you'd think they're his natural habitat -- just look him up on Google Images. Neither Diesel nor Fillion are mentioned anywhere on PETA's blog. 50 Cent <a href="http://www.50centrapstar.com/50_cent_fur_coat_picture.htm">loves his extravagant fur coats</a>, but his only mention on PETA's blog is flattering. Adam Lambert <a href="http://ontheflix.com/2010/05/06/adam-lambert-spotted-in-a-lot-of-leather-leaving-his-london-hotel/">wears so much leather</a> so often I'm surprised the damn stuff isn't coming out of his pores, yet he's also AWOL on PETA's site.<br /><br />But of course, when PETA chooses to excoriate a celebrity for wearing leather, it's a woman -- <a href="http://www.peta.org/feat-worstdressed2010-Day2.asp">Jessica Simpson.</a> They call women who wear fur "fur hags" but have no equivalent term for men who wear fur or leather. In fact, if you look on the right hand side of that link, you'll see that all the contestants for their 2010 Worst Dressed List are women. Now, they have <a href="http://blog.peta.org/archives/2010/01/kanye_west.php">called out Kanye</a> for wearing fur, but don't think I haven't noticed that the only dude they've called out recently <i>just so happens</i> to be black. And, they made sure to call his girlfriend "sleazy" while they were at it, because a party wouldn't be a party at PETA HQ if nobody was being sexist and racist, amirite? </p> The bottom line is, PETA doesn't deal respectfully with the people they disagree with, and then they have the audacity to wonder why fur keeps coming back into style every few years. <span style="font-style: italic;">It's because people stopped wearing fur out of fear, not genuine moral conviction.</span> PETA's like the Dutch kid with his finger in the dam, temporarily stopping the leak but doing nothing to help in the long term (and, quite possibly, HARMING in the long term). This whole debacle, particularly Janet's former veganism, also proves why you can't use celebrities as reason to go vegan, because if you're using someone else, particularly a famous person, as your moral compass, you'll never really commit yourself to a cause; for many, their commitment to a cause will forever be linked to the commitment of their idol, and that's never going to work in the long term.<br /><br />I guess what I've really taken out of this is that I wish, more than ever, that we had an animal rights organization as prolific as PETA that could discuss these issues RESPECTFULLY and be taken seriously. I don't want someone I admire so much to roll her eyes and turn up her nose at PETA's statements, but given the heinousness of that statement, I can't say I'd blame Janet. I'm still hoping she'll come to her senses and stop this nonsense and donate Blackglama's money to a decent animal rights group (like one of the ones in my blogroll!) but I'm not going to hold my breath. I will, however hope that Janet remembers her words about critics who said Rhythm Nation didn't matter: "Even if only one person out of all those who listen to the album makes a change, that's an accomplishment." Because if even one person who sees this fur ad buys a fur coat, that's NOT an accomplishment. That's <a href="http://liberationbc.org/issues/fur#this-many">240 more dead, tortured animals</a> who absolutely did not deserve such a fate.<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Note: Often I'm taken aback at the way in which animal rights activists interact with each other, both in person and online. I made the change requested by a commenter in a comment rejected for its holier-than-thou tone, but let's not be condescending about it, shall we? (See how patronizing and snooty that sounded, commenter?)</span><div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-43563284084642484392010-05-13T18:55:00.000-07:002010-05-13T19:02:19.503-07:00OMG, you guys, PETA is, like, TOTALLY feminist!I have proof. On their blog, they've written <a href="http://blog.peta.org/archives/feminism/"><span style="font-style: italic;">two</span> articles</a> that mention feminism! Never mind that one is a pitiful attempt to justify their bullshit treatment of women, ending with a call for opinions that won't be used if they're toooo critical of PETA. (Trust me, I know this from experience.) I guess I'd better close this blog now that we have the final proof that PETA are our Feminist Saviors.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-81853436028796591722010-04-27T17:12:00.000-07:002010-04-28T07:57:51.595-07:00This is what happens when you sell your soulAh, PETA. <a href="http://insepia.net/kendricklo/2010/04/olivia-munn-for-peta-leather-bootso/">You really don't care, do you?</a><br /><br /><blockquote>Model/actress/G4 TV-host <strong>Olivia Munn</strong>, quite popular among gaming and sci-fi nerds (like myself), just did a campaign with PETA to combat circus cruelty and showed up to the PETA event wearing leather boots. A protestor asked, “Are those boots leather?” To which PETA staff retorted, <strong>“This isn’t a leather campaign.”<br /><br /></strong></blockquote>And in case you didn't click on the link, yes, Olivia Munn is naked in accordance with PETA's apparent mandate that all women in their ads must be naked and/or objectified in some way. Seriously, at this point it's like they're just phoning it in. I can hardly find anything in my inbox to get riled up about anymore because it is the same. damn. thing. over and over again. Titty this and titty that and titties titties titties everywhere! Although between this and the <a href="http://vegansagainstpeta.blogspot.com/2009/11/peta-just-another-welfare-org.html">Crustastun fiasco,</a> <span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span>it does seem that PETA is making their true colors more and more obvious. Now I almost feel like it's unfair to welfare orgs to call PETA one -- my new theory is that PETA might just be a group of pathetic groupies who are trying to get the attention of celebrities in the hopes of being able to schmooze with the rich and famous. Which is, like, sooooo 2005.*<br /><br /><span style="font-family: georgia;">*</span><span style="font-family: georgia;font-family:georgia;" >I did a quick bit of research to make sure that 2005 was, indeed, the time when all those partying celebrities were in the news</span><span style="font-family: georgia;">, and I discovered that Paris Hilton does </span><span style="font-style: italic; font-family: georgia;">not even come up on Google's Autocomplete anymore!</span><span style="font-family: georgia;"> Seriously, I thought maybe I was misspelling her name, or that I'd imagined her entire existence. I guess hope does spring eternal.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-19674766093512526862010-03-01T10:18:00.000-08:002010-03-01T10:28:30.018-08:00PredictionToday while <a href="reading%20the%20news%20about%20Obama%27s%20marginally%20high%20cholesterol">reading the news about Obama's marginally high cholesterol</a> , I looked into my crystal ball and came up with the following prediction:<br /><br />PETA's going to come up with a really obnoxious PR release any second now. It'll tell Obama all about how going vegetarian will fix his cholesterol, pass health care, end the strife in Israel and Palestine, and cause him to fart rose-scented rainbows for the rest of his life.<br /><br />Okay, so some of that is an exaggeration. But I'm betting my favorite pair of Vegetarian Shoes that they're gonna come up with something about this. And it's going to be annoying as shit.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-23212444694160109672010-02-13T20:15:00.000-08:002010-02-13T20:28:21.663-08:00PETA, please go fuck yourselfWell. This is appalling. PETA is having losers vote on their website for their annual worst-dressed celebrity list (meaning: women and black men who wear fur; since leather is very commonly worn by straight white men, they don't typically include leather wearers in their list). Of course, the usual misogynist slurs toward women who wear fur are in full effect, but PETA decided to go the extra mile and also make light of domestic violence when including Rihanna in their poll:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold;">You'd think that being a victim of violence would have opened Rihanna's heart to the suffering of others—like the animals who were beaten, drowned, and electrocuted for her fur coats. Girl, you've got beautiful eyes: Use them to see the pain and suffering your wardrobe causes.</span></blockquote>Of course, I'm sure whatever ignorant intern wrote that is patting themselves on the back for the COMPASSION they showed in noting that Rihanna has beautiful eyes. (Because compliments on a woman's looks totally make it okay that her ex beat the shit out of her!) But ya know, when you drag somebody's traumatic past into the picture, that makes you a first-class insensitive asshole. If it weren't so awful, I'd be amused at the fact that domestic violence and women's rights activists have been trying to tell PETA all along that there's a link between exploiting people and exploiting animals, and that when you exploit people in the interests of animal rights you're actually strengthening the structures that also lead to animal abuse. But comments like these just show that the problem isn't that PETA doesn't get the interconnectedness of all forms of violence, as they're perfectly willing to make arguments like this. The problem is that PETA knows all violence is connected -- they just don't care about it if it happens to humans, which does absolutely nothing to help animals.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-48345572911920008302009-11-24T06:20:00.000-08:002010-06-02T14:03:45.493-07:00PETA, just another welfare org....So I thought this was some PR smear against PETA, until I <a href="http://blog.peta.org/archives/tags/crustastun/">found it at their own blog:</a><br /><br /><blockquote>In a perfect world, lobsters and crabs would be able to do <a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6nhOChpMck">their deep sea thing</a> without being preyed upon by humans hell-bent on turning sea life into seafood. Unfortunately, we live in a woefully imperfect world in which crustaceans are routinely boiled alive or cut open while they are still conscious. That's why we're hoping that the <a target="_blank" href="http://www.crustastun.com/products.html">Crustastun</a> will catch on. <p>A less cruel method of slaughter, the Crustastun uses a low-voltage current to instantly render crustaceans unconscious and to kill them within five to 10 seconds. I don't think that I need to tell you what a huge improvement this is over the <em>three minutes</em> of pure agony that lobsters suffer though when they are cooked alive!