Memo to PETA: Go F *** Yourselves for traumatizing children.

[riqster]

http://bluntandcranky.wordpress.com/2013/11/07/memo-to-peta-go-f-yourselves-a/

Snips:

"In the name of saving animals, they are deliberately trying to traumatize little kids. They are putting up anti-turkey-dinner ads in bus stops, you see: ads that show grownups a Rockwell-ish image of a mom carving a bird, and that show anyone shorter than four feet tall a demonic woman murdering a live bird, and spattering her kids’ faces with blood."

"Of all the despicable, abusive, and idiotic things to do. Do the stupid-f***s at PETA think that little children do the grocery shopping in American households? Anyone on Planet Consensus Reality knows better."

More at the link. Jesus fucking Christ on toast. These assholes at PETA need an attitude adjustment.

[Ranchemp.]

1. ^^^THIS^^^

PETA=Assholes.

[HERVEPA]

3. ^^^THIS^^^

Animal killers = assholes

[Ranchemp.]

6. What?

You think this hurts my feelings? Guess what, I've already hunted and killed and dressed our turkey for Thanksgiving, I have no remorse doing so either, if that makes me an asshole in your eyes, so be it, I'm an asshole, but I'll be a well fed asshole this Thanksgiving, as will be the rest of my family.

Guess what else? I also hunt deer, elk and game birds for food, and, I make no apologies for it.

[HERVEPA]

13. Congratulations

[leftynyc]

21. Excellent

I'm sure it will be very yummy. I have no beef with hunters who eat what they kill (I almost said shoot but realize there are still bow and arrow hunters and didn't want to leave them out). You don't owe anyone an apology. I would, however, outlaw trophy hunting. That's just gross.

[Ranchemp.]

55. I detest trophy hunters,

unless they donate the meat to homeless shelter, otherwise, trophy hunting should be outlawed.

[leftynyc]

139. From what a hunter

ex-boyfriend told me, the animals killed for their heads are older animals and their meat is tough and chewy. That's why they're rarely eaten. His folks lived on a ranch in southern Alberta and the giant den was lined with the heads and hides of animals. It was disgusting. But I did get to play midwife to a cow - that was cool.

[Ranchemp.]

147. Thanks for the info,

I've never known a trophy hunter, so I didn't know that they hunted older animals, and he's right, the older the animal, the tougher/gamier the meat, not really fit for human consumption.

[leftynyc]

148. He explained that it was the older

animals that had the giant racks that people wanted to put on their walls. Younger animal=smaller racks.

[Ranchemp.]

153. In my humble opinion, that's pretty warped,

I've hunted deer, elk, never have I mounted the racks, my wife would never allow it and it's just not my thing.

[leftynyc]

203. That's great

We're no longer together for many reasons but his whacked out family was one of them. His mother and I detested each other.

[Scootaloo]

279. Trouble is...

Older animals = better genes. They've survived this long after all, they're bound to benefit their offspring. Take out the big guys from the herd and all that's left are the spikes and who knows what their genetic lottery says.

Also? Meat is meat. If you kill it, you eat it - or at least, give it to someone who will. Unless you chased the sucker down with a pointy stick, I don't want to hear anything about "trophies."

[jmowreader]

210. A lot of them are eaten as sausage

Elk sausage is great stuff, and the best of it comes from older animals.

[leftynyc]

238. I've never tasted elk

I'm sure it's somewhere on a menu in NYC but I'm not recalling seeing it. Venison isn't bad - not something I would order but had a friend make meatballs and spaghetti with it and it was very tasty. That's on menus a lot.

[OwnedByCats]

228. That makes you

one of the better hunters in the world. If you abide by the local hunting laws and kill the animal as quickly as possible so it doesn't suffer, and it's food for you and your family, you're one of the ethical ones and as much as I love animals, I don't have a problem with that kind of hunting. I'm not even a vegetarian so I really have no right to tell you that what you do is wrong. That would be hypocritical.

The assholes are the ones who hunt for trophies and abuse animals.

[NutmegYankee]

235. It's still called shooting an arrow. Nt

[Mutiny In Heaven]

256. Vegetarian here...

I don't have a great problem with people hunting for food...it's not what I would do, but it certainly isn't factory farmed torture slop. I see an awful lot of people who'll eat whatever as long as it's in a package, yet find the idea of people hunting for food repulsive, which is excruciatingly illogical. As for me, personally? There are, I'm sure situations in which I would eat well-prepared road kill.

Trophy hunters can piss off though; I cannot begin to imagine what goes through such minds. As for PETA, it does its share of worthwhile stuff, but too often seeks to shock for the sake of it, which of course, only makes people double down on their daily gristle.

[Ilsa]

277. You are my kind of hunter. <<<hugs>>> nt

[MoonRiver]

19. +1000

[Deep13]

137. Agreed. nt

[HERVEPA]

2. Yeh, that's a shame

Kids finding out what they're eating comes at the expense of killing helpless animals. Terrible.

[cali]

5. It's just a stupid, nasty thing to do.

we're talking about kids who are really little- like 3 to 8 on average.

and it does nothing but piss people off.

this is all about PETA doing anything for publicity. and they don't give a fuck if it's negative publicity and hurts the cause they purport to care about.

[seabeyond]

7. so, you have no problem purposely traumatizing little kids?

[beerandjesus]

8. Way to miss the point

It's not just the message, it's that they're trying to sneak it past their parents.

Completely unethical. Fuck Peta.

[HERVEPA]

15. And if it helps some kids to become vegetarians eventually, great.

Note: I have two well-adjusted grown vegetarian children who made the decision on their own as young teens shortly before I became a vegetarian. They and my grandkids will enjoy a fine delicious vegetarian Thanksgiving dinner without having caused harm to a helpless animal.

[cali]

22. does it matter to you at all that far more children just won't understand it

and will likely be upset and confused by it? We're talking kids who are 3, 4, 4 years old.

And people like you with your self-righteous and selfish attitude don't do vegetarianism any favors.

[HERVEPA]

30. Well, I guess they could ask their parents, couldn't they

And their parents will figure out how to answer and discuss it with them.
Contrary to popular opinion, kids can understand a lot.

[cali]

33. that's a different point.

it's still stupid, clumsy and nothing but PETA trying to get publicity.

I'd bet it turns far more people off from vegetarianism than it converts.

[HERVEPA]

42. Not logical.

Possibly might not create any vegetarians, but someone contemplating becoming one would not decide not to just to spite PETA. If you're thinking of becoming a vegetarian, though something from PETA may have influenced you positively, you are deciding based on whether or not you want to please PETA.

[cui bono]

111. I'm all for going vegetarian, but you are simply missing the point.

That is a vulgar and insensitive way for PETA to make a statement. This is why people hate the organization. And having people hate you doesn't help your messaging.

If they were going to do it they should have reversed it. Let the adults see the gruesome pic and the kids see the Rockwell pic. Or let the kids see turkeys running out in the wild.

As it is it is in very poor taste and makes it hard to support them as an organization.

[etherealtruth]

220. PETA does a tremendous job at ...

drawing attention to themselves and diverting it from the supposed message they want to send. Their ads and campaigns do not make people reflective ... they simply bring attention to themselves as a group ... which apparently is more important to them than the actual message the purport to want to convey.

Though I am no longer a vegetarian (i ate very, very little animal products) ... two of my children are

[Sheepshank]

154. I can't think of the last time I smeared blood of a freshly killed carcass, on my kids faces....

....how is this a realistic conversation that I should engage in with my children?

FUCK PETA

[backwoodsbob]

173. could I post posters at childrens bus stops telling them

that child molesters like childrens bus stops complete with some graphic pictures?

And would you say that's a great idea because they can ask the parents about it?

[morningfog]

230. That is the worst analogy of bad analogies.

How is being a victim of a sexual assault anything at all like choosing what to eat?

[el_bryanto]

23. Do you think that PETAs actions here are an effective way of spreading the message?

It strikes me that they are more likely to cause people to resist it - firstly because of the possibility of traumatizing children and secondly because of the clear moralistic preaching tone.

Do you think it's important for PETA to effectively convince people to become vegan (not vegetarian, incidentally check their website)? Or is it important to simply make a statement regardless of its effectiveness?

Bryant

[HERVEPA]

28. Peta encourages vegan

Does not discourage vegetarian.

[el_bryanto]

32. Because Vegetarians are still cruel to animals, as I understand it

Not as cruel as actually eating them (like I do), but still imprisoning them, milking them, harvesting eggs and the like.

So you are OK with a little cruelty to animals, you just don't go so far as to eat them?

Bryant

[Rex]

301. What is so great about being a vegan?

You are still killing living organisms and devouring their flesh. I don't really get it.

[seabeyond]

24. so, you are really saying you are into traumatizing little kids? this is fuckin surreal. nt

[HERVEPA]

26. Certainly no more surreal than many of your posts.

(and I am a feminist, by the way).

[seabeyond]

34. simple question. you are ok with adults purposely, with intent to hurt and harm children?

[HERVEPA]

45. Or you could put it that I am not in favor of the slaughter of animals

[seabeyond]

53. this is about purposely, with intent, to hurt a child. that is what the campaign is. children

are who they directed it at. they made it as traumatizing as they could for a little kid. they put effort and thought into how they could horrify a child. then they implemented.

again. answer the fuckin question. you advocate hurting children?

