RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

SternSkipper -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 9:06:36 AM)

quote:


The attention-hungry activists at PETA want to launch a pornography site that combines "a lot of girl and boy next door content" with pictures of animals being mistreated. Pending their application to the the operators of the .xxx domain, the animal rights organization wants to spread their message as widely as possible and isn't shy about the power of sex appeal.


Firm... didya read the last line??? Too funny... I knew they'd find a way to fuck the whole deal up......
I say we get the pool going for how many days it will take PETA to arrive at zero hits per/day I smell a small fortune to be made.

quote:

"Apparently they are planning to juxtapose porn with images of mistreated animals," wrote Carmel Lobello at Death & Taxes. "For any sane person, images of mistreated animals should be an instant boner-killer."


Pleather my ass[:D]




GreedyTop -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 9:09:42 AM)

~FR~

aside from the giggle factor (imo) is the cleverness in staging BOTH pics!!




LillyBoPeep -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 9:57:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Lilly, they throw away the vegetables after hours taking photos. The stuff is on the counter under hot lights, gathering bacteria. Feeding it to someone is akin to poisoning them.


i know that. food gets thrown away after stupid photoshoots when someone could have eaten it. that makes me mad. i'm specifically talking about this article in question, which is what the thread is actually concerned with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kaliko

I find it offensive. Not because I'm so delicate and I can't look at a dead chicken, but because it is a disheartening humanity that treats other living beings that we share our earth with in such a disrespectful manner.



exactly. it's disrespectful.



GreedyTop -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 10:00:58 AM)

ETA: ~FR~

ok.. to be clear.. is it disrespectful because it's a chicken? or because of the photoshoot?



LillyBoPeep -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 10:55:06 AM)

is disrespectful because this creature was a living being, too, who lived a horrible life (i'm sure they wouldn't waste money on an expensive organic chicken), died a horrible death, and then is being used as a prop in comedy -- after which it will be thrown away because it's been fiddled with and contaminated with germs for hours. 

do something similar with a dead dog (or geez a cat) and see where it gets you.



GreedyTop -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 11:07:20 AM)

Lilly.. yanno I love you.. but devil's advocate here:

what about the veggies that are being genetically altered, and forced to grow outside their seasons?
then used in ads for the slicer/dicer kitchen appliances? and c'mon really.. arent those ronco or whatever ads a gigglefest?



Kaliko -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 11:27:46 AM)

I'll jump in again. Vegetables and the like are not sentient beings. (And here is the disclaimer that everything is "as far as we know." Is there a chance that a radish actually screams a little bit inside when it's cut? Well, isn't it true that, according to some science law somewhere, anything is possible? So, yes...consider this the asterisk that there may be a chance that an apple has the ability to feel and process pain, but we work with the information we have available to us.)

So, vegetables and the like are not sentient beings. Cows, chickens, pigs, etc, can process information and make choices and feel pain and display what we would associate with sadness. While I certainly wouldn't claim that other animals think and feel in the same way that humans do, I do think it's fair to say that they process information and adapt their behavior according to their nature and what they've learned from experience...just like humans.

Anyway, in a world in which I can walk to the corner grocery store and happily fill my cart with a week's worth of food made with no animal products, why would I choose to be a part of the captivity and death of an animal that has done nothing to deserve such treatment?

Honestly, what I've learned is that it just comes down to whether you view the life of an animal as something valuable or not. I don't believe that one viewpoint is any better than the other. (My former Dominant was an avid hunter, and I loved every inch of him.) It's just a difference of belief and perspective, and if someone doesn't accept the premise that the life of an animal - any animal - is just as valuable as another, then there is no need for further debate because it just ain't gonna happen.

;)

ETA: and having been involved with an avid hunter, I'm aware that some do, indeed, quite value the life of the animal they hunt. That's a whole other argument.



GreedyTop -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 11:42:07 AM)

Kaliko/ I wasnt intending to trot out the sentient being thing..

but the "living being" bit.. plants are.. LIVING BEINGS. They are born/sprouted/whatever...

they live for their determined lifecycle.

they die in their naturally appointed time (when left alone).

why is growing veggies out of season (in artificial conditions, most often, these days), and using them for adverts for some kind of machine that mangles them in order to sell the latest greatest time saving kitchen appliance any different than using a chicken in an allegedly provocative pose for an advert?, when, by the natural progression, the veggies should still be slumbering beneath the earths surface?