<br /></p> <p>....</p> <p>Knowing that this method will spare our crustacean comrades untold agony, we recently reached out to Tucson's Child & Family Resources concerning its upcoming annual lobster dinner fundraiser. Last year, another organization reached out to the event's organizers and tried to get them to dump the lobsters from their menu. The organizers refused, but this year we convinced them to allow to us to provide them with a Crustastun to use. The inventors of the Crustastun will be on hand to train the staff in how to use the device, which is easy to operate and guarantees the lobster a quick and painless death. And while we don't condone this event and we hope that the organization's future fundraisers will not include harming animals, we're glad that we can at least help reduce the suffering of these lobsters.</p></blockquote><p></p><br />Okay, this alone would be bad enough, but what actually happened at the event was that <a href="http://blogs.pitch.com/fatcity/2009/11/finding_new_ways_to_kill_lobst.php">the CrustaStuns never arrived</a>, and the lobsters were boiled alive anyhow.<br /><br />Now, I'm sure we can go around and around with this all day long, but I think any animal rights activist who's ever argued with a meat-eater knows that it's a hell of a lot harder to convince the one who eats free range animals to give it up, because the free-ranger believes that treating animals badly is okay just as long as it's done in a hipster organicy kind of way rather than as badly as they imagine it's done by hicks in Hicksville. If we start letting welfarists rule the day, animals will never enjoy the freedom and dignity they deserve -- I mean, hell, would YOU want to be fenced in all your life, kept pregnant all your life and have your children snatched from you for slaughter, only to be slaughtered yourself in the end? Would all this magically become okay just because you occasionally get to see the sun? Yeah, didn't think so.<br /><br />Another thing I found interesting though profoundly irritating is <a href="http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/11/hundreds_of_lobsters_murdered.php">this idiotic blog</a> in the Phoenix Times (really, do they hire their bloggers at Hank's Corner Pub and have them write before they get a chance to sober up?). The top photo is a play on PETA's brain-dead anti-woman campaigns, and it's pretty goddamn clear from the entry that A) The schnockered-off-his-ass author is familiar with PETA's titty campaigns and B) is very much against animal rights. Which leads us to the probability that C) TITTY ADS DON'T WORK! AT ALL!<br /><br />I'm going to say it again: An organization that can't even be bothered to care about the most basic of human rights isn't going to truly give a shit about animals, either. Compassion is compassion, and you either have it or you don't. Clearly, PETA has none, for humans OR animals.<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Hilarious update: </span>I just received a funny comment from some dude whose undies are all in a knot over the fact that PETA didn't sponsor this event ($800 to the first person who finds where I DID say that!) and claims that, therefore, this article is untrue. So, just to make sure, I clicked over to PETA's original blog post, the one linked to at the beginning of this article, and it's GONE. Seriously. That's how badly PETA knows they fucked up, but rather than apologize, they're just going to act like it never happened. AND I never would have known about their little restructuring of history if this douche-balloon hadn't come around trying to act like King Shit of Know-it-All Mountain. Awesome.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-11546892408030109062009-10-21T17:49:00.000-07:002009-10-21T18:06:01.072-07:00Like you care, PETASo, PETA's <a href="http://www.peta.org/mc/NewsItem.asp?id=13711">started a new website</a> that aims to convert Muslims to veganism and vegetarianism by condescendingly telling Muslims all about their own religion. Their reason for doing it now? An <a href="http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=450">October 2009 Pew Forum study</a> showing that nearly one in four people on the planet is Muslim. Not because, you know, they <span style="font-style: italic;">care</span> about Muslims or respect their religion or think Muslim people are important on their own, regardless of how large a percentage of the population they are. And if PETA had been paying attention, they wouldn't need a Pew study to tell them that Muslims make up a large portion of the world.<br /><br />I'm also wondering how long it will be before the Muslims they target start to notice that PETA's tactics <a href="http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/PETA/peta.html">are not exactly in line with Islamic values.</a> I'm going to guess not long.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-55980058657663410942009-10-07T19:40:00.000-07:002009-10-07T19:53:16.075-07:00Care to elaborate, Daily Telegraph?<div class="story-header" style="font-family:times new roman;"> <div class="story-headline"> <h1 class="heading"><span style="font-size:78%;"></span><a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/sydney-confidential/jess-origliasso-scarred-after-peta-campaign/story-e6frewz0-1225783995492"><b></b></a><span style="font-weight: normal;font-size:78%;" ><a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/sydney-confidential/jess-origliasso-scarred-after-peta-campaign/story-e6frewz0-1225783995492">I can't say I've ever read a less informative news story in my life.</a> If anybody can tell me what's going on here, I owe you a Tofutti Cutie.</span><span style="font-weight: normal;font-size:78%;" > </span><span style="font-weight: normal;font-size:78%;" >All I can say right now is that this picture seriously freaks me out.</span><span style="font-size:78%;"><br /></span></h1><span style="font-size:78%;"><br /></span><h1 class="heading"><span style="font-size:78%;"></span></h1></div></div><blockquote><div class="story-header" style="font-family:times new roman;"><div class="story-headline"><h1 class="heading"><span style="font-size:78%;">Jess Origliasso scarred after PETA campaign </span> </h1> </div><!-- // .story-headline --><!-- // .story-header-tools --> </div><!-- .story-header --> <div class="article-media article-media-small media-count-1 first-image-316w237h"> <div class=""> <div class="image "> <div class="image-frame image-316w237h"> <img style="width: 290px; height: 217px;" src="http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2009/10/07/1225783/995473-jess-origliasso.jpg" alt="Jess Origliasso" /> </div> <!-- // .image-frame --> <p class="caption"> <span class="caption-text">Battle scars ... Jess Origliasso / Pic: Facebook </span> <span class="image-source"><em>Source:</em> The Daily Telegraph</span> </p> <!-- // .caption --> </div> </div> <!-- // .tabs .js-tabbed --> </div> <!-- // .article-media --> <div class="story-intro"> <p><strong> SHE wasn't doused with paint or sent a threatening letter, but Veronicas twin Jess Origliasso was not unscarred when she left a photoshoot with PETA this week. </strong></p> </div><!-- // .story-intro --> <p>The bleached star, who caught animal rights activists' attention by wearing a jacket saying "f . . . fur" earlier this year, was left with a cut above her eye after doing the hands-on campaign.</p><p>Jess and sister <b>Lisa</b> will head home in the coming weeks to start pre-production on their anticipated third album - three years after writing their last offering <i>Hook Me Up</i>.</p><p>"We're taking our time to experiment and push the assumption of what people think they know about The Veronicas," she said.</p><p><br /><br /></p></blockquote><p></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-16028245968476509812009-10-07T17:03:00.000-07:002012-12-24T21:20:12.519-08:00Uh oh, does PETA know about this?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-size: 85%;"><span style="font-style: italic;">(Not a post about anything PETA has done lately, but something that reminded me of them...) </span></span><br />
<span style="background-image: url(http://img.pulseware.com.au/mle.asp?l=196043x&o=e);"><span style="font-family: Lucida Calligraphy,Desdemona,Lucida Handwriting,Algerian;"><span style="font-family: times new roman;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-image: url(http://img.pulseware.com.au/mle.asp?l=196043x&o=e);"><span style="font-family: Lucida Calligraphy,Desdemona,Lucida Handwriting,Algerian;"><span style="font-family: times new roman;">I have to say, I really love Google News' way of picking pictures to go with their front-page stories. Like the other day, when they had an article about Gordon Brown accompanied by a picture of Tony Blair. But today has to be my all time favorite so far:</span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-image: url(http://img.pulseware.com.au/mle.asp?l=196043x&o=e);"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUEJTHNlRNMbd_y1AZS6sPOTgvbncW7gxkbhq6RykpZeLo28f1jpkoUydA5R7Rt-AIaHTfNs3cA0Yl8ar7p3eiABPtya45lCPtLpgLybQqF1Qj4NgGU1S1cJi0QsKnm_hlCVBIXvv0cOU/s1600/ronald+pakistan+clipped.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUEJTHNlRNMbd_y1AZS6sPOTgvbncW7gxkbhq6RykpZeLo28f1jpkoUydA5R7Rt-AIaHTfNs3cA0Yl8ar7p3eiABPtya45lCPtLpgLybQqF1Qj4NgGU1S1cJi0QsKnm_hlCVBIXvv0cOU/s1600/ronald+pakistan+clipped.PNG" height="212" width="320" /></a><span style="font-family: Lucida Calligraphy,Desdemona,Lucida Handwriting,Algerian;"><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times new roman;">Wait, is that Ronald McDonald in the picture accompanying the Pakistani military story? Has he joined their military? Are conservatives across America going to join PETA in branding Ronald McDonald a terrorist? Or maybe he's just also concerned about the US aid bill, to which I say, it's about damn time Ronald McDonald started taking an interest in international affairs. Before this, nobody knew ANYTHING about the guy, save that he has really shitty taste in food. Perhaps this will help humanize him a bit more for his audience, although I am not entirely convinced that middle America will appreciate learning that Ronald is siding with the </span><a href="http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2008/09/obama_is_not_muslin_or_muslim.php"><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><span style="font-family: times new roman;">Half-Breed Muslin</span></span></a><span style="font-family: times new roman;"> Terrorist Conspiracy From Hell. Reading through the story, it does not once mention McDonald's or anything remotely Ronald-related, which means that I can a) continue to indulge my imagination in RM's connection to the Pakistani military (is he trading French fries for nukes? Can we somehow blame the French for this?) or b) I can Google and get to the bottom of this very important development. In my ongoing quest to Know Everything, I chose "b."