[seabeyond]

68. you are talking about feeding children graphic pictures of death cause you believe in the cause and

you are telling me a little "decorum". what a hoot.

[HERVEPA]

75. Just messing with your highfalutin language

[seabeyond]

78. what you are doing is showing an unwilllingness to clearly state you have no problem harming

our children if it is a just cause for you

[ismnotwasm]

74. I love online psycho-analysis

I indulge in it myself.

[Capt. Obvious]

81. You don't say?

[longship]

52. PETA is shameful.

I have no problem with people being vegetarian, vegan, or breathairians (who just die), if that suits them.

I am omnivorous and always will be, just like most humans since time immemorial.

So you're vegetarian? Good for you.

[alphafemale]

229. Same kind of thought process religious right wingers use handing out hell tracts to children.

EXACTLY. The same.

It doesn't matter if they are traumatized so long as they are "Led to the Lord!"

EXACTLY the same.

They both see themselves as superior to ALL others.

Fuck religious freaks who terrorize little children with hell tracts and tribulation houses.

And


Fuck


PETA!

[beerandjesus]

253. Ah, you beat me to that particular point....

that's what I get for not reading the whole thread!

Your analogy between religious right-wingers and Peta is well-taken, too, since the Peta types are equally religious in their zeal, not to mention tactics.

[alphafemale]

288. There are a few things that really piss me off.

People who engage in the emotional abuse of children, and defend it as a perfectly valid way of promoting their agenda is high up on that list.

[beerandjesus]

252. By your logic, similar ads that would show dead fetuses at children's eye level

are equally justified, because the kids can as their parents about it.


But another poster is right, this has very little to do with vegetarianism and everything to do with Peta's media-whoring. And it turns off people like me, who are not vegetarian, but are generally sympathetic.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

18. You have a Darwin fish and are worried about animals being eaten?

Am I missing something?

[HERVEPA]

49. Yes you are. A Darwin fish says you believe in evolution..

and don't believe in biblical fables. It doesn't say you believe in eating fish.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

159. I eat fish when I believe I'm hungry, so do lots of other creatures

many of whom were themselves eaten by other things.

[hughee99]

36. Exactly, we should expose them to grizzly child murder scenes as well,

to make sure they understand "stranger danger".

[kelly1mm]

48. At the local abortion clinic a group brings big (4x6) pictures of aborted fetuses. This

clinic is on the main drag in town. Lots of people complain that the pictures are traumatizing to children. But the protesters have the same attitude you do in that traumatizing children is OK because are doing it for a good cause.

[HERVEPA]

59. The cause is not a good cause. It is an attempt by people

who have no business doing so, usually religiously motivated, to control women's bodies.
And I've seen tons of these pictures, and been called every name in the book, as I've been a Planned Parenthood escort for more than 20 years.

[seabeyond]

62. so, if you do not believe in the cause, it is wrong. if you believe in the cause it is ok to hurt

children?

[HERVEPA]

72. Religious men attempting to control women's bodies is wrong.

Not killing animals to eat is not wrong.

[seabeyond]

84. you are good with hurting children. you just cannot say it out loud. is that what i am getting?

cause you dance all around saying it is ok to hurt children if the cause is right. but, you refuse to actually own it. at least peta is honest enough to own their intent ot hurt children, with absolutely no modesty at all.

[HERVEPA]

92. I do enjoy dancing. Have you ever tried contra dancing.

It might be a good outlet for some of your anger.

[seabeyond]

97. you do not mind hurting little kids, you just cant say it. all for the cause. nt

[HERVEPA]

104. Perhaps a different form of dancing would be more to your liking.

I didn't mean to be limiting.

[seabeyond]

107. nah. you cant own the hurting children for cause, so now you are in a gmae mode. i do not think

it is cute. and certainly not clever. i have never been much into hurting human beings. but then, they are not animals, so it is fine to hurt them. even our littlest.

what rationality one must have to swallow that load.

[seabeyond]

60. point. i am as disgusted and angry at these people that give these pictures to children with the

intent, purpose, to traumatize the child. exactly. thank you. and living in a fundamentalist area, i had to keep my eye out for these people so they did not do exactly that.

[kelly1mm]

98. It is amazing to me that Hervepa does not see the similarity in these two examples of "shock

exposure".

Really comes down to if she agrees with the underlying message (ethically, religious, political basis) then by any means necessary. apparently.

[seabeyond]

102. ya. i guess it tells me how these people in my community, loving people, have no problem feeding

their kids this garbage. it is all in advocating the cause. and child be damn. cause ranks.

really was another learning experience for me here on du.

outta the thread.

[Ranchemp.]

108. It blows my mind that she can't see the similarities,

these anti abortion protesters are trying to control a women's body and PETA is trying to control what we eat.

[kelly1mm]

110. well, I would focus more on the TACTIC of showing graphic images no matter what your cause.

that is what is similar, at least to me.

[cui bono]

133. That's not the similarity at all. PETA isn't trying to "control" what you eat.

They are trying to get you to not eat animal products, but they are not trying to "control" it.

The similarity is in the method used to try to dissuade people from an action, the method being gruesome pictures that kids will see.

[Ranchemp.]

138. That's what I was trying to get across, but did so poorly,

I should have said influence what we eat with graphic illustrations.

[d_r]

207. cognitive dissonance

[jberryhill]

127. Electric shock is more effective

You could strap the kids to a chair, shout "MEAT!" and give them an electrical shock each time you say the word "MEAT!"

That would also work.

[lostincalifornia]

150. I am a vegetarian, but I recognize it isn't for everyone. The point I would make is if PETA

believes that this type of ad will persuade people, they are mistaken, and it will have the opposite effect.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

174. you know it is rude and exploitative of young, innocent minds to do so

it's one thing if a kid happens to be on a block where they are tossing blood at fur coat wearing people and the kid happens to see it. It is another thing to SPECIFICALLY target the ad to elicit strong reactions from KIDS.

BULLSHIT tactics.

[Logical]

209. And you wonder why people hate PETA! nt

[pnwmom]

239. Kids won't find that out because they're not seeing the same image as

their parents. They're seeing an inexplicable, monstrous image of an angry woman stabbing a living bird while blood spurts onto the faces of children.

They're not seeing any connection to the Thanksgiving dinner their parents are viewing.

[Rex]

302. SO you are not a big fan of nature I take it?

You do realize that right now, somewhere, something is killing a helpless animal? Why are you against the natural order of things?

[el_bryanto]

4. This is real - kind of nasty

Here's the link to the Peta Site.

From the site - "If you wouldn't want your kids to see how your dinner was made, maybe you shouldn't be eating it." Fair enough but the one time I did a turkey for thanksgiving (which turned out great by the way) I didn't have a live squacking turkey that I was stabbing and splattering myself with blood.

Bryant

[Iggo]

9. WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!?!?!?

[seabeyond]

14. i think peta is absolutely thinking about how to HURT children. you want to encourage them

to think more about the children? please, no.

[Iggo]

20. Actually, I think they're trying to piss people off...

...and I think they're succeeding fantastically.

[seabeyond]

27. at the expense of childrens emotional health. purposely hurting children. nt

[cali]

37. I think you and the op are being a tad melodramatic.

I doubt that image will harm any kid's emotional health.

It's a nasty, stupid pr stunt but it really isn't an image that's likely to harm a kid.

[Capt. Obvious]

43. "I think you and the op are being a tad melodramatic."

You see who you are responding to, right?

[ismnotwasm]

51. What does that have to do with it?

[seabeyond]

66. i also do not have messed up kids that got lessons at age appropriate times instead of when

society and perfect strangers decided my children should experience something beyond their years.

that is a bad thing? cause i am thinking that is being a parent. my job.

[seabeyond]

46. i disagree. butchering an animal and blood flying all over the kids. got a picture?

cause having raised little ones, and lots of nieces and nephews, ya.... it would be harmful. parents protect kids from this shit. we spend a lot of our time protecting our kids from this garbage. and we do it for a reason. not cause we want to waste our time for nothing.

[cali]

114. it's a cartoon image.

[TorchTheWitch]

233. it sure as hell would have hurt me

As it would now. I was a sensitive kid and a sensitive adult. Gruesome photos stick in my psyche. It would have been a hell of a lot worse when I was a young child. I'll never stop despising the Catholic church for what it did to my psyche either.

[HERVEPA]

79. Do you think their goal is to hurt children?

[seabeyond]

87. well, hell ya. that is what the campaign is. that is what they put their time in creating. they

went out of their way to do exactly that.

you think they made it as graphically horrifying to a kid that they could and NO ONE actually thought about the harm it MIGHT do to a little kid.

and were sure to HIDE it from the parents view. a parent they know damn well would take care of their kids and say fuck the message.

really? you think they were clueless in what they were doing?

[cui bono]

136. Their goal is not to hurt children. That's quite a stretch. n/t

[seabeyond]

145. ??? they put thought and effort into a graph that would traumatize a kid. they did it with intent

so parent would not see.

how is the intent NOT to hurt a kid?

their reward? kid not eat meat.

to get that reward, their intent is to hurt kid.

[cui bono]

151. No, you've decided it will absolutely traumatize a kid.

But that isn't necessarily true. It's a drawing, a cartoon, for one thing. Most kids have probably seen that already in cartoons.

The goal is NOT to traumatize kids. The goal is to get them to not want to eat animals. You are allowing your outrage to confuse the issue.