LillyBoPeep -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 11:50:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop

Lilly.. yanno I love you.. but devil's advocate here:

what about the veggies that are being genetically altered, and forced to grow outside their seasons?
then used in ads for the slicer/dicer kitchen appliances? and c'mon really.. arent those ronco or whatever ads a gigglefest?


i don't use GMOs if i can help it; i think it's creepy.
that said, like Kaliko said, vegetables aren't sentient beings -- the parts that we use are usually seed pods anyway -- if we were all roaming in the wild, when eating an apple or a cucumber, we would carry the seeds around, poop them out, and help the plants reproduce. so eating tomatoes, or seeded fruits and such isn't detrimental to the plant in and of itself.
also, a squash plant dying after a season in its own time is different than an animal, like a chicken, that could live 10 years but that's pumped up with hormones and slaughtered after 6 months. or a chicken kept in a battery cage where it is denied nearly all of its basic needs and mutilated in order to keep it functional and unable to peck itself or others to death when they're forced to live in tiny battery crates.

animals feel sad, they feel hurt, they feel lonely. plants don't (as far as we know) -- plants will send out chemical signals when they're stressed by environmental changes or damage, but what we know of their biology suggests to us that they don't feel or interpret loneliness or pain.

it's a completely different scenario.

when it comes to wasting food -- wasting fruits or vegetables or chickens pisses me off. like i said, ask people if they'd donate that to a shelter or to a soup kitchen and you'll get some big shpiel about people pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps. but waste it as part of comedy -- sure!

but, as Kaliko also pointed out -- it's a difference of belief and values. I put X amount of value on the life of an animal, while other people put Y amount, and it's very rare that either side changes the other. i'm not going to argue about it forever



LillyBoPeep -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 11:53:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop

why is growing veggies out of season (in artificial conditions, most often, these days), and using them for adverts for some kind of machine that mangles them in order to sell the latest greatest time saving kitchen appliance any different than using a chicken in an allegedly provocative pose for an advert?, when, by the natural progression, the veggies should still be slumbering beneath the earths surface?


and with regards to this, a lot of plants grown, say, by hydroponics, grow bigger and healthier because nutrients and water go directly to the roots where they need them. so artificial conditions actually benefit them, not hinder them. battery crates for chickens, gestation crates for sows, veal production, etc -- those depend on hindering an animal in order to be productive. the entire point is to prevent the animal from engaging in behavior, or growing up a certain way, in order to make things easier for us. again, an entirely different scenario.



GreedyTop -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 11:59:38 AM)

(devils advocte again)

Not every nursery/farm uses hydroponics, some use chemicals.. so is it ok to use the FORCED veggies (regardless of HOW they are forced?) for thse veggie slaugther ads?

I kn ow..I'm being a bitch right now.. but I love you anyway.. *smooch*



LillyBoPeep -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 12:08:31 PM)

i used hydroponics as a contrast to your "slumbering beneath the earth's surface" example.

i think the popularity of the organic movement shows that people aren't huge fans of chemicals. trouble is, of course, lots more people can't afford them.
i think modifying a plant with frog DNA or something like that is disgusting. i don't really care how it helps it tolerate XYZ conditions because it probably shouldn't be growing in those conditions. the ecological fallout from growing unseasonal plants or plants in areas where they wouldn't grow can be pretty huge -- how much water is used to grow plants in a desert area for example?
the ecological soundness of A LOT of what people do is certainly questionable.

i like to watch those TV adverts where they cook a dish and then actually feed it to people. if you want to show off your gadget, then do it that way. wasting food, whether it's vegetable or animal, is wrong.

and p.s. before anyone gets the wrong idea, i'm not a militant veggie who goes out of her way to try to convert people. while we weren't in the position to do much hunting, my M was planning to do more, but he was also the type to respect it and use it all, not just stick a head on his wall.
there were things he changed his mind out, like pork and circuses, but those were his own decisions.