</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times new roman;">Well, I am now officially deflated. It turns out that Ronald is not involved in any sort of international intrigue. He -- or rather, a statue of him -- was actually just getting cozy with <a href="http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/07/pakistanis-view-us-aid-warily/">two guys in Islamabad</a> </span><span style="font-family: times new roman;">who have opinions on the US aid bill, as mentioned in a different story in a New York Times blog. One would assume, then, that Google News must have a bot that picks the pictures to go with their stories, and that their front page editors drink a lot of whiskey. And here I was totally hoping to see PETA pick a fight with the Pakistani military. </span></span></span><span style="background-image: url(http://img.pulseware.com.au/mle.asp?l=196043x&o=e);"><span style="font-family: Lucida Calligraphy,Desdemona,Lucida Handwriting,Algerian;"><span style="font-family: times new roman;">Damn you, reality (and Google)! </span></span></span><div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-47876027352520687562009-08-25T16:49:00.000-07:002009-08-25T17:59:59.161-07:00Today in passive aggressive backpedaling<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjk1vIOoX5pYCX0KH0ZsAWfQehEJg3jJqJ-FLTFlaZ_x9gzYbGICq_KxnE5C1YkQCBYy1hIBVzO0qAxkjCHyTRFs7gyna4l28JVxkbc3zoLc_TnAJlNGvtutjFrFaX_2ia9D7kosIUog94/s1600-h/082509+billboard.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 240px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjk1vIOoX5pYCX0KH0ZsAWfQehEJg3jJqJ-FLTFlaZ_x9gzYbGICq_KxnE5C1YkQCBYy1hIBVzO0qAxkjCHyTRFs7gyna4l28JVxkbc3zoLc_TnAJlNGvtutjFrFaX_2ia9D7kosIUog94/s320/082509+billboard.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5374054912193738610" border="0" /></a><br />Well, <a href="http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local-beat/Fat-PETA-Ad-Gone-but-Not-Forgotten-54772307.html">at least I don't have to worry about having reason to close this blog any time soon. </a>Remember <a href="http://vegansagainstpeta.blogspot.com/2009/08/peta-to-world-whales-suck1111-and-women.html">PETA's atrocious ad</a> shaming fat women for daring to exist outside of burlap sacks? Well, check out their latest bit of barfitude, put up in place of their prior fat-hating billboard. On its own, it's pretty standard PETA fat-hating fare, but check out this quote from one of PETA's typical hateful little bigots:<br /><blockquote><br />"Our goal is help overweight Jacksonville residents - the best way to do that is to go vegetarian. We're not trying to insult anyone," <a title="Ashley Byrne" href="http://www.nbcmiami.com/topics?topic=Ashley+Byrne" class="informTopicLink">Ashley Byrne</a>, a senior campaigner for PETA, told <a title="HuffingtonPost.com Inc." href="http://www.nbcmiami.com/topics?topic=HuffingtonPost.com+Inc." class="informTopicLink">Huffington Post</a> after the first billboard was put up. "Vegetarians look and feel better than meat eaters. This is a life-saving message."</blockquote>Yeah, you little fucking spokestool, because I didn't get the message the first 2,403,211 times around that if you're ugly and vegetarian or vegan you're a big. fucking. failure, and the entire female population of the world, as well as many men, certainly don't hear often enough that the only thing that matters is how you look, not who you are or what you contribute to the world. You know what, Ashley? This thin yet ugly vegan is sick to fucking DEATH of your stupid little goddamn organization shaming me for not being the epitome of a HOT HOT HOT vegan. In fact, half of the reason why I absolutely refuse to do leafleting is because I know I'd make a bad example for veg*ans because of how I look, and if you've ever done animal rights activism you know that leafleting is one of the activities for which most AR groups desperately need volunteers.<br /><br />And quite frankly, when I hear sentiments like this, I don't even feel like I'm doing a good thing by being vegan. In fact, I feel like by being ugly and vegan I'm doing more harm than good to the cause; I feel flat-out like a bad person, like a liability. And what about all those so-called <a href="http://vegansagainstpeta.blogspot.com/2009/04/petas-pointless-pussypenis-pushing.html">hot non-vegetarians,</a> and the other vegetarians and vegans who don't measure up? And what about the <a href="http://vegansagainstpeta.blogspot.com/2009/03/blasphemy-beauty-and-animal-rights.html">torture animals go through</a> so we can live up to the beauty standards that Byrne and all of PETA promote? Are animals really better off in a world mindlessly and cruelly obsessed with looks and consumption, a world with a frankly carnivorous appetite that can only be satisfied through the most horrible forms of animal testing and torture? Are we really better off in a world that values looks over kindness, that offers us nothing in return for goodness and everything in return for beauty?<br /><br />As we grow more obsessed with the shallow, harmful things of consumerism that PETA stands for, both animals and people suffer and die, and nobody seems to remember Paul Wellstone's simple yet truest truth: "We all do better when we all do better." A world full of people miserable because they don't "look" good will be cruel to animals, each other and the environment, will focus on buying and what they can do to reach that impossible zenith of beauty rather than working to change the world. Meanwhile, in a world where we're not distracted and driven to misery by the beauty industrial complex, where our actions and not our bodies or faces dictate how others view us, people <span style="font-style: italic;">will </span>have incentive to be good and kind, and will have little to nothing to gain by exploiting animals, each other and the environment. That is the world I want to live in, not PETA's land of selfish Beautiful People.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-88159469684359627912009-08-17T18:42:00.000-07:002009-08-19T12:09:58.784-07:00PETA to world: Whales SUCK!!!11!!!!1!!!1! (And women still do, too...)<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCS9YPQ_MEY-iKZeNq8D5RDDMWfJ2TqJUWRzBmbTKh5O6mJtO6ApmPtsO63LcSOu0tkIZg1_7qadBksvuLunE9OcfeB7g7Df9fg1TbIET1syjfOBJn6xmvvrfvWvWU635Tbe6Wmt973Q0/s1600-h/humpback_whale.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 284px; height: 214px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCS9YPQ_MEY-iKZeNq8D5RDDMWfJ2TqJUWRzBmbTKh5O6mJtO6ApmPtsO63LcSOu0tkIZg1_7qadBksvuLunE9OcfeB7g7Df9fg1TbIET1syjfOBJn6xmvvrfvWvWU635Tbe6Wmt973Q0/s320/humpback_whale.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5371122136273695442" border="0" /></a><br />I know I'm quite late on this and <a href="http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/08/women-still-less-important-than.html">many others</a> <a href="http://the-f-word.org/blog/index.php/2009/08/11/against-animal-cruelty-but-not-human-cruelty/">have already covered it,</a> but I couldn't let it pass because it's one of PETA's more egregious stunts as of late. I shan't post a picture of PETA's latest piss-smelling billboard, but it's in Jacksonville, Florida and has an illustration of a fat-ish woman in a bikini. The emblazoned hate message on it is "Save the WHALES. Lose the blubber. Go vegetarian."<br /><br />One woman in Jacksonville reported being so upset by it that she forwent a trip to the beach with her family -- and even though I'm vegan, and with street clothes on look reasonably thin, I can honestly say I'd probably do the same if I saw a billboard like that on my way to the beach. I simply do not look like a supermodel when I wear a bikini, and although I love swimming, I always feel horribly self-conscious in a swimsuit, such that things much smaller than this can tip my decision on whether to go to the beach. It's particularly shitty because I have a lot of upper body problems that could benefit from more swimming (ZOMG an unhealthy thin person!!! Call the Body Police!) but it is not often that I feel up to the emotionally grueling task of having my exposed body publicly judged while I'm just trying to enjoy myself. And quite frankly, the fact that PETA would probably claim the message isn't targeted at me doesn't make a whit of difference as to how hurt I feel when I see it; PETA's billboard is hurtful to ALL women and ALL fat people and ALL people who have eating disorders or body dysmorphic disorder, regardless of whether we're vegan, vegetarian or omnivorous.<br /><br />Furthermore, what's with the fucking speciesism, PETA? How is trivializing the anti-whaling movement and appropriating it for your stupid everybody-hating billboard going to help any, you know, actual <span style="font-style: italic;">whales?</span> The humorous context of "Save the Whales" on this billboard only serves to further the ridiculous, over-the-top way that environmentalists are portrayed and perceived in our culture. Also, as <a href="http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/08/women-still-less-important-than.html#disqus_thread">a commenter at Shakesville notes</a>, "I really don't follow the logic of that billboard. How does losing weight 'save the whales' if by whales they mean fat people? Isn't their point that they'd be <i>getting rid of</i> fat people? Logically then this billboard should read 'Wipe Out The Whales'! But of course somebody might read <i>that</i> the wrong way and a cute animal (because they rarely care about any other kind) might get hurt. So instead they insult a significant portion of the population <i>and</i> look stupid."<br /><br />Funnily enough, a few weeks ago a friend of mine sent along the following e-mail, and it seems appropriate to re-post it here. I don't know how true the story behind the French gym is, but what matters is the awesomeness of the words themselves:<br /><br /><blockquote>Recently, in a large French city, a poster featuring a young, thin and tan woman appeared in the window of a gym. It said:<br /><br />"THIS SUMMER DO YOU WANT TO BE A MERMAID OR A WHALE?"<br /><br />A middle-aged woman, whose physical characteristics did not match those of the woman on the poster, responded publicly to the question posed by the gym.