I agree the messaging - content and delivery - is insensitive and in poor taste, but that hardly translates into their goal being to traumatize children.

[seabeyond]

157. how do they figure they will get a little kid to not eat meat. a little kid that is too young

to even comprehend the food groups. a little kid that is just learning meat, fruit, vegetable.

showing a picture that is not gonna have the kid screaming in horror will do what? absolutely not.

killing a live thing with blood squirting out that will horrify a child will get him to not TOUCH meat.

right?

[cui bono]

163. Whether it is accomplished or not, that is their goal. n/t

[seabeyond]

165. so, their intent is to make the picture as horrifying as they can to get the kid to mentally be hurt

so they will not eat meat.

their intent is to hurt a child to gain the result of that child not eating meat.

[cui bono]

169. No. Geez. If their intent was to make the picture as horrifying as they can they failed big time.

At this point I have to believe that you haven't even seen the picture in question. If you think that's as horrifying as they can make it you need to get out more.

Here's a link to it:

http://www.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/content/20131107-peta-plans-ads-with-one-image-for-adults-another-bloody-one-for-children-poll.ece

[seabeyond]

179. they wont let me copy picture. lets disect. 2-4 yr olds in mind. a loving mom/a mean eyebrows

drawn mom. they already know there is a problem here. mom looks demented. as if she is getting a perverted pleasure with all the blood. a piece of meat/a live animal. blood squirting out and the face is in shock, a child will say pain. blood on kids face.

that is sick. it is fuckin..... sick.

horror at what is happening on the kids face.

and you wnat little kids to consume this. and all the people that say kids see this all the time. bull fuckin shit. because it is cartoon, does not make it cutsey in the kids mind.

it is sick. it is actually worse than what i thought it would be

and i can not copy and paste for others to see

[cui bono]

182. I was going to post the pic but I thought my post might get hidden.

Just right click on the image and select "view image" then copy that url into your message.

Go ahead. Show people what you imagine to be so "as horrifying as they can make it".

It's simply not true. You are really overreacting and that phrase is the proof right there. There is no way anyone in their right mind would think that cartoon pic is as horrifying as they can make it. It would take 10 seconds to make that pic more horrifying if one had the graphic tools.

Honestly, you are too worked up over this. It's not even out, it says they are planning it. So your energy would be better spent complaining directly to them rather than repeating the same thing over and over on DU.

I'm done with this discussion.

[seabeyond]

185. you are afraid it will be hidden. on a forum with adults. but, it is good to go for 2, 3, 4 yr olds

interesting.

what i am worked up about is adults, grown adults that laugh.... what about the kids. as this is about the kids and they are being targeted. deciding that a picture of an alive animal being cut up is not bad for a kid. blood spurting out. blood all over the kids

a big thumbs up

taht is what i am worked up about.

but, it seems people seem to be more passionate about their cause than what a child might experience.

what ever.... i do not get how any adult would justify that picture for the consumption of little kids.

so. i am going to have a glass of wine and get off the net

enjoy

[cui bono]

188. DU juries and all that, you are so up in arms about it you might have alerted. Go ahead and post it.

I once posted a pic of my neighbor's dog in a "batman" outfit at halloween and that post was deleted. No idea why, except maybe because his penis was sticking out a little like a dog's penis will do. I was very surprised. So yeah, never know what DU will hide or leave up.

Again, go ahead and post it yourself. I didn't not post it because I thought it was terrible. I thought it would be alerted on by you since it's upsetting you so much. I can't believe you've really looked at it for you to describe it the way you did above.

[seabeyond]

190. it is really unlikely i would have alerted since i tried to post it. please, in a course of

a discussion, even disagreement, dont assign shit to me.

i felt that at least with you, i was having a reasoned discussion. to suggest "up in arms" and i would alert, when i am talking about the effects on little kids, is pure silliness.

kinda like the people now saying, vegetarian haters, kill vegans ect... like this has anything to do with others choices of diet.

i have been very specific with my issue with petas ad. directed at little kids, behind parents back, to harm child to get them to not eat meat.

i have been consistent.

now. done.

[cui bono]

196. You hadn't tried yet at that point.

You tried to make me not posting it about how horrible it really is - which is not the case on either point - so I told you why. Sorry if that offends you, but that's why, coupled with a broken jury process and the hide rules. I told you about the dog picture that got deleted. That made no sense.

[seabeyond]

198. i am not getting view image when i right click. i cant find image anywhere else.

i got in into my puter under pictures.

is there a way i can get it from my pictures onto du? i am computer stupid.

[DonCoquixote]

236. Yes, it is that bad

For one, it is trying to make the Mother looks like a villain, note the scowl and grin. The message is "my Mommy is an evil killer for making turkey."

And, of course, to all ther kids who have no control over the dinner table, whose parents cannot affford the Vegan diets which are so pricy and organic and chic and first world problem laden, PETA does not give a damn. You cannot make a vegatarian Omelette without breakign a few eggs, right?

[stevenleser]

39. You can't claim this is a logical fallacy. This is a policy directly aimed at children by design.

And it is designed specifically to traumatize them.

Similarly, you cannot claim Godwins law if one accuses the head of one of the neo-nazi organizations of being a Nazi.

[Deep13]

194. I think that is the whole point of the OP.

A better question is why we are wasting so much time and effort worrying about livestock?

[B2G]

10. Assholes is a tremendous understatement. nt

[TheCowsCameHome]

11. How about showing a turnip beaten to a pulp in a bowl

Turnips have feelings, too. And so do carrots and yams and squash......

How about it, PETA? Play fair.

[Inkfreak]

12. Fuck PETA (nt)

[TheBlackAdder]

16. Shouldn't we also show them the Agent Orange-Like RoundUp and Pesticides sprayed on their veggies?

How about all of the additives, chemical compounds, etc. that go into the foods?

PETA... You're really into Child Abuse, aren't you?

[Capt. Obvious]

17. WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN

[seabeyond]

31. children are being targeted by adults with an intent ot purposely hurt little kids. you think that

is funny?

the intent, the purpose, their effort, is to HURT little children

[Capt. Obvious]

38. If you keep saying that

then I guess their intent is to HURT little children.

Type that out a few more times throughout this thread. It's hilarious.

[seabeyond]

76. are you declaring that is not petas intent. that they did not purposely draw up a campaign

targeting children with the purpose of harming them?

explain please.

[Capt. Obvious]

77. What's to explain?

[HERVEPA]

83. Her modus operandi is to repeat ad infinitum.

[Capt. Obvious]

91. Oh, I know

[cui bono]

141. You are confusing their goal. It is NOT to harm children. n/t

[seabeyond]

146. their goal is to get kid not to eat meat. to do that, they use hurting a kid to get him to not eat

meat.

the intent is to hurt the kid. the reward to that intent is he stops eating meat.

[cui bono]

155. No. Hurting the kid is not the intent. You put that value into the equation.

You have no proof that this will hurt kids. It is simply not the goal of the campaign. If it hurts any kids at all, even though it is a cartoon, it is "collateral damage" of an ill thought out campaign, not the goal of it.

[seabeyond]

158. how do you traumatize a little child that has absolutely no concept of eating animal, food groups,

that they are consuming, a moral judgment on eating meat... how do you traumatize that child enough to get them to BULK at eating meat?

that is what peta was after.

it was not looking for an intellectual conversation on the right or wrong of eating meat. the age group it is targeting is way too young.

it was looking to creating a horror in the childs mind to make them not able to eat meat.

[cui bono]

167. How do you know the kid has no concept of it?

My SIL is vegetarian and my bro eats meat and feeds it to their kids and makes a veggie dish for my SIL. The kids understood that their mother is a vegetarian all along. They knew she was not eating meat and was eating a different dish at dinner.

I don't disagree that it's a stupid campaign and in poor taste, but I disagree on your take that it traumatizes the kid and that the kid has no knowledge about what they are eating.

Kids have seen this already. It's not a real picture, it's a cartoon drawing. And many kids have seen this in real life already on farms or after their parents' hunting/fishing trips.

[seabeyond]

177. 2-4 are too young to be able to put any of it together. a lot of girls about 5, 6 tend to go away

from meat and eat cheese. then they fall back to the meat. 2-4 is too young. the only way peta can get them to not eat is to fuck with them.

older, you can have a conversation. i had two niece that went vegan. and it was cool. i was accommodating. we discussed it. the advantages. the rightness. i have no problem with that. i eat little meat just cause not that healthy and expensive and i eat other stuff and that about fills my day.

i do not believe anyone has the right to try to purposely hurt a child for any reason, whatever the cause.

i know sensitive kids. it is wrong. i do not believe in toughening them up. i do not believe in feeding kids violence. i do not believe throwing our moral value at a child when it is not age appropriate.

the sneers. think about the kids... whine.

well, i do. i think about the little kids being targeted. i seem to be the bad guy. all cause we are suppose to think about the animal.

that doesnt seem skewed to you

i had two sensitive boys. at 2-4, they would have been bothered. dont know how much, but even a little is wrong in my book. an adutl does not have the right to purposely put forth the effort to hurt my child.

[nomorenomore08]

216. I think her point is more that they don't care if they psychologically harm kids or not.

They're trying to make people go vegetarian/vegan, period. The end justifies the means.

[cui bono]

219. I agree that the campaign is in bad taste. I still don't think kids are going to be traumatized by

it.