<br /><br />To Whom It May Concern:<br /><br />Whales are always surrounded by friends (dolphins, sea lions, curious humans). They have an active sex life, they get pregnant and have adorable baby whales. They have a wonderful time with dolphins stuffing themselves with shrimp. They play and swim in the seas, seeing wonderful places like Patagonia and the coral reefs of Polynesia.<br /><br />Whales are wonderful singers and have even recorded CDs. They are incredible creatures and virtually have no predators other than humans. They are loved, protected and admired by almost everyone in the world.<br /><br />Mermaids don't exist. If they did exist, they would be lining up outside the offices of psychoanalysts due to identity crisis.. Fish or human?<br /><br />They don't have a sex life because they kill men who get close to them. Therefore they do not have kids either. Not to mention, who wants to get close to a girl who smells like a fish store?<br /><br />The choice is perfectly clear to me; I'd rather be a whale.<br /></blockquote><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhh-rNAyae8ZtvRW_Gj_DBcK9AYw8GXAZUDhykQAGWoBTCJ73kio6tjGak3sQ-8JeYNNqJmE7FsUJmZVQyVPb7IzpgLvUdd4oNXqsOLMph0LSBZcqSmuNPG9yFgAa9-ZT1E6kSqiytl3Sw/s1600-h/orcas.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 240px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhh-rNAyae8ZtvRW_Gj_DBcK9AYw8GXAZUDhykQAGWoBTCJ73kio6tjGak3sQ-8JeYNNqJmE7FsUJmZVQyVPb7IzpgLvUdd4oNXqsOLMph0LSBZcqSmuNPG9yFgAa9-ZT1E6kSqiytl3Sw/s320/orcas.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5371122519119513698" border="0" /> </a><br /><center>The orcas are watching you, PETA, and they do not approve.*<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">*(Yes, I know orcas are not technically whales, but sometimes an empress just wants to post orca pictures, ya know?) </span></center><div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-33655257817931617812009-08-17T17:54:00.000-07:002009-08-17T18:04:20.265-07:00Vegans against PETA badges!Ahoy, vegans! I crawl out from under my rock to bring you <a href="http://tinyurl.com/vegans-against-peta-badges">vegans against PETA badges</a> that you can put on your website, use as avatars, etc. As I have approximately no artistic skills, you can bet your last falafel that I didn't make them. A lovely blog reader sent them to me. They come in all shapes so they should be appropriate for whatever occasion or space you have. Kind of like a black cocktail dress, only soooo much cooler! (No offense to black cocktail dresses, of course.)<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnF1rhZCUixutWU45mS-2QK77TuTK89mHzjHhtKfQrlZVnF5n5_4wEO5AhW0NOBbWnzMfClr1DRJKNkfXy9B1tbdhC45aDrBQRs_7gR5fI0w4JiOLWU8tCKod9eJaoom0lkk5ZLFVgIxI/s1600-h/vegans_against_peta_02_320x88.png"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 88px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnF1rhZCUixutWU45mS-2QK77TuTK89mHzjHhtKfQrlZVnF5n5_4wEO5AhW0NOBbWnzMfClr1DRJKNkfXy9B1tbdhC45aDrBQRs_7gR5fI0w4JiOLWU8tCKod9eJaoom0lkk5ZLFVgIxI/s320/vegans_against_peta_02_320x88.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5371103178610106530" /></a><div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-9492015499092270522009-08-04T15:02:00.000-07:002009-08-04T19:14:41.665-07:00HuhSorry for the sparse posting lately, fellow PETA disparagers! Life has been crazy, and I am also in the midst of a fairly serious Personal Crisis and am attempting to Find Myself. <br /><br />Wait! There I am! Under the desk, behind the dust bunnies and next to the ancient Egypt books!<br /><br />Since I have been found for the moment, let's take a look at <a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-4198-Vegan-Examiner~y2009m8d1-An-open-invitation-to-Ingrid-Newkirk">this interesting invitation</a> for a debate between a philosophy professor and our BFF of ALL TIME, the one and only Ingrid Newkirk.<br /><br />Some highlights:<br /><br /><blockquote>While your followers who have managed to donate some 30 million dollars annually believe PETA's campaigns bring us one step closer to real justice for animals, there is still a significant percentage of animal advocates who disagree with this conclusion as well as PETA's tactics and fundamental philosophy.<br /><br />Some PETA supporters have taken to avoiding any debate for the fear of what they call "infighting." Animal advocates are reluctant to give any energy into responding to disagreement in fear of disrupting the supposed unity of a movement for animals. However, I will remind you that debate and criticism is a lucrative means of exploring the truth. Debate is and has been a sound practice in academia and has been used effectively to learn more about a particular cause, theory, or discipline.<br /><br />...<br /><br />The purpose of this letter is to humbly request your participation in debating Gary L. Francione, Distinguished Professor of Law and Philosophy at Rutgers University School of Law under my moderation. The invitation has already been accepted by Professor Francione, so the ball is now in your court.<br /><br />While Francione recognizes the sincerity of your beliefs, the fundamental differences between yours and Francione's approach make for a disagreement of tremendous importance to how rights may be established for animals. Professor Francione's disagreements with PETA's approach and fundamental philosophy are evident in his Six Principles of the Animal Rights Position where he argues:<br /><br /> <br /><br /> <span style="font-style:italic;">3. Just as we reject racism, sexism, ageism, and heterosexism, we reject speciesism. The species of a sentient being is no more reason to deny the protection of this basic right than race, sex, age, or sexual orientation is a reason to deny membership in the human moral community to other humans.</span><br /><br /> <br /><br />This appears to stand in disagreement that a campaign that is sexist in nature cannot be considered an animal rights campaign. Francione has also vocalized disagreement with PETA's campaign tactics in the form of billboards and public demonstrations.</blockquote><br /><br />Of course, because this is a debate about animal rights involving PETA, the comments degenerate fairly quickly into total weirdness, and I also have to voice my own personal distrust of the Examiner, whose contributors tend to fly fast and loose with facts. Friends of Animals president Priscilla Feral also notes in comments that she once asked Gary Francione to debate her directly, and the debate never happened, so make of this what you will.<br /><br />It's a shame they used the wrong picture of her, though. Clearly, this is the only picture of Ingrid Newkirk that truly does her justice, and it can only be found here at Vegans Against PETA:<br /><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h123/mekhit1/Newkirkfail.gif?t=1237570914"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 440px; height: 370px;" src="http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h123/mekhit1/Newkirkfail.gif?t=1237570914" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br /><br />Anyhow. Back to the dust bunnies now! If you need to find me, I will be chilling with my homegirl Hatshepsut. She was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatshepsut">quite the gender outlaw</a>, you know!<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-57372605700164771392009-07-16T16:46:00.000-07:002009-07-16T18:16:52.271-07:00PETA, even stupider than we fearedSome ass on PETA's lifestyle section is super-happy that the racist, misogynist, lying animal-haters at L'Oreal are trying to con vegans into giving them money. Namely, <a href="http://living.peta.org/2009/ever-pure-the-vegan-line-by-loreal">PETA minions are now lauding the monsters at L'Oreal</a> for coming up with a gimmicky line of hair care products that they call "Ever Pure," which they advertise as vegan. Except, as the article notes, L'Oreal has never signed PETA's statement of assurance that they don't test on animals, and the company is widely known to test their ingredients on animals while trying to hype the fact that their <span style="font-style:italic;">finished</span> products aren't tested on animals. Uh, what's the difference, fuckknots? Animals are still dying and being tortured for your products, regardless of what point in the process it's happening. As <a href="http://www.uncaged.co.uk/pgfaq3.htm">a UK group called Uncaged says,</a> "Many companies can be deliberately misleading in their animal testing statements, cleverly wording customer letters in order to reassure a concerned public. Often they talk about the products when most of this type of animal testing is for chemical ingredients." They've also received a <a href="http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/Mediainfo/LOrealandtheBodyShop.aspx">"worst" rating</a> from Ethical Consumer for their animal testing policy and for their extremely environmentally unfriendly ingredients and practices. <a href="http://www.vegsoc.org.au/forum_messages.asp?Thread_ID=4620&Topic_ID=8">A discussion at this Australian message board</a> gives more background info and links on the L'Oreal debacle. <br /><br />Of course, a discussion on L'Oreal wouldn't be complete without a discussion of their absolutely miserable record as regards human beings. For starters, <a href="http://afroncurls.blogspot.com/2009/06/do-i-need-to-quit-buying-loreal-yeah-i.html">they refused to hire non-white women</a> for a French campaign to promote their Garnier Fructis shampoos -- and became the first major French firm <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jul/07/france.angeliquechrisafis">to be convicted of racist bias.</a> <br /><br />An earlier racist-misogynist excursion by L'Oreal saw them trying to force a female manager, Elysa Yanowitz, to fire a top-selling, dark-skinned female sales rep and hire a "hot" blonde. <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/08/12/BAGV9E6VFI1.DTL">The San Francisco Chronicle</a> reported that L'Oreal ass job Jack Wiswall told Yanowitz "that a dark- skinned salesclerk was 'not good-looking enough,' and directed her to fire the woman and 'get me somebody hot,'" and pointed out a blonde woman who apparently fit the bill. When Yanowitz, also highly rated in the company, refused to fire the dark-skinned woman, L'Oreal harassed her and generally made her life miserable until she quit.<br /><br />And here comes the kicker. L'Oreal has a product called <a href="http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/product.php?prod_id=60707&refurl=%2Fbrowse.php%3Fcategory%3Dshampoo%26">L'Oréal Kid's 2 in 1 Extra Gentle Shampoo</a> that ranks as one of the most toxic shampoos on the Environmental Working Group's <a href="http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/">Skin Deep database.</a> Yup, children, whose brains are still developing, and whose parents will almost certainly believe they're protecting those particularly delicate brains by buying a shampoo labeled "extra gentle." <br /><br />So, to break it down: L'Oreal hates women, people of color, animals and children. Is it any wonder that PETA's falling all over themselves to worship at their altar? It's almost like they were separated at birth!<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-30591816245241222022009-06-23T06:00:00.000-07:002009-06-23T09:58:54.993-07:00Sexualisation for the Sake of it<span style="font-style:italic;">Aloha, anti-PETA expositors! This scorching summer day brings you a fabulous takedown of PETA's latest buffoonery, courtesy of Alderson Warm-Fork, author of <a href="http://directionlessbones.wordpress.com/">Directionless Bones.</a> It regards <a href="http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/poor-che-guevara/">the ridiculous stunt described here</a>, which sadly, is PETA's first campaign in South America. I mean, really, PETA? You couldn't start with an exposé of factory farms or otherwise describe where the meat on people's plates comes from? That says it all with regard to what PETA thinks of South Americans' values and intelligence, I think -- at least in the States and Europe they've done <span style="font-weight:bold;">some</span> actual <a href="http://www.petacatalog.org/prodinfo.asp?number=VP523">uncovering of factory farm conditions.</a> <br /><br />Anyhow, without further ado, allow me to hand it over to Alderson:</span><br /><br /><br />A recurrent theme in animal-rights rhetoric is an attempt to connect with other<br />struggles against oppression, to present the abuse of animals as similar to the<br />abuse of different sorts of humans.<br /><br />Now, for many people, the leftist revolutionaries of Latin America, from Fidel<br />Castro to Evo Morales to Salvador Allende, are a key example of that struggle<br />against oppression. So if you were an animal rights group and you found that the<br />granddaughter of Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara was a vegetarian and was willing to work<br />with you, it would seem that you have a campaign ready made.<br /><br />You might, for example, have her in an outfit and posture that echoes famous<br />poses that Che Guevara often held. You could use a slogan like “Join the<br />vegetarian revolution”. It’s a brilliant plan. It’s got a striking image with a<br />lot of resonance, and it’s also got a point that can be backed up (the<br />connections between different forms of oppression, the need for revolutionary<br />change in human-animal relations, the willingness to endorse militant tactics,<br />etc.)<br /><br />It’s controversial, sure – Guevara is a controversial figure, hated by some and<br />loved by others. But let’s suppose you have no problem taking controversial<br />stances. And perhaps your main plan is to run the campaign in Latin America,<br />where Guevara’s very popular.<br /><br />But now, imagine that you’re also PETA. Now a problem emerges. There’s a woman<br />in your poster, but there’s nothing sexual about it. Nobody’s going to get a<br />boner out of simply seeing someone in an inspiring pose of resolute defiance.<br />What can you do?<br /><br />I guess you’ll just have to make her semi-naked. Get her tits out, yeah? Cover<br />them with an ammo belt of carrots, sure, but make sure that she’s clearly in a<br />state of undress. After all, she’d rather go naked than wear fur, amiright?<br /><br />Never mind that there’s absolutely no reason for a sexualised image in a poster<br />themed around Che Guevara and revolution. He is hardly famous for having posed<br />nude while storming Havana.<br /><br />And never mind that it introduces a completely conflicting message that is<br />liable to undermine the actual point – that will encourage viewers to look and<br />think ‘I’d like to do her’ rather than ‘I’d like to aid her in doing something<br />revolutionary’.<br /><br />Never mind that you’re sending the message that women must always be sexual,<br />even when the subject at issue – political relatives – has nothing to do with<br />sex at all. Never mind that you’re encouraging a culture where every bit of the<br />media features soft-core porn and women are pervasively judged in sexual terms.<br /><br />That’s all beside the point. This campaign might get more attention now, and<br />that’s all that matters. Nice one PETA.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-2742602574330407342009-06-16T10:43:00.000-07:002009-06-23T06:43:28.243-07:00Non-violence, my ass<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirXQDbX87J98J-1QvWxaE1Z9cm81l5zXErIZ4Uzu9IUM_ws1Pwp4bClZlfzgGdgSCE_vbdWb8sB1nYTq3tRjCIGAf02mJ2Mb-q1_0hWrbJrLfnNatligKVzujb0PduH2QTGMAwfHdzWtw/s1600-h/Tiller+flowers.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 280px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirXQDbX87J98J-1QvWxaE1Z9cm81l5zXErIZ4Uzu9IUM_ws1Pwp4bClZlfzgGdgSCE_vbdWb8sB1nYTq3tRjCIGAf02mJ2Mb-q1_0hWrbJrLfnNatligKVzujb0PduH2QTGMAwfHdzWtw/s320/Tiller+flowers.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5347991086602001122" /></a><br />PETA makes me realize that the English language simply does not have enough angry swear words, or enough non-degrading ways to express contempt. In their latest woman-hating stunt, <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ieDNWP-2RLxxz1hlndyAmuszoCbw">PETA has "offered" to buy the clinic of slain abortion doctor George Tiller</a> -- yes, in Wichita, the very same city where they were attempting to traumatize residents and capitalize on Tiller's murder by posting <a href="http://vegansagainstpeta.blogspot.com/2009/06/peta-wants-to-own-your-uterus.html">these billboards.</a> <br /><br />And what do they want to call it? "The Nonviolence for All Beings Center." Sometimes I wonder if PETA's PR people aren't plucked straight from the Onion's newsroom, except that the Onion's humor is intentional and sometimes actually has redeeming social value. PETA's humor, on the other hand, just serves to show how self-centered and hypocritical they are. Really, PETA endorsing non-violence for <span style="font-style:italic;">everybody</span>? The people who show videos of a woman being stripped and beaten to death, who make the rampant murder of transgender people a joke, who dress up as the KKK, who stick women half-naked into cages, who steal from the Holocaust museum and show <a href="http://uncensoredfeminista.wordpress.com/2008/06/16/peta-using-violence-against-women-to-send-message/">women as half-naked murdered meat</a> on the street? Everything about PETA, from their actual campaigns to the number of dogs and cats they euthanize to their ways of interacting with oppressed people, is violent. I absolutely cannot believe that they would co-opt the work that non-violence activists have done and twist it for their own hateful, bigoted ends, ends which every day have less and less to do with helping animals and more and more to do with their own greed for attention and hatred for oppressed groups.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-9234240492985461082009-06-12T21:01:00.000-07:002009-06-17T15:29:53.996-07:00Animal rights and control of women's bodiesI am so at the fucking end of my rope right now with the goddamn animal rights movement. No, I'm not going to go out and eat a goddamn steak or some immature, illogical shit like that, because it's not like cows ask some vegans to be obnoxious, vicious, triggering assholes. I would, however, like the animal rights movement to extend 1,209,348th of the respect to women's bodies, and all human bodies, that they extend to animals.<br /><br />This is because I just went to a speech by a supposedly famous vegan who I'd never heard of before that literally has me wanting to hurt myself really badly. It's a good thing I'm a fucking hairy feminist or I'd know right where my razors are and I'd be up and running with them – of course PETA would disagree about hiding razors and be mortified that I'd rather be hairy and female than bleeding all over the carpet and sheets – but that's a story for another time. <br /><br />Anyhow, in the aforementioned speech, a schmancy-ass vegan from New York obsessed over food and told us how going vegan made! her! skinny! Which is really funny, because it's made me gain 20 pounds in the last year since I started again. I've been struggling with my weight gain a lot, although I don't even weigh that much, and it's made my relationship with food really disordered and fucked up. The only time it's been this messed up was after I was raped and lost tons of weight, thus becoming a Model of Good Veganism. I haven't yet begun restricting my food intake as much as I did then because physically I feel better than I have for a long time, although this starts to recede every time I look in the mirror. <br /><br />The thing is, for rape survivors, a HUUUUUGE part of recovery is becoming comfortable and non-hateful toward your body once again. When I was really little I hated how I looked because of Disney movies, yet although I never really came close to actually <span style="font-style:italic;">liking</span> my body, I grew into an acceptance and natural flow with it. As long as I treated it well, it treated me well and that was all that really mattered.<br /><br />But of course, rape changes that. The act itself, obviously, is the worst loss of control you can imagine. What happens after that, for many survivors, is an epically nightmarish continuation of that. Assholes who don't give a shit about ending rape fault you if you don't report it and criticize every aspect of your recovery, every shitnozzle in the world feels entitled to tell you how to get over it and when to get over it, you have vicious nightmares that you can't control, you have waking nightmares in the middle of the workday or when you're out with friends, you argue with longtime friends because they all think rape is hee-larious, your muscles start to tense up and even spasm because you're under so much stress all the time until your entire upper body is a fire pit of pain; basically nothing is under your control anymore, and you realize just how little ever was within your control.