[nomorenomore08]

222. Yeah, after having actually seen the thing, it's hard to get upset about.

And I don't know that I'd feel terribly different even if I did have small children.

[stevenleser]

40. See my #39 nt

[ismnotwasm]

47. Um yeah?

What the hell dude? PETA is an asshole organization.

[Capt. Obvious]

58. Gobble Gobble

[ismnotwasm]

71. Buck buck buck?

[Ranchemp.]

103. Quack, quack, BANG, dinner.

[nomorenomore08]

217. You've certainly elevated the discourse here...

[longship]

25. You want to help animals?

Donate to the ASPCA, your local animal shelter (who often do great work with minimum budgets), or the Humane Society.

PETA are a bunch of crazy loons.

[FedUpWithIt All]

29. It is difficult to believe that PETA actually cares about trying to influence people.

Why alienate so many if your true purpose it to try and move people toward your cause? If they truly wanted to try and influence people to try and behave more humanely toward animals they would be better served by trying to relate and actually communicate with people instead of offending and insulting them.

PETA tactics are very reminiscent of the type of tactics used by the "right to life" groups who stand outside abortion clinics with signs intending to offend and shock.

Upsetting children isn't going to endear them, and the cause they purport to care about, to anyone.

[Capt. Obvious]

35. Here is the image

http://www.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/content/20131107-peta-plans-ads-with-one-image-for-adults-another-bloody-one-for-children-poll.ece

And they are putting up in bus shelters. Bus shelters!!!
That's where 3 and 4 year old children are most likely to see it!!

[GreenStormCloud]

61. When I was four I watched Daddy kill a hog.

I was raised on a farm. We killed and ate lots of animals. I knew where my food came from. I did some of the killing.

[Capt. Obvious]

70. According to a poster upthread - you are most likely a Republican then

Link

I grew up with a family whose dad was a meat inspector (or whatever his job was) at a slaughter house. He brought all 5 of his kids in to see where their meat comes from.
One became a vegetarian immediately. The rest still eat meat.

[GreenStormCloud]

90. It is the Democratic Party that is trying to save family farms.

Republicans favor huge corporate farms.

[pnwmom]

240. So? Most kids aren't. And you had an opportunity to talk with your

father about what was happening.

This situation couldn't be more different. A preschooler will only see an angry woman stabbing a bird with a large knife and blood on the faces of the children. But the preschooler's parent will see an entirely different scene -- a typical Thanksgiving dinner. The parent won't know what the child is seeing or vice versa. So they won't be able to talk about it with any degree of understanding.

If PETA only wanted to educate, rather than traumatize kids, then they would have made two pictures and placed them side by side -- to provoke thought and discussion. Instead, they embedded the violent picture into the Thanksgiving scene, and fixed it so only children would see the violent picture, and their parents wouldn't know what the were seeing.

This is a form of psychological assault and it shouldn't be legal.

[TheCowsCameHome]

82. At least the one shown on the right wasn't frozen six months ago. n/t

[RandiFan1290]

41. Love PETA!

LOL

[ismnotwasm]

44. PETA runs the most counterproductive, offensive campaigns around

They're complete assholes.

[GreenStormCloud]

50. How do kids who grow up on farms turn out OK?

If that ad harms kids so much, what of those of us who grew up actually helping kill rabbits, chickens, turkeys, hogs, etc, and cleaning them? Then helping with the cooking and finally eating them.

That must have given me a life trauma.

[ismnotwasm]

57. Don't the majority of them turn out to be Republicans?

Just sayin'

[bvar22]

120. Can you support your claim?

Not too many years ago, EVERYBODY got to see where their meat came from.
If that knowledge and experience produces Republicans,
then where did the Democrats come from?

[jberryhill]

130. No, they don't

Next question?

[nomorenomore08]

218. Some do, some don't. Best not to stereotype.

[Puglover]

168. Thank you.

I must have been around 4 or 5 when I saw both my Aunt Kathryn and Auntie Millie butchering chickens.

Somehow I escaped total and complete trauma. Some folks really cannot be taken seriously.

That said, it's a stupid campaign.

[Sheepshank]

205. you don't think there is a difference between kids being raised on a farm

and city kid-folks seeing a slaughter for the first time?

wow

[GreenStormCloud]

212. It is a cartoon slaughter. The turkey doesn't even look realistic.

By the time a kid is 10 he has seen thousands of human deaths, some of them real, on TV. Don't you think that has an effect?

[wickerwoman]

293. If you click through to the actual cartoon,

http://www.turnto10.com/story/23913897/peta-defends-thanksgiving-ad

you can see it's not a case of "city kids seeing a slaughter for the first time". Not even remotely close.

That ad is just slightly more graphic than classic Looney Tunes.

[Prophet 451]

54. And this is why I hate PETA

There are ways to promote vegetarianism/veganism. But PETA long ago stopped promoting those and became this factory of outrageous fanaticism that alienates infinitely more people than they have ever or will ever convince. I'm not even sure they're trying to promote anything anymore, they just want to feel smug and self-righteous. They long ago stopped being missionaries and became inquisitors. And they kill more fucking animals than they ever saved.

[nomorenomore08]

221. I respect many of the arguments against meat-eating, even if I don't follow them myself.

I eat red meat once or twice a week usually, poultry or vegetarian dishes the rest of the time.

Personally, I don't even take PETA seriously enough to be outraged by anything they do. About all I ever do is roll my eyes and shake my head at them.

[Prophet 451]

223. I respect a lot of teh actual arguments as well

I'm currently trying to cut down my meat consumption for health reasons (I have high blood pressure).

I just get angry about the unwarranted self-satisfied smugness of the PETA assholes.

[nomorenomore08]

225. Absolutely. And it's fairly obvious that they care as much, if not more, about being provocative

than about actually converting people to their cause. No one - even somebody on the fence - is very likely to be swayed by something as downright silly as the ad in the OP.

[LittleBlue]

56. PETA has every right to try to convince the next generation to

treat animals humanely.

I'm not a memeber of PETA or a vegetarian, but the "think of the children" response is not appropriate. PETA is doing what its mission statement says. They are entirely within their rights to express to children how terribly animals are treated.

Also I've seen this Blunt and Cranky blog posted before. Was it the NSA they were pimping? That site is full of specious reasoning.

[el_bryanto]

64. I don't think people are arguing they dont' have the right to

I think they are arguing that they shouldn't. People have the right to say any damn thing they want, but that doesn't mean they should.

Bryant

[Capt. Obvious]

65. HOW DARE YOU

[riqster]

73. There is a difference between educating and traumatizing.

What PETA is doing in this case is traumatizing.



(Oh, and I bashed the NSA in my blog. Screw those people.)

[LittleBlue]

94. Not convincing at all

Millions of children around the world on farms see this every day. Most of our grandparents saw this commonly.

Children can handle it. Billions have. But can the parents handle it? I'm not certain. After all, it might mean confronting some difficult questions from their children. Sticking children in front of a PlayStation is so much easier. Or worse, having to fix a lunch that is more difficult because their kids don't want to eat animals anymore.

This "think of the children" mentality is lazy.

[seabeyond]

105. i was on a farm. i grew up with it. my kids are city, they did not. this is the kid targeted for

the greatest emotional impact. but wtf, right? not your problem. or petas. and the children, fuck 'em. you and others decide.... they will be fine. totally surreal. i really did not think i would hear people defend them. yet.... there are.

[LittleBlue]

175. If you grew up on a farm, then you must consider yourself undamaged by the experience

It has nothing to do with the children and everything to do with lazy, overprotective parents.

[seabeyond]

183. oh, you got me. i am all that in bad parenting. like you have any authority on the subject.

what a fuckin joke of a post.

[LittleBlue]

186. The only joke here is your incoherent argument

I say that millions of kids see animals slaughtered and aren't bothered. You point to yourself, either arguing that you were screwed up by the experience or supporting my view. But you haven't said which, you just carry on like logic doesn't mean anything.

At least if you're going to argue, find an actual disagreement. Don't post support for my conclusion and carry on incoherently argumentative.

[nomorenomore08]

224. In the end, I have to basically agree with you here. Factory farming isn't exactly a nice, pleasant

thing. And there's nothing wrong with making more people fully aware of that.

That said, I still find PETA ridiculous and hard to take seriously.

[pnwmom]

241. They would have every right to post the two pictures side-by-side

but NOT to assault small children with a violent image that their parents were too tall to see -- and therefore couldn't help them to understand.

[geek tragedy]

67. I'll remember to have a second serving of dead dumb bird in honor of PETA

this Thanksgiving.

[HERVEPA]

99. Yes, I see dead, dumb works well for you.

[geek tragedy]

109. Only for the animals I eat. Nom nom nom. Think I'll go for thigh meat

this year. Nom nom nom.

My favorite is turkey bacon.

[Ranchemp.]

124. Turkey chili.

Nuff said.

[geek tragedy]

126. I like jurkey (jerk turkey). nt

[HERVEPA]

135. Geez. The responses just write themselves.

And seriously, if you've decided to continue eating animals that's one thing, but why such huge pride about it?

[geek tragedy]

144. Because it pisses the scolds off

Also, nothing devours meat like a huge pride.

[Ranchemp.]

149. I pride myself for my hunting skills,

I pride myself for my ability to put meat on my table,
I pride myself for not contributing to the vile cruelty of factory farms.

[jeff47]

140. Might want to be careful tossing around "dumb"

The fact that you don't empathize with plants does not mean they do not suffer nor respond to trauma.

If you're eating raw plants, they are desperately responding to being shredded and ground by your teeth. A massive number of chemical reactions and hormones are being thrown out by the plant as they try to avoid being killed by your chewing. The bits that remain alive then get to enjoy being dumped into your stomach acid and slowly dissolved.

If you're eating cooked plants, well they were still quite alive when you threw them in the oven or on the stove. Again, they desperately reacted to the massive trauma until they were killed by the heat.

Anyone who says they're a vegetarian so that their food does not suffer is someone who doesn't know much about plants.

[AtheistCrusader]

189. To say nothing of the animals that live in the fields of harvested plants...

[badtoworse]

69. Years ago, I concluded the PETA people are a bunch of sick assholes

This is just another example of why.

[ismnotwasm]

80. +1

[Orrex]

85. Does PETA actually *do* anything?

I mean, other than acting like assholes and posting pictures of naked women?

[RandiFan1290]

88. Yes

They get really dumb people to repost their ad campaigns all over the internet for free!

[Iggo]

171. Heheheh.

I would use the word "unwitting", but yeah.

[Union Scribe]

96. Well, they also kill lots of animals

but the animals are cool with it because they know they won't be eaten. Or something.

[HERVEPA]

100. Yup, they do plenty of other things. Educate yourself.

[Orrex]

121. They have a bigger budget than I do, and I'm not pushing their agenda

It's not up to me to fight past their bullshit to see what they're "really" about.


But thanks for playing.

[eqfan592]

128. You're right, they do, like have some of the worst kill shelters in the country.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/04/09/peta-takes-heat-over-claims-it-killed-90-of-animals-dropped-off-at-virginia-shelter/

[alphafemale]

303. I knew this. But had already thought them the scum of the earth.

When I learned about this my thoughts were confirmed.

They care about raising money from gullible fools.

To fund outrageous publicity.

To bilk more money from fools.

They are about animal welfare like the 700 Club is to Christianity.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

166. They sometimes provide an outlet for aging actresses who are afraid of being less noticed

as they get older.

[Blue_Tires]

86. "traumatizing children?"

The same kids playing the new Call of Duty or whatever around the clock and watching The Walking Dead each week?

Whatever you say, chief...

[GreenStormCloud]

93. Good post!

By the time a child is 10 he has seen tens of thousands of human deaths (most simulated, some actual) on TV and movies.

And people here are worried about a cartoon treatment of a turkey.

[seabeyond]

95. 2, 3, 4 yr olds are not playing call of duty. nt

[JanMichael]

106. no, but their older siblings are

and they watch.

Please, the knee jerk reaction of this thread is past ridiculous.

[seabeyond]

113. not that it matters to you, you are wrong. peta targets little kids with intent to traumatize. their

statement. their purpose is to traumatize the little kid.

they said. their intent.

yet all you are assuring us it will not hurt kids.

though peta put all this money and clever thinking to how they could traumatize children.

you are not able to see the disconnect in this thinking?

peta honest enough to admit what their intent is.

and you all saying peta is lying, they reallya re not out to hurt children.

[JanMichael]

116. Hey, you have been

telling me "I am wrong" for the better part of a decade.

I seriously doubt there is going to be a kid sitting on the shrinks couch because he saw a cartoon turkey murder, and decided to eat broccoli.

I shouldn't have even responded-- it's basically the same old Duers enjoying their "outrage." This will be forgotten within a day. Carry on.

[Orrex]

129. So, in your view, PETA's idiotic campaign is pointless?

If their preposterous faux-shock tactics can't even inspire a kid to eat broccoli, then why the hell is PETA spending money on this crap?

[pnwmom]

243. Not unless their parents let them. But in this case,

these images are being inflicted on children in public places without the parent's consent. And if a child is disturbed, the parent won't even know why because s/he is seeing an entirely different, innocuous image -- so the parents' comments would add to the child's confusion.

[Blue_Tires]

123. I'm pretty sure a 2-4 year old won't properly process the image at a glance

and I'd like to think a 2-4 year old would be at a bus stop with a parent or caretaker...

And I'd like to think a parent can find *some* way to divert or occupy a 2-4 year old's attention away from the sign...

[pnwmom]

246. I think you're missing the key point here.

How would a parent know to divert a preschooler's attention from a sign that -- to the parent -- looks like a perfectly innocuous Thanksgiving dinner? It is only the small child who, from its vantage point -- can see the violent scene embedded in the innocuous one.

"The ads incorporate lenticular technology, so that people 4-feet, 3-inches and shorter will see an image different from the mother carving a cooked turkey in front of two children. Shorter viewers will see the scene with the two children spattered with blood and horrified as the mother cuts into a live bird."

[seabeyond]

255. my 8 yr old read a bumpersticker. do not kill babies. he was 8. he was horrified.

he was all over... of course people should not kill babies. why would anyone kill babies. how horrible someone is killing the babies.

he was too young. and intellectually, he was advanced for his age. read everything, all the time. was it the persons right to put that sticker on that says... do not kill babies. of course it was. and then i am trying to bring a discussion to age appropriate so he is not all flipped out over people going around killing babies. i could only touch on some of the issue assuring him it was much more complicated and in essense, people were really not killing babies. i certainly was not gonna discuss fetus, and abortion. he would have had no cognitive ability to disassociate himself from fetus/embryo/baby and would have appalled him. i concluded we would continue the conversation when he was older and could better understand, around 12.

when we did discuss it, when he was much older, he had a tough time. we ended it with .... the facts and allowed him to sit with it, think about it. later he came back and we discussed it from different perspectives.

people have the right to do all this stuff. it is also lazy/dishonest/cop out to suggest it is a simple matter of a couple minute chat with issues that are not age appropriate. and in the world today, parents have a challenging and time consuming job simply addressing the zillions of things our children are fed from the adult world before their time.

i raised boys during the time of 911 and massive deaths. two wars. fundamentalist/christian coalition reign. it is very hard to help a 5 yr old thru 911. or everyone around them telling them kerry is a murderer and democrats are heathens.

so, i really do not take much stock from these people that did not put in the work, addressing all this crap, how "easy" it is to address this stuff with little ones. and simply their right to put this crap out targeted at the kids.

[Sunlei]

89. petas the pro with the shock ads & making outraged spread the word for them.

can't top palins smiles in front of vat of blood and blood covered man.

[JanMichael]

101. When I was that age, my folks had the news from Vietnam

on the TV all the time. Half of everyone we knew hunted, some of the family lived on a working farm.

Now kids are "traumatized" by a stupid cartoon?

I think the adults have lost it, not the kids.

Don't talk to me about advertising to kids either; every corporation in this country does that-- Frankly, I think it's more "harmful" to the psyche to constantly desire new smart phones, iPads, or the latest crap at some of those shitty stores that sell crap MADE by genuinely traumatized children, than simply wanting vegetables for dinner.

[Arcanetrance]

112. I'm not sure one way or the other if it will traumatize kids. But I think Pete uses counterproductiv

tactics to try and promote being a vegan because just being a vegetarian isn't good enough for them either.

[NuclearDem]

115. Just so everyone knows, PETA != all vegans and vegetarians

They're one of the largest advocates, but not every member of the veg community follows or supports them.

I really wish they would stop with the horrible ads though, since they have some really good veg starter info and tips.

[Warpy]

117. Kids see worse than that in a morning full of cartoons

They are not going to be traumatized.

[NCTraveler]

118. Many groups who hold views outside of societal norms.....

will go for younger age groups. It is really nothing new, and it is completely unethical.

[CrawlingChaos]

119. If only the PETA bashers could spare a tiny bit of their considerable outrage for animal suffering

Personally, I was greatly traumatized by a Farm Sanctuary demonstration at Thanksgiving. It was there for all to see, children included, with graphic photos of the unspeakably cruel treatment of factory farm animals. I'm GLAD I saw it. I became a vegetarian on the spot. I've since gone vegan.

The Farm Sanctuary materials were far more horrific that this PETA cartoon, which I think is unlikely to cause any significant trauma -- think about the violence kids see in the media on any given day, which doesn't seem to outrage the anti-PETA crowd for some mysterious reason. We need to stop sanitizing the truth about how animals are tortured for our cheap consumption, for everyone, including kids. They can learn to be compassionate at a very young age. Maybe this isn't the best way, but it's hardly worthy of the faux outrage seen here.

[HERVEPA]

131. Well said

[RebelOne]

132. Well said. As a vegetarian, I agree 100% n/t

[solarhydrocan]

143. Spot On! + a million

[Ranchemp.]

160. If PETA confined themselves to just the unjust conditions at these factory farms,

then I wouldn't have a problem with them, but they condemn all meat eating, including those of us who hunt for our meat.
And weren't they caught killing animals awhile back?

[cui bono]

161. Agree completely. Well said. n/t

[LittleBlue]

176. Yep

Look at the people in this thread without even an ounce of remorse for the horrendous treatment of animals.

These are people who will harp all day about injustice but won't spare even a moment to think about animal suffering. Fake people with fake outrage.

[ScreamingMeemie]

315. Well, if my children were small, I'd be thinking: My children vs. animals...

and I would go with my children. However, that cartoon is super ridiculous looking.