<br /><br />Fast forward to years later, and suddenly you realize that one of the most important aspects of your life is being twisted by people who would like to control your body and actions in much the same way that the aftermath of rape did. I'm not talking about the (obvious) fact that vegans ask people not to eat animal products – indeed, consumption of animal products is simply asking people to not do something to other beings without their consent, so the control issues there really lie with omnivores.<br /><br />However, the animal rights movement seems to increasingly be co-opted by people who equate thinness and obsessive exercise with moral goodness. This speaker harped on everybody in the audience about the importance of exercise, self-righteously telling us to go to the gym nearly every day (because hey, we all have the money for that, right?!?) and at one point she even said, “I don't care if you hate physical activity -- do it anyways!” And then she tried to go on about how oh, she hated gym in school too, but now she looooves exercise!<br /><br />Well, I'm sorry Ms. Society, but you obviously didn't experience what some people did in gym. I'm not disparaging the importance of exercising, but just saying that to be that flippant about it is callous and extremely privileged. Why not say, “If you hate exercise, try to get therapy so you can perhaps work out your issues with it, or try out some types of activity you haven't tried before?” I mean, hell, girls get raped quite frequently by athletes in locker rooms after phy ed, and some kids have really, really serious issues that arise from how they were treated in gym. One of my first elementary school memories is of a group of boys surrounding a fat kid in gym, a kid who was one of the sweetest, most harmless people you could ever meet, dancing around him screaming “Horny Henriett-AH, Horny Henriett-AH!!!” while he cried and lashed out at them and the teachers did <span style="font-style:italic;">nothing.</span> To this day I can still see the looks on most of their faces, including the boy who was their target, and it was horrifying. If it was that horrifying for me, I can only imagine what it was like for him – and from then on, all through elementary, middle and high school, he was a favorite target of bullies in gym class. One could hardly blame him, I think, if he hated exercise to this day and rarely engaged in it.<br /><br />I was also a target, not to the same extent, but because of a minor eye disability I'm really shitty at sports and have had a hard time finding enjoyable ways to exercise, for both physical and emotional reasons. (For example, I don't have emotional issues with biking, because we never did it in gym, but my disability makes it difficult in certain situations.) And the thing is, sure, exercise is good for you, but why the fuck does it become a moral issue, particularly in the animal rights movement? Aren't we advocating for justice for animals, not the eradication of ZOMG FAT!!!!?!?! <br /><br />Furthermore, is it only a moral choice if not exercising makes you fat? What about all the thin people who don't exercise – are they A-OK because they're not shaming the animal rights movement with their unsightly, un-patriarchy-approved fatness? After all, if it were really about health we should also be shaming people who smoke, or who work in dangerous environments, or people who don't get their houses tested for radon, which is the second leading cause of lung cancer. Given the environmental issues surrounding radon, one would think this would be something the animal rights movement would be hopping right on, since the environment affects animals too. And really, not getting your house tested for radon affects EVERYONE in your house, whereas not exercising affects only you – so why the obsession with exercise and thinness in animal rights? I mean, if you're going to encourage exercise so we can run away from angry security guards after an undercover filming of a factory farm, hey, that I could get behind – but until I plan to participate in something like that, you have NO FUCKING RIGHT to tell me what to do with my body. And really, we all know it's not so we can run away from security guards -- it's because some assholes think beautiful people will better attract followers to our cause than exposing abuse of animals in factory farms. <br /><br />And so, they start telling us what we can and can't do as vegans, and telling irrelevant, alienating stories about their weight. Well, I am a woman. I am a rape survivor. I have had about all I can stand of people telling me what I can and can't do with my body, and if it doesn't benefit animals, it has <span style="font-style:italic;">no fucking place</span> in the animal rights movement. Start your own goddamn exercise movement if you want, but leave me in peace and don't give me any more reasons to hate my body. I already have plenty. I came here to save animals, not shame myself, so move the fuck out of the way and let me do that. Because I sure as shit will not be a lot of help to the movement when I'm starving and sobbing in my bed, as I will be for many nights to come after this drivel.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-51978582678445101792009-06-08T17:35:00.000-07:002009-06-08T17:46:39.715-07:00Perhaps people will start seeing the light now...PETA's exploitation of Dr. George Tiller's murder has sparked a shitstorm the likes of which I haven't yet seen against them. I don't know why their other heinous stunts haven't caused quite this level of outrage (since those other stunts still, in many cases, exploit tragedies) but hey, at least more vegans and vegetarians are finally publicly giving them the ol' finger. <br /><br />The latest awesome screed to pop into my inbox <a href="http://www.northstarwriters.com/jv093.htm">is from the North Star Writers Group:</a> <br /><br /><blockquote>I’ve been abstaining from meat-eating for a little over four years now, and I relate to PeTA’s goals and aims, but their execution is intentionally offensive and terribly miscalculated. I’ve never met a meat-eater who was talked into vegetarianism by a PeTA ad (granted, one of their underground slaughterhouse exposés solidified my vegetarianism, but the video showed raw facts as opposed to the inflated, controversial rhetoric of some of their recent campaigns). And yet I’ve heard plenty of people exclaim: “Just for that, PeTA, I’m going to go grill me a nice 24-ounce steak.”</blockquote><br /><br />Anti-PETA vegetarians and vegans, unite, and let us flock to <a href="http://www.mercyforanimals.org/">Mercy for Animals</a>, or <a href="http://www.cok.net/">Compassion Over Killing</a>, or <a href="http://www.hsus.org">HSUS</a>, or <a href="http://www.farmsanctuary.org/">Farm Sanctuary</a>, or, well, any AR group but PETA!<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-18445413937842204172009-06-06T20:26:00.000-07:002009-06-07T12:00:39.922-07:00Stupid PETA news round-upSince I know we all just crave the feeling of moral and intellectual superiority that only learning about PETA can give us, here's a roundup of stupid PETA tricks that I just didn't have the stomach or time to write about.<br /><br />At the always-fabulous Muslimah Media Watch, <a href="http://muslimahmediawatch.org/2009/06/01/peta-fails-at-talking-about-humans-yet-again/"> Krista has the breakdown</a> of PETA's latest racist stunt -- they've claimed that beating women is part of local practice in the Middle East. (Funny, because beating women <a href="http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/video.asp?video=fur-is-dead-psa&Player=flv">is part of local practice at PETA, too.)</a> Glass houses, PETA shitheads, glass houses. Also note that PETA idiotface Dan Mathews is quoted often in this article; the guy's an ignorant, hateful nutcase and I'm gonna have an article on him soon. Oh, and PETA's official position is now that Canadians are "Neanderthals." Stay classy, PETA, and keep showing the people how much you respect them... <br /><br />A college newspaper called the Advocate (not the same as the LGBT mag) has a great article called <a href="http://www.advocate-online.net/60509/MattColumn.php">PETA: A lesson in staggering irrelevance.</a><br /><br />Gay Wired reports <a href="http://www.gaywired.com/Article.cfm?ID=23046&Section=67">(with a stupidly offensive headline)</a> that PETA spokesobject Audrina Partridge is starring in an ad for burger joint Carl's Jr. She salivates at the burgers when she arrives on set and wears a skimpy gold bikini that would make the PETA idiots proud, if only she were doing it to prove that only vegans are sexy! In the woman-hating pissing match between PETA and the meat industry, I shall be cheering for casualties.<br /><br />A friend sent along an article called <a href="http://www.humanespot.org/node/3260">The Problem with PETA.</a> Here's an excerpt from the beginning:<br /><br /><blockquote><br />People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) was founded in 1980 and has since become the most recognizable animal protection group in the world. They deserve a lot of credit for almost single-handedly putting animal rights issues on the radar of the U.S. public. As concern for animals becomes more mainstream, however, much of PETA's public education work seems outdated and potentially even counterproductive. Has PETA outlived its usefulness and/or has its approach to generating media tarnished the image of its fellow animal advocates? Whatever the answer, it's a question worth asking.</blockquote><br /><br />Finally, it is a sad comment that PETA's celebrity craziness has me confused every time I see a headline on their thoughts on seal hunting. When I see such headlines, I keep wondering why anybody would hunt a talented British singer.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-74137061913828415462009-06-03T20:28:00.001-07:002009-06-06T19:52:52.196-07:00PETA wants to own your uterus<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFd9q1GIvtP9N9ntqtX5PqCqHvsvRqCDwEY9VaM4y0QpkO4OL3J7_MorHR3mOjPVr5Nix40rm7fqhQ2egN5wMj5yX6yybiRcvb1hbRDC5ux__wmsrLC_rUANwVUtaW6-iNFqTUNS-Jbi4/s1600-h/PETA+likes+murder.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 241px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFd9q1GIvtP9N9ntqtX5PqCqHvsvRqCDwEY9VaM4y0QpkO4OL3J7_MorHR3mOjPVr5Nix40rm7fqhQ2egN5wMj5yX6yybiRcvb1hbRDC5ux__wmsrLC_rUANwVUtaW6-iNFqTUNS-Jbi4/s320/PETA+likes+murder.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5343313550417341538" /></a><br />Most people who read this blog have likely heard already, but PETA's <a href="http://community.feministing.com/2009/06/feminist-fuck-you-peta.html">now hoping to capitalize on the murder of Kansas abortion provider Dr. George Tiller.