I love, love, LOVE my animals with all my heart but, if my house was on fire? I'd save my son first.

PETA is doing it wrong.

[petronius]

122. Did they actually do it, or did they say they were "hoping" to do it?

It's always amazing how many pixels get burnt over things PETA said it was going to do, or things someone said PETA said it was going to do...

(This is a very cool technology, however - I recall a thread a few months ago about using these ads for child-abuse prevention: kids could see the hot-line number, but adults couldn't.)

[BlueStreak]

125. Well I guess atheists should be releieved

that the angry mob is focused on the vegetarians now.

Vegans must die. Must .... consume .... animal .... blood

[eqfan592]

134. That's ok. one of us will dare to point out something screwed up that was done in the name of...

...religion and then we'll be right back to being labeled as "bigots" again. Lol

[whatchamacallit]

142. I'm coming to realize Centrists are confused conservatives n/t

[AnotherMcIntosh]

152. Confused? Some are. Some aren't.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

156. It's hard to traumatize kids. First they have to be civilized.

Kids can smash ants with no inhibitions.

It's just a matter of degree, until they are civilized.

[Cobalt Violet]

162. God forbid kids know how they get their turkey.

[hunter]

164. I knew three great grandmas who traumatized me as a little kid by cutting apart animals...

... for supper that I'd previously seen alive. Never met the fourth great grandma, but all of them were Wild West and had excellent skills with knives and guns. Any of them could take apart a fish or small animal and prepare it for dinner faster than most people can pick up meat from the grocery store.

My mom and dad don't hunt but as children my parents' freezer was always full of fish, dead domestic animal parts, and wild animal parts. Most of my childhood protein was fish my dad caught.

I feed our own dogs high quality meat and fish dog foods. I don't think it's right to force dogs to be vegetarians. Dogs are omnivores like humans, but with preference for meat.

Mostly I'm a vegetarian, I try to walk lightly upon this earth, but sometimes I'm not. Whenever I'm not vegetarian I thank the spirit of the animal that fed me. (Another one of my heresies, religion says I should thank God first. But why? It's not like He's dead, but if He is, some great whale corpse towed by a boat, well then, what's the problem? Whose flesh am I eating? (some wisted hunter heretic Catholicism. Uncomfortable? Run away!!! Now!))

If I'm ever forced into cannibalism by some very extreme circumstance (Airplane crashing on a remote mountain range, some apocalyptic crash of this civilization) then I'm still going to follow the same ethic. Thank you dead neighbor.

I'm a human, I can live as an omnivore. It's what humans are.

[AtheistCrusader]

192. "I try to walk lightly upon this earth"

[nomorenomore08]

226. Great post. From probably one of the most interesting posters around here.

[OwnedByCats]

170. I love animals

I mean I really love animals, more than people. I hate any kind of animal cruelty, more than anything else to be honest. People automatically think I must be a PETA supporter. However, I stay as far away from them as possible. If they put as much money into actually saving animals as they do their outrageous advertising campaigns, they could make a real difference. Instead all they seem to care about is using insane advertising to get attention and making animal rights activists look like a bunch of raving lunatics. They have quite often used sex as a way to promote their message, which shouldn't even be in the same ball park as animal rights. Most of their campaigns are so inappropriate, I just don't know what they're thinking. Not to mention they do euthanize most of the animals they rescue (at least they used to). Then if you've ever heard some of the speeches given by the founder, let's just say she spouted some real crack pot stuff.

They hurt the cause more than they help with advertising like this.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

172. because of hearing this, I'm buying TWO turkeys this year. so fuck you PETA

[dlwickham]

178. let me add my "Fuck PETA" to the chorus

does anyone actually pay attention to them any more

[REP]

180. WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN??!!??11

There is nothing as tiresome as adults hiding behind children because something has offended the adults.

Well, maybe blog-flogging.

[stevenleser]

250. See my #39 nt

[REP]

275. Sitting on the bench at the stop lowers an adult to height required to see the alternative image

Both my points stand.

[solarhydrocan]

181. Animals are people too

[LanternWaste]

184. Yet video games and movies with an equal or greater amount of violence traumatize no one...

Yet video games and movies with an equal or greater amount of violence traumatize no one. Either that, or 90% of Hollywood and game designers need an attitude adjustment too?

[whatchamacallit]

187. I've noticed a lot of PETA hate comes from subliminally self loathing meat lovers

Almost all PETA threads devolve into food fights.

[riqster]

214. The choice to rant about topic A does not imply a lack of care for topics B - Zugws

[AtheistCrusader]

191. I'm a hunter. I eat meat.

My kid is 4. I have always been nothing but honest with him about where our food comes from.


I don't glorify it, but I don't hide it from him either, and I do prefer a humane kill, to meat sourced from factory farms/slaughterhouses. He also understands the idea of extinct animals. That was a tough convo, but we got through it.

Kids understand more than maybe you think. I do agree the PETA ads can be over the top though. But free speech is free speech. Nobody ever promised you comfortable speech, or non-controversial speech.

[dotymed]

193. Being a vegetarian should be an informed choice.

Some people do not have a choice.
IMO, the choice should be made as an adult. Of course, children of vegetarians usually have to make that choice.
However, after they are "legal", they still choose.
Children should not be terrified into making this choice.

I remember reading a PETA anti-meat book as a child. It was horrific. I could not eat meat for months without remembering the gruesome reading material. I lost quite a few pounds (I was already skinny) and was disgusted at each meal.

I think that using terror to induct a child is sick.

[magical thyme]

195. When I was very young...5 or 6 at most...I had the wonderful (not) experience

watching an uncle take a terrified lamb out of the trunk of his car, its feet bound together. And watched the neighborhood butcher slice it's throat, silencing its cries while the life drained from its eyes.

It didn't turn me vegetarian, because my parents forced me to eat meat. The image haunted me, returning off and on so I can even see it in my mind's eye now.

I have tried being vegetarian off and on, but have a hard time with it. No matter how much alternate protein I eat, I end up craving meat. It may be because the heme in red meat provides a more bioavailable source of iron than any vegetables do, and women are more susceptible to anemia due to loss of iron. I'm not sure, but I do seem to be finding it easier now that I'm 60. Time will tell.

I don't think PETA's approach is helpful.

[Hekate]

197. "Lenticular technology" -- as fascinating as it is despicable.

From the article at the link:
The ads incorporate lenticular technology, so that people 4-feet, 3-inches and shorter will see an image different from the mother carving a cooked turkey in front of two children. Shorter viewers will see the scene with the two children spattered with blood and horrified as the mother cuts into a live bird.

PETA could be a force for good in this world, in the tradition of the RSPCA, the ASPCA, the Humane Society, and the work of Temple Grandin. Animals deserve compassionate treatment; even if they are raised to be eaten, they can be treated humanely. PETA could readily bring huge pressure to bear on the fast food industry to change their practices and then prove to their consumers that the cattle they buy are raised and slaughtered humanely, that the chickens are likewise, from egg-layers to broilers. But no. No.

Throwing blood/red paint on women's furs -- whatever, charge them with vandalism. Naked women carrying signs -- I really don't care. My world moves on, long ago having concluded they exist to shock and are attention whores who achieve nothing positive.

But this proposed ad goes beyond the bounds of decency. PETA gets not one moment's support from me.

[JVS]

199. PETA has a right to free speech and I find the picture hilarious.

[Deep13]

200. PETA is all about getting publicity for themselves...

...hanging around so-called celebrities, and getting them to pose nude in their ads under pretense of protecting animals. Their extremist thinking is not only anti-meat, but it is anti-medicine. Ingrid Newkirk believes that lab test animals are the moral equivalent of Nazi concentration camp victims, and that killing any animal for any reason is the moral equivalent of murder. As a practical matter, she would rather that you die than accept a porcine heart valve transplant. She would rather people die from diabetes rather than produce animal insulin to keep them alive. She would rather a child starve to death than eat any animal products including milk, eggs, and honey. One definition of fundamentalism is a thought process that provides ready-made answers to any question from its own internal ideology, rather than from the larger world. To make sure PETA's admirers arrive at their preferred conclusion, they spread lies about the imagined lack of necessity for animal testing. So who's right, the scientists who go through the aggravation of dealing with animal test subjects, or a woman who would rather kill you than a rat? Koch's Postulates require three panels of animal test subjects just to positively identify the cause of an infectious disease. The human body is so complex and overflowing with so many kinds of bacteria and viruses that it is the only way to be sure that the germ the clinicians found is the one causing the disease. Thinking you are doing something for animals may make you feel good and you may tell yourself you are doing what is right, but you are plainly not do so. The result of those efforts is more sickness.

So, if you actively support PETA, you are engaging in an irrational, arguably fundamentalist, and plainly immoral activity.

[a la izquierda]

201. I'm a vegan. I think PETA's nuts. However...

I also think kids see a lot of crazy shit on TV, in movies, etc, that a cartoon ad won't bother most. I have young nieces and nephews. I see what they watch, etc. Is this over the top? Yes. Do I think people on here are having a conniption? Yes. I know of plenty of farm kids and kids who've hunted at a young age.

Maybe more American children should figure out where their food comes from. Hint, it ain't just from the grocery store and there's a tremendous amount of terrible, terrible suffering.

[riqster]

202. Children are animals too. So are all of us.

Humans are animals. Look it up.