</a> They want to get these billboards put up in Wichita, where Tiller practiced and where he was murdered. In addition to what I would hope are the obvious problems with such an idea, PETA seems to take the right-wing view that pro-choicers want to force women into getting abortions rather than that we want women to be able to CHOOSE whatever is right for them; we don't say, "Pro-choice? Choose abortion!" We say, "Pro-choice? Make an informed decision and do whatever is best for you." And that may be any number of things, from giving birth and raising a child to adoption to abortion. And I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and say I'm guessing PETA's position isn't that people should choose to be meat-eaters, pescetarians or vegans and that all choices are equally valid. Under this approach, there really is no accurate way to draw a parallel between abortion and vegetarianism -- although I do find it interesting that after being so often compared to pro-life extremists, PETA now seems to be aligning themselves with that camp by cheapening and exploiting Tiller's murder and insinuating that pro-choicers are out to tell everyone what to do while using language that is eerily reminiscent of pro-lifers' "Choose Life" mantra. <br /><br />I suppose I shouldn't be surprised -- PETA has already tried to capitalize on murder and misogyny in the past <a href="http://www.missingpeople.net/backlash_spurs_peta_to_pull_gris.htm">by comparing the women murdered by pig farmer Robert Pickton to pigs.</a> (To see the actual ad, <a href="http://www.adrants.com/images/petapig.jpg">go here.</a>) Therefore, I shouldn't be at all surprised to see that PETA sees murder and brutal violence and assaults on women's freedom as a marketing opportunity, since they flat-out see women's bodies as nothing but marketing opportunities anyhow, but this is a new low even for PETA. It really, really furthers my theory that they're some kind of patsy for the meat industry. Nobody who wants to discourage animal cruelty (or be a decent fucking person) can honestly think this is a good idea, can they?<br /><br />UPDATE: Two major billboard owners in Wichita, George Lay Signs and Clear Channel, <a href="http://www.kansas.com/934/story/839346.html">have rejected PETA's ads,</a> thankfully. Although PETA's still grandstanding as though they have other options, if Wichita is like most other American cities, Clear Channel likely owns the vast majority of billboard space. I really never thought I'd see the day when I'd agree with Clear Channel on anything, frankly.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-55217225598379364972009-05-27T15:20:00.000-07:002009-06-03T20:24:05.537-07:00And now they malign the Inuit people...<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvAmBsRTT1O9Fhfd_U63WYWOLprFRWg8aZ2f9h5gkgbSJrQAsZk-C6_N6YddHtkMe3NOFfjeRInn_H5Iv0Z4WYKUIHS70WXAddYKLGTuiN13RyVL1FaD24_YlD4pmU2Uh_Dp81OSvmsvg/s1600-h/inukshuk_image.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 180px; height: 286px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvAmBsRTT1O9Fhfd_U63WYWOLprFRWg8aZ2f9h5gkgbSJrQAsZk-C6_N6YddHtkMe3NOFfjeRInn_H5Iv0Z4WYKUIHS70WXAddYKLGTuiN13RyVL1FaD24_YlD4pmU2Uh_Dp81OSvmsvg/s320/inukshuk_image.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5343285409270794018" /></a><br /><center>This is an inukshuk</center><br /><br />See that image above? Beautiful, isn't it? <a href="http://www.inukshukgallery.com/inukshuk.html">It's an inukshuk,</a> a monument of unworked stones that Canada's Inuit people use for communication and survival in the harsh climate in which they live. The meaning of the inukshuit (the plural form of inukshuk) are "Someone was here" or "You are on the right path." If it puts you in mind of a human pointing the way, that's not just a coincidence -- "Inukshuk" in the Inuit language means "in the likeness of a human." Inukshuit are used, among other things, to point the way to channels where boats can navigate, to food sources, to shelters and campsites and as milestones. <br /><br />Now, if you're at peace with this image, if you find it beautiful, important and meaningful, stop reading, at least for a while so this image has a chance to seep into your mind. You probably already know, but PETA's about to ruin it for you. <br /><br />See, the Inukshuk was recently chosen as the symbol for the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver, Canada. PETA, being all disgruntled at Canada's annual seal hunt, has of course decided to use the occasion of the Olympics to make a statement about the hunt -- never mind that they've never slammed, say, the UK, China, Australia or other countries when they host the Olympics despite the fact that those countries all engage in just as much, if not more, animal cruelty as Canada. <br /><br />Part of their campaign is that they've re-worked the Olympic logo with the rings to have blood dripping from one of the rings, which has <a href="http://www.vancouversun.com/news/PETA+comes+under+fire+parody+Olympic+logo/1633063/story.html">caught the ire</a> of the lawsuit-happy Olympics organizing committee. I could really give two craps about PETA's version of the Olympic rings. The only people it hurts are people who have plenty of money, anyhow. Of course, PETA didn't stop there. Why would they? So far they've only mildly hurt the feelings of some wildly privileged people. And we can't have that! For PETA wouldn't be PETA if they weren't working tirelessly to oppress the oppressed and <a href="http://www.uphere.ca/node/370">portraying indigenous people as savages who beat on cute animals:</a><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQmNI9fyowUHOiNqH5CRaE9SYa_y8PfESVdh6MU2JnWmxPg1ozB1d6olEE5EKMXBkVlePQcngg-DFHEL8B7cnyq794KpLLJyTFjwoT0V8y0WG8phsSOq3gzxfCegO7B4ZeTpIc72GkwRk/s1600-h/petaolympiclogo.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 236px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQmNI9fyowUHOiNqH5CRaE9SYa_y8PfESVdh6MU2JnWmxPg1ozB1d6olEE5EKMXBkVlePQcngg-DFHEL8B7cnyq794KpLLJyTFjwoT0V8y0WG8phsSOq3gzxfCegO7B4ZeTpIc72GkwRk/s320/petaolympiclogo.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5343295289028158546" /></a><br /><center>This is total disrespect for Inuit culture</center><br /><br />Yes, they really went there. And they really don't give a crap and are spouting the pathetic-ass excuse that the Olympic committee has already cheapened the inukshuk by using it for the 2010 logo. This is despite the fact that when the inuksuk logo was unveiled as the Olympic symbol, Inuit Tapirit Kanatami president Mary Simon said it was great, so clearly the Olympics' use of the symbol does have the support of an important part of the Inuit community. <br /><br />And anyhow, just because the Olympics committee decided to use the inukshuk doesn't mean PETA should (further?) cheapen it by making a logo that tries to get people to have a negative association with an important and little-known Inuit symbol. After all, will the average person looking at that think, "Oh, it's an animal rights argument AND an edgy commentary on the co-optation of an Inuit cultural symbol!" or are they going to think, "Hmmm, Inuit symbol doing something a lot of people find brutal, therefore Inuit people must do it themselves and are brutal?" If you know anything about the human mind and enduring historical attitudes toward indigenous people, and if you've actually looked at that damn PETA logo, people are going to go for interpretation number two first. Furthermore, PETA claims they're not against people like the Inuit who hunt for subsistence, but this type of stunt just guarantees that any criticism of seal hunting will be deflected from commercial seal hunters onto indigenous hunters. <br /><br />I'm sure PETA thought of the negative ramifications of co-opting the inukshuk but simply didn't care. After all, when have they given a crap about the commodification of other cultures? Was it when they compared pictures of black men being hung in lynchings to slaughterhouses, or when they compared pictures of Jews in concentration camps to slaughterhouses by using pictures they essentially stole from the Holocaust museum? In the context of PETA's previous actions and their unwillingness to respect or form coalitions with human rights groups, this is nothing but racism and willful ignorance; PETA has no interest in learning about other issues or other cultures, and they certainly don't care about respecting oppressed people. After all, if they wanted to make a statement about seal hunting in connection with the Olympics, they could have had an image of the Canadian maple leaf dripping with blood, or they could have taken any number of other Canadian symbols that are NOT specifically connected to indigenous cultures and made a statement with those. Instead, they've done this, and since I hadn't yet seen the Olympic symbol and I've never seen an inukshuk before, PETA's "symbol" was the first glimpse I've had of any type of inukshuk, which makes me really, really sad.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhoRItGwdSBlFugKfIwGNw9bOfFeDtFClNCYj-XzE64aWwMB2bDOqvZogYZNMzQrLBvMvXZI2SWZLR3zVci7uKjFXGjq2YFzwRVqfF_fRTUDQStkIyQhu0jtF6uHObL6YuvAlc16Cs09_E/s1600-h/inuksuk.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 218px; height: 296px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhoRItGwdSBlFugKfIwGNw9bOfFeDtFClNCYj-XzE64aWwMB2bDOqvZogYZNMzQrLBvMvXZI2SWZLR3zVci7uKjFXGjq2YFzwRVqfF_fRTUDQStkIyQhu0jtF6uHObL6YuvAlc16Cs09_E/s320/inuksuk.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5343307316574499378" /></a><br /><center>THIS is an inukshuk</center><div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-54893698146445191652009-05-23T20:51:00.000-07:002009-05-24T11:55:02.549-07:00Way to fucking go, PETAA large majority of Americans -- and a significantly larger percentage than last year -- <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/118546/Republicans-Veer-Right-Several-Moral-Issues.aspx">view wearing fur as morally acceptable,</a> according to a recent Gallup poll. Now, we all know that every time somebody criticizes PETA's misogynist anti-fur campaigns, they scream, "But SEX SELLS!!!!" (Never mind that <a href="http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/video.asp?video=fur-is-dead-psa&Player=flv">stripping and beating a woman to death</a> isn't sexy...but I digress...) What I'd like to tell PETA is, well, knuckleheads, if sex sells, then every damn person in the West should be against wearing fur by now. After all, practically everyone has seen your dumbassed "I'd Rather Go Naked Than Wear Fur" ads, and many have seen your other crap like the mostly-naked Suicide Girls in the newer "Ink Not Mink" campaign. <br /><br />But as I've said before, tits and ass will not convince people of a damned thing. In fact, given <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/feb/16/sex-object-photograph">evidence that viewing women as sex objects</a> makes men <i>less</i> likely to listen to women and even shuts down the part of their brain that experiences empathy, those ads are probably doing far less good than hearing it from a fully-clothed woman, and may even be doing harm to women <i>and</i> animals by shutting off people's empathy. It should also be noted that when you use a campaign that demeans and degrades one group and it fails, not only have you failed to help the group you aimed to help, you've also made things worse for whatever group you threw under the bus in your campaign. This is yet another reason why PETA-style campaigns are so ill-advised -- you can't be sure it will work, and if it doesn't you've simply unleashed more harm on the world; your impact isn't just zero, it's <i>negative</i>. You're gambling with people's lives and dignity.