[drmeow]

204. OOOH - I love posts like this

They help me grow my ignore list (hint - not you )

[riqster]

206. I hear ya.

[longship]

208. Or, just f*ck yourself, PETA, for everything you do

I'm not talking about advocating for animals. But there are many other organizations which do that without being douchebags about it, which is precisely what fucking PETA does.

I will not tell them to shut up, since their so-called advocacy is their worst enemy. How anybody who cares about animals can defend PETA I'll never know.

No. I won't tell them to shut up. I'll tell them, "Fuck you!"

If you want to help animals, donate to SPCA, your local independent animal rescue shelter, or the Humane Society.

[Karmadillo]

211. LOL. Excellent enlightening ad. Go PETA! If you're really upset by kids being traumatized, maybe

you could send a fuck you to those responsible for this:

Doctor: Children 'Traumatized and Re-Traumatized by Drones' in Yemen

Children dream of 'dead people, planes and people running around scared'

- Andrea Germanos, staff writer

A report from a clinical and forensic psychologist just back from Yemen offers a disturbing picture of the horror drones have inflicted on children, who are "traumatized and re-traumatized" by the strikes whose use "amounts to a form of psychological torture and collective punishment."

"Entire communities – including young children who are the next generation of Yemenis– are being traumatised and re-traumatised by drones," said Dr. Peter Schaapveld. (Photo: kate_griffin13 / flickr) The findings come from clinical and forensic psychologist Dr. Peter Schaapveld, just back from a week-long visit to Yemen, who presented at a press conference on Monday his evidence of a 'psychological emergency' in the country as a result of drone strikes, and of the particularly heavy toll they have on the mental health of children, plagued with PTSD as the mental anguish from the deadly strikes lasts long after the sound of the unmanned aircraft above.

London-based human rights charity Reprieve reports that Schaapveld said:

What I saw in Yemen was deeply disturbing. Entire communities – including young children who are the next generation of Yemenis– are being traumatised and re-traumatised by drones. Not only is this having truly awful immediate effects but the psychological damage done will outlast any counter programme and surely outweigh any possible benefits.

more...

[riqster]

254. Said Fucks have been Fuckyoud elsewhere.

Sorry for the verbization.

[Vashta Nerada]

213. WONT SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!111111

[stevenleser]

249. See my #39. It's not a logical fallacy when something is in fact aimed at children. nt

[nomorenomore08]

215. Honestly it wasn't as bad as I expected. Strikes me as more silly and cartoonish than anything else.

But I can't say how I'd react to it if I were, say, a preschooler.

[justiceischeap]

231. Or, you know, the obvious, people sitting down on the bus bench

How tall does sitting on the bench make you? A little over four feet maybe? Just high enough to see a different ad when you sit?

But why use logic when you can bash PETA?

[flvegan]

232. So are we now against telling kids where their food comes from?

Memo to snowflake protectionists...fuck you. Traumatize kids? With the truth? Pity that.

Had to post this. PETA thread and all. Gonna go get popcorn.

Note to self? OP thinks "anti-turkey-dinner ads in bus stops are deliberate (attempts to traumatize) children"

[DonCoquixote]

237. If you do it by

1) deceiving adults
2) Making mommy look like a butcher, complete with evil face

then your halo needs to fall. Mothers are already demonized enough by the right, we do not need the left dumping on them even more.

Unless of course, you are prearing to buy all the kids the vegan meal that they will want Mommy to buy so that they will not be afraid of her. Good luck gettign all the produce at Whole Foods.

[flvegan]

304. Oh, so politics now. Okay.

My halo aside, do tell of the deception. Please. But, please if you will, do so while engaging proper spelling.

[DonCoquixote]

306. of course.

Simple, is the artwork in question meant to scare children, yes it is. It is meant to do so by it's trick of being visible from an angle only children can see easily. It is meant so that a parent would not see the message the children did. The aprent might no appraoch the image if they knew what it is about.

It is meant to make the children think of Mother as evil. You take a look at the scowl on their mother's eyes, and tell me that the Mother is not a villain in that piece.

By the way, as someone whose hands are damaged to the point where typos happen, I did find that "proper spelling" jab amusing, reminds me of what people on the right wing sites do when they realize the facts are not on their side.

[flvegan]

307. Do you really find that artwork scary?

I find it intriguing that you know the basis of the advertising, how it's factual to you in what you've said. Please, carry on.

As to your last paragraph, I feel like I should probably apologize for the recent findings, but then you go off with "they realize facts are not on their side" and then I just can't because of how you pull me in towards "people on right wing sites" and so forth. So again, those facts...please carry on. You stated 6 of them. I look forward to it.

Simple.

[DonCoquixote]

308. fine then

Is the ad meant to be seen by the parent differently then the child? Answer, yes, the article explains how it is done.

Does the ad show the mother as being scary? Would you want your sister, mother, wife, or yourself (if you are female) to be depicted as scowling and grtiing your teeth while killing something. Please, do explain how this is not so.

"They are putting up anti-turkey-dinner ads in bus stops, you see: ads that show grownups a Rockwell-ish image of a mom carving a bird, and that show anyone shorter than four feet tall a demonic woman murdering a live bird, and spattering her kids’ faces with blood."

Now, let's go ahead and focus on WHERE the ads are? Are they in magazines meant for parents, trying to tell the parents not to do turkey? No, they are in Bus Stops, meant to be in PUBLIC, especially palces where those who use public transport cannot help but go to. They could have made their point by taking out ads in Food network magazine, or in Supermarket pages where they added a coupon for whatever they wanted to replace turkey with, but no, they went for Bus stops, why, because people have to pass them.

Also, if a kid was frightened, he/she would have this in PUBLIC (unless you want to argue that the kid has a bus stop in their living room).

It's one thing to say "do not eat meat" and I have already described many means of doing that that respect the parent, that maybe even help them (coupons) but no, this is meant to freak kids out in public, and turn them against the parent (unless you want to argue that splattering blood on your face is meant for humor.)

[flvegan]

310. You didn't address what I said.

I think most would be more...upset by someone smiling, dancing and otherwise gleeful "while killing something" don't you? Unless the last name was Nugent, I guess.

Don't hate reality for what it is. We hide where our food comes from away from children (mostly, props to those hunters and folks that explain the basis of "food" to the kiddos...I don't have to like it, but I respect grasping reality) because said snowflakes shouldn't be exposed to reality, or something.

There should be horror in killing something, or at least a demonstration of what it is. Because...killing. I'll leave "something" aside.

[DonCoquixote]

311. you did not address the main point

Do you approve an ad that is meant to trick adults and get it's message straight to children?

Do you approve of the mother being seen as a killer?

[flvegan]

316. Yes I did.

If you missed it, that's not my problem. Try again.

[DonCoquixote]

317. You know

It is sad to see someone I agree with on many other posts say things like "try again", right after I asked two simple questions. I have had my fill of popcorn in this thread, but when you have an answer for them, I will be all ears. You and Peta may want to ponder if the way your message is being spoken winds up giving the wrong signal. If you do not care about how your message is cimmunicated, you should nto be surprised if people either misinterpret you, or stop listening.

[davidpdx]

234. I've looked at the posters and read the discussion

While myself and other's aren't going to argue against PETA's right to free speech, I will agree the posters are in bad taste. My question for those who think doing so is ok is could this have been done in a more tactful way? I would argue the answer is yes.

I support the ethical treatment of animals, but not the banning of doing so.

Education and changes should be made and advocated for. I just don't support the manner in which they do it.

[riqster]

245. Winner.

That is indeed the point. The way in which one says something is at least as important as what one says.

Treating the audience in a respectful manner instead of an abusive way is far moe ethical than what PETA did here,

My sister is a vegetarian, and she's laid it all out there for the kids on more than one occasion. No objection from myself or anyone else. Because she treated the kids in a decent manner while making her case.

[Warren DeMontague]

242. PETA would do better if they focused on things like factory farming, instead of trying to make a

dubious moral point that a rat = a chicken = a human = a virus.

They're not the same, and for PETA to adopt black-and-white thinking; endemic, unfortunately, to a lot of the animal rights activism community, it does the job of compassion a disservice.

Meat eating isn't going away.

[oberliner]

244. PETA are not "assholes"

They care passionately about their cause. Many children love animals and are unaware of the relationship between the food they eat and the animals they love. There is no reason why anyone, children or adults, ought to delude themselves into thinking that the meat they are eating was not once a living, breathing animal that was most likely treated cruelly. As long as there is that disconnect, the factory farm industry will continue to inflict its horrors.

[pnwmom]

247. They love animals but they don't love children.

If they cared about educating children, they could post the two images side-by-side, which could lead to many fruitful discussions between parents and children.

But they don't care about children, so they assault them with this violent image, while showing parents an innocuous one -- so the parent can't understand why a child is so disturbed, and a child can't understand why a parent thinks the picture is no big deal.

[oberliner]

248. I disagree

I know several people who work for PETA, and they all love children.

The reality of the factory farming system needs as widespread exposure as possible. It is telling that children have to be lied to regarding the relationship between the animals they love and the food they eat.

[pnwmom]

257. Then why didn't they just display these pictures side by side

so children and their parents could have open, honest conversations about them? Why expose these children to a violent image that the children won't even connect to eating Thanksgiving dinner? All they'll see is a deranged woman wielding a knife at a living bird, and blood on children's faces. They won't connect this to the food they eat. Not unless an adult is there to explain it to them. That's what's so stupid about this picture, on top of being a form of psychological assault on the kids who see it.