<br /><br />Similarly, what PETA doesn't understand is that convincing people to change their lifestyle is a hell of a lot different than getting them to buy a particular brand of beer, and it requires far different tactics, tactics that actually make people think and that will stick with them, tactics that will appeal to their conscience and connectedness with others, not make them feel superior to anyone who's not a white cisgender man. See, the way we treat animals now is part of a hierarchical system that puts straight white cisgender able-bodied etc. men at the top. Meanwhile people not in that category are in the middle at various rungs of the ladder depending on how many privileged characteristics they have, children are next to the bottom, and animals are at the very bottom. Doing things that uphold this hierarchy, such as exploiting women and thereby upholding sexism, will not do a damned thing to liberate animals; it will only strengthen the hierarchy, and will increase people's estrangement from others. We will sink or swim <i>together,</i> and if we as animal rights advocates <a href="http://thecolonic.blogspot.com/2009/02/using-transphobia-to-fight-animal-abuse.html">can't even respect our fellow human beings</a> there is no way in hell we'll get anybody to respect animals. <br /><br />It might sound wishy-washy, but it shouldn't: <i>We are all connected, goddamnit.</i> Until we understand and live by that, until we feel it with every breath of polluted air we take and with every brutal hate crime and every report of a young black man gunned down in an urban wasteland, we will all lose. It is only with compassion, love and respect that we will win anything, and I simply don't see that in any of PETA's campaigns. I see scorn, bigotry, adolescent snickering and a despicable sense of moral superiority. Given that, nobody should be surprised that Americans think it's okay to kill animals for fur; PETA has simply decided that human beings are not capable of empathy and will only respond to demeaning displays of dominance over oppressed groups. They should be ashamed of what they've done, and the rest of us should resist PETA's type of thinking at all costs. In the end, humans, animals and the earth will all be the better for it.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-39492724823344765872009-05-23T20:11:00.000-07:002009-06-07T10:45:07.326-07:00Dear PETA, nobody thinks you're funny except your mom. Love, Me<span style="font-style:italic;">Note: This post is more of a pet-peeves-about-PETA post than anything really horrible they've done. For once.</span><br /><br />Ah, PETA. Right when I almost forget you exist, I open my email and lament to remember that you do, in fact, hog my air on a daily basis. (GET IT?!?! HOG?!?!? LOLOLOLOL....)<br /><br />Now, if you think that joke was not funny, allow me to share an observation. PETA is also not funny. Well, unintentionally they are, but what I mean can be found in a recent entry from <a href="http://blog.peta.org/archives/2009/05/dear_furries_pl.php">their blog:</a><br /><br /><blockquote>Dear Furries, Please Don't Wear Real Fur. Love, PETA<br /><br />Heads up, Pittsburgh: A menagerie of costumed wolves, rabbits, foxes, and other fake fauna are about to converge on your city. <br /><br />And no, it has nothing to do with PETA. <br /><br />Actually, it's all about Anthrocon—the world's largest "Furry" convention. OK, so if you don't know what a Furry is, I know you're dying to ask. In a nutshell, a Furry is a person who is totally into animal anthropomorphism (assigning animals human traits). I mean totally into it. We're talking loving fictional animal characters so much that they often wear mascot-like costumes of their fave animals (think Crayola-colored cheetahs in cargo pants). <br /><br />Which is where PETA came into the picture. Don't get me wrong, we weren't trying to harsh their mellow. We just wanted to make sure that convention-going "Fursuiters"—as they like to be called—weren't parading around in the pelts of real animals. Here's the letter we sent to them:<br /><br />(Scan of typical stupid PETA letter follows)</blockquote><br /><br />Now, I really love what happens next:<br /><br /><blockquote>Their response?<br /><br />Dear Shawna:<br />Real fur is frowned upon at all furry conventions, in the same sense that leaping in front of speeding locomotives is frowned upon at comic book conventions.<br />Yours truly,<br />Samuel Conway, Ph.D.<br />Chairman and CEO<br />Anthrocon, Inc. </blockquote><br /><br />Note that the funny part of this blog entry did <i>not</i> come from PETA. Now, some of you may not be familiar with PETA's dumbass blog in which dumbass PETA supporters write about dumbass things. You are lucky. More to the point, however, this writing style and this type of dumb, pointless stunt is pretty much the norm on the whole blog. And it makes me want to rip my toenails out and throw them at Ingrid Newkirk. On the same page as this waste-of-money Furries stunt we see a preview for an article called “Pamela Anderson Bowls Over an Austrian Official – Then Has a Ball,” and another article opens with this slammin', sassy line: “There was no love lost between the Chicago Blackhawks and the Detroit Red Wings as they battled on the ice last night in game three of the Stanley Cup playoffs, but there was love in the stands during halftime when Jason Levy asked his girlfriend, Nicole Hughes, to marry him.”<br /><br />I mean, <i>really,</i> PETA, really? I KNOW some of y'all read my blog – it's called a <a href="http://www.statcounter.com/">tracker</a>, you see – and I was thinking maybe you could take a cue from me, or better yet from <a href="http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/">Twisty Faster</a> or <a href="http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/">Melissa McEwan</a> and actually be funny. Because if I have to be annoyed with your crap on a daily basis I'd at least like to be amused, or feel that your donors are getting a little something for their money other than the upholding of racist capitalist patriarchy. But if the only way you can entertain people is by being so ridiculous that they just make fun of you, what's the point? (And if you don't know that all people do is make fun of you, you clearly do not get PETA news alerts sent to your inbox. Or hell, you don't even read your own press releases.)<br /><br />Perhaps I should be careful of how I word this criticism. I wouldn't want to wake up and find out that PETA has extended an offer to me to contribute to their blog because they're so desperate. That is, unless it's okay that my first post will be titled “New blogger/rogue vegan declares PETA a tool of the meat industry.” But don't get me wrong, I wouldn't be trying to harsh PETA's mellow or anything.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3398356168271472316.post-21630793921392759552009-05-13T18:23:00.000-07:002012-12-24T22:40:04.690-08:00Get your juvenile on....I love Republicans.<br />
<br />
No, seriously! Have you heard that they're trying to re-name the Democratic party <a href="http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/05/children.html">the Democrat Socialist Party?</a> It delights me to learn that you can now re-name groups without their permission, so I, too, have taken this opportunity to join in the re-naming fun. Now, hold on to your faux fur hats, because this will be a highly intellectual exercise. And by intellectual, I mean you might get to use the word "poopy." <br />
<br />
That's right, my revolutionary friends! We're going to re-name PETA! Please note that the suggestions below are ones that I've only come up with between now and getting home from work, so they are probably not as hilarious as they could be if I had a more democratic, er, Democrat Socialist attitude. But even an empress takes suggestions, so e-mail or leave your re-names below and I'll add them to the poll if they are pleasing to me and if I get a chance. Bribery will also help your cause. Of course, not having your entry there at the beginning means you'll start out behind, but if you are part of a privileged group you may consider it a free lesson in <a href="https://www.blogger.com/www.case.edu/president/aaction/UnpackingTheKnapsack.pdf">unpacking the invisible knapsack.</a> See, sometimes you DO learn things here at Vegans Against PETA!<br />
<br />
(Note: I've mostly stuck with keeping the acronym the same, because I figure name recognition is very important. Plus I don't want to invite uncomfortable comparisons to Prince. But other naming schemes are welcome if they're awesome enough.)<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-Q3ob3ounXrzWMN6S5mHM3TgU64Gwxq8rZR2ZQbtLi4UujtAUqKL9R-ugCP6MIZEWmcfyfKroYABCtIpB-AXmbKdpxWVYAx6CXgAjyt2k0uMnnJJ_VdbLAza0JziqoAyjml2g_NJFT2o/s1600/peta+poll.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-Q3ob3ounXrzWMN6S5mHM3TgU64Gwxq8rZR2ZQbtLi4UujtAUqKL9R-ugCP6MIZEWmcfyfKroYABCtIpB-AXmbKdpxWVYAx6CXgAjyt2k0uMnnJJ_VdbLAza0JziqoAyjml2g_NJFT2o/s1600/peta+poll.PNG" /></a></div>
<script src="http://modpoll.com/poll.js?pid=agdwb2xsMmdvcgwLEgRQb2xsGPXGEAw&theme=khaki&width=565"></script><br />
<br />
<br />
<i>(PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: Somewhere along the line, the poll disappeared from this entry and refused to come back, so I've simply posted an image of the entries. If I recall correctly, the winner was "PENIS ERECTION TITS ASS ZOMG!!!" It warms my heart to know that you all share my impressively low level of maturity.)</i><div class="blogger-post-footer">Atom</div>The Venerable Vegan Empresshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12181191699936334897noreply@blogger.com0