[badtoworse]

258. What do you think about breast milk ice cream?

Only a bunch of assholes would be pushing that.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/peta-pitches-breast-milk-ice-cream-1.769356

[oberliner]

259. Seems pretty odd

I guess I am just defensive about it because I know personally some folks who work for the organization who are very kind-hearted people.

[badtoworse]

260. Tell them to work with a different animal rights group.

PETA isn't the only one.

[Capt. Obvious]

251. PETA is worse than Ralph Nader

This is an amazing thread.

[oberliner]

261. 45 million turkeys are killed each year at Thanksgiving, usually at the age of 5 or 6 months

Workers often cut off portions of their toes and upper beaks with hot blades without giving them painkillers. During slaughter, many birds are scalded alive.

[seabeyond]

262. ergo... target children to hurt them. wow. that makes sense. not. nt

[riqster]

263. And small children are responsible for this, how, exactly?

Targeting this ad at adults who buy the turkeys would be fair IMO. But kids, hell no.

[oberliner]

264. A cartoon image alluding to this reality needs to be hidden from them?

Don't kids have the right to know they are eating an animal and decide to respond how they choose?

They see images of cartoon violence on morning cartoons that are a lot more graphic than this one.

[riqster]

265. The parents see a sanitized image. The kids see the horrifying one.

Fuck that.

[oberliner]

268. It's not all that horrifying

It's a friggen cartoon.

[seabeyond]

266. no. a toddler has no rights. it is all mine. the parent. and a ridiculous description

of petas action. you might actually go to the thread where parents are talking and be a little open minded about the issue. instead of rigidly defending an org that purposely, with intent and a declaration that their intent was to target little kids to get them to stop eating meat. they do not do that with conversation, reasoning or thinking things thru. the only way to do that with a little one is to traumatize them. and even that is not effective cause they are too little to associate that picture with not eating meat.

[seabeyond]

267. in other words and simply. peta is being cruel to children. that simple. and people defend them. nt

[oberliner]

269. Traumatize them?

It's a cartoon image. It's no more traumatic then the scores of violent cartoon images on television.

[seabeyond]

270. that just is not true. i have to wonder whether you have spent lots of time with little ones.

again. if you seriously want to argue the appropriateness of that disgusting cartoon for a child consumption, go onto the thread of PARENTS discussing the issue and see how so many feel.

[oberliner]

271. Have you actually seen the image?

It seems like you haven't.

I've spent a lot of time with little ones - I've even sat with them as they watched cartoons. This image is nowhere near as disturbing as what is shown on most of them.

I'm sure many parents are troubled by it. Many parents are troubled by a lot of things.

[seabeyond]

272. again, you are wrong. why you would suggest that this is a normal image for a 2-4 yr old

tells me clearly you do not know what you are talking about. but hey, obviously from this post you are not a parent and it is always good for a person who has never been with a little one 2-4 to tell them what a child should consume.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023998514

[oberliner]

273. It's a cartoon

Have you seen the image?

There are lots of things a 2-4 year old child could see walking around that would be way more upsetting than this cartoon.

[seabeyond]

274. you did not go into the link did you. stay uneducated so you can continue in ignorance and not have

justify a wrong. i get that.

[oberliner]

280. Have you seen the image?

Is it fair to assume that you haven't?

[seabeyond]

281. if you would go to the link and educate yourself, open yourself to others knowledge, you would see

that not only did i see the picture, i linked the pictures and PARENTS respectfully talked to each other about the issue of the picture.

but wtf right? three posts later you choose to sit in ignorance.

[DonCoquixote]

276. so

YOU have the right to make children fear and hate their parents? And the pictures of cartoon violence are not directed at making Mommy look evil...unless your mommy is a giant robot or dragon..

[oberliner]

282. This cartoon image will make children fear and hate their parents?

Maybe it will just make them not want to eat animals?

[DonCoquixote]

284. oh gee

scowl the mother's face, make her hack some cartoon animal, no no, that won't make children scared of mommy.

[oberliner]

286. There are lots of cartoons with scary parental figures

And with a lot more graphic violence than is depicted in this image.

A scowl on the face of this cartoon woman is going to make children scared of their mothers?

What about walking past a mother yelling at their child? Might that have a similar effect?

[seabeyond]

289. bullshit. you guys keep saying this. name ONE. just ONE. that is bullshit.

i had little ones a decade ago. i KNOW what was out there. BULLSHIT. i watched the crap with the boys. i have nieces and nephews that are that age today. total BULLSHIT that there is ANYTHING out there comparable to this for little ones.

you say there is. others that do not have kids say there is. ONE. name ONE.

[oberliner]

291. Doesn't Daffy Duck get shot in the face repeatedly?

Isn't that a little troubling?

[seabeyond]

295. fuck...

[riqster]

312. He doesn't get shot by a demonic parental hunsn figure .

[seabeyond]

285. how do you get a child that is 2-4 that does not have the ability to piece together killing a live

animal is the food they eat. you know, in all your brilliance about age appropriate and child development, at 2-4 they have no concept about the live animal as food they are eating. you give a picture of a perverted mommy stabbing a live animal. the animal face in pain. the kids faces horrified. blood on them.

you think these two yr olds are putting together that this is their thanksgiving dinner? right.... not the way the little ones brain is working.

all they see is that they are subjected to a mommy wielding a knife, stabbing a live animal while the kids watch.

so, they cannot even associate it is what they eat. but if petas intent is to get tehm to stop eating meat, refusing to eat the meat, it is only cause peta effected the childs psyhic enough to horrify them from eating an animal. yet, you say it does not effect the little ones. teh only way peta wins is IF it effects the little ones in a harmful fashion. YOU cannot have it both ways.

[oberliner]

287. OK

I make no claim about having any brilliance about age appropriate and child development.

It just doesn't seem like this cartoon is especially traumatic, especially relative to the variety of potentially upsetting images that children are bombarded with during their lives.

[seabeyond]

292. parents spend their life at that age protecting their kids from this garbage. really? are you fuckin

serious? that is what a parent does. that is their job. ANY parent walking up to this poster would notice, turn their kids and get them the fuck away from garbage like that. we do NOT let the kids see it in their safe home environment. and we make damn sure the friends house they go to have responsible parents that are doing the same with their kids and we can trust them.

this is what wastes so much of parenting time now a days. everyone shruggin and saying, meh... so the kid sees. the adult world takes precedent of a kids world.

then peta, not only targets a kid, but they do it in a lying, manipulative, disgusting manner to get it PAST the parent. so the parent does not even have the ability to protect the child. so the parent is looking at the child in confusion, why they are upset in a picture of thanksgiving dinner. so a child is taught that the parent isnt to be trusted in an assessment of safe and non safe, cause the PARENT CANT FUCKIN SEE IT.

and then you and others that do not have kids have the audacity, the fuckin audacity to tell us parents... meh... no issue here. move along.

[oberliner]

296. OK

Your position on this subject is very clear. I don't mean to upset you. I was just sharing my opinion.

[DonCoquixote]

297. amen

It might be one thing if this was aimed at Junior high school age. Even then, most of the blood involves Japanese kung fu stuff. Not to mention cartoon animals are different; even the Dim home-schooled GOP kids know that the rabbit in the garden cannot swallow anvils like Bugs Bunny could.

No, this was meant to make kids afraid of MOMMY, it was meant to start fights over dinner, which may be just fine for Junior high, but not when a kid is still a damned kid. Then again, we tend to have no respect for the right of children to grow up in a safe secure environoment, or for the parents that raise them.

[Paladin]

278. "There's no such thing as bad publicity."

Just something I tend to add to any runaway thread on PETA, when they turn up on DU.

[seabeyond]

283. new coke and many other products and companies would disagree with you. number one pasta company

in the world... you do know what happened to them recently. that is the stupidest, laziest statement failed PR companies use that not only does not make sense, but is flat out wrong and history proves it.

[Paladin]

298. Don't sugar-coat it, tell me how you REALLY feel. (nt)

[seabeyond]

299. k

you made me smile.

[Paladin]

300. Glad to hear it. (nt)

[arthritisR_US]

290. Their over the top methods over shadow their

message. They could sure use a PR over haul!

[Douglas Carpenter]

294. Bloom County 1988

[riqster]

313. One of my favorites, from one of my favorites.

This was a fantastic way to get the message out. Age-appropriate, and everyone knew to expect such things from Mr. Breathed.

My son and I actually read this strip together and discussed it. Great way for him to learn about the issue. And about how adults deal with it.

[flvegan]

314. What message was that?

I'm sorry for your son, learning in such a compassionless way, how adults learn to be apologists in the face of abuse. "This is where empathy goes to die, son. Fuck 'em, who cares. Taste trumps everything."

Cue the banjos.

[duffyduff]

305. They're extremists and liars who don't tell people what their REAL goal is

and that is the abolition of animal domestication.

Fuck them all to hell.

[flvegan]

309. Oh yes, this!

Because NObody at PETA has a pet animal. They hate pets. Animal domesticationists are the devil. Even if they, those people, are animals...and domesticated. DON'T LOOK THERE!

I HAVE A KEYBOARD!!!!! Are we still doing the WHARGARBLLLE! thing? It fits here.