Kaliko -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 12:30:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop

Kaliko/ I wasnt intending to trot out the sentient being thing..

but the "living being" bit.. plants are.. LIVING BEINGS. They are born/sprouted/whatever...

they live for their determined lifecycle.

they die in their naturally appointed time (when left alone).

why is growing veggies out of season (in artificial conditions, most often, these days), and using them for adverts for some kind of machine that mangles them in order to sell the latest greatest time saving kitchen appliance any different than using a chicken in an allegedly provocative pose for an advert?, when, by the natural progression, the veggies should still be slumbering beneath the earths surface?



Ah. Gotcha. Veggie ads don't bother me at all. But...that's kind of because they're not sentient beings. Everything is living, if we get technical about it.

This is often the debate that vegetarians are roped into. There is no way to avoid destruction of any kind to all life forms ever. A bit of common sense is called for. There is clearly a difference between a chicken and a potato. Those that argue the point are often more interested in argument than discussion. (Not saying that's your intent...that's just been my learned experience.)

It's similar to the other quite common argument - perhaps we shouldn't eat vegetables, either, due to all the birds and small animals that are killed during harvest by the machines. It's a diversionary tactic to find a hole in an argument that is not even being offered up.

There may be reasons to have averse feelings toward an advertisement that depicts vegetables in a disrespectful manner, such as the waste of food, etc. I don't know...I don't have any guilt cutting up a carrot. It's really just not the same thing.



LafayetteLady -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 1:12:22 PM)

~Fast Reply~

My father was a butcher. I was raised eating meat, I eat meat now, and I will eat meat for as long as I live.

I found the picture, entertaining and cute. Found the other one funny.

There are a myriad of health codes involved in donating food. Around here, we have a store called "Quick Chek." They throw out enormous amounts of food on their "expiration" date. Is bread bad when it is a day old? Of course not. Is a sandwich that was made on Monday morning no longer edible by Tuesday morning? Nope, but the health code dictates they can't be kept on the shelf. The same health codes dictate that those foods can not be donated to food pantries and the like.

I'm not saying that I agree with how these codes are written and regulated. I am saying that it isn't so simple as just donating the food to a local charity.

As for the views of "disrespecting" the animal and the vegetarians and vegans. If that is how you choose to live, have at it. Don't preach to me about the "horrors" of my eating meat, and we can get along just fine.

As for PETA, when one of their children needs a transplant and none are available, then I guess the poor kid has to die rather than have a pig kidney. And if they are diabetic, they better be able to properly regulate their disease through diet alone, because they really shouldn't be using insulin. Yes, I am aware that synthetic insulin is readily available and more often than not what is used today (considering I am a diabetic). However, that synthetic insulin would not have come into being if not for the animal testing that was done in the first place.

So basically, I'm pretty much of the mind that every member of PETA should be dropped in the jungles of Africa where they can be hunted and eaten by lions while trying to forage for some edible plant life. To me, the health, well being and lives of HUMANS is now and will always be more important than the life of an animal.



LillyBoPeep -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 1:20:10 PM)

oy... i'm not saying they should donate the used chicken to a food pantry. i'm saying that if you ask someone to donate AAAAAAAA chicken, or anything. food drives are generally successful so it's not a world full of misers, but no where did i say "they should donate THAT chicken."

don't assume people are preaching at you, and respond by preaching back, and we'll get along just fine.



LafayetteLady -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 1:31:39 PM)

Actually you are the one making assumptions. I certainly wasn't preaching at you or anyone else, although you obviously took it that way.

Yes, food drives are often very successful. That's why so many poor people are living off canned goods. People are always willing to go through their pantries and find the things that they either bought too much of and didn't use or somehow came about that they wouldn't use. The number of food pantries that give people multiple cans of canned cranberry sauce comes to mind. Yes, cranberries are nutritional, but canned cranberry sauce has little nutrional value.

I was talking about the amount of food that is wasted by grocery stores, convenience stores and restaurants because the health codes make it too difficult for them to donate those items.

This is preaching: You obviously don't know the difference.



Termyn8or -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 2:48:47 PM)

"I know ot's and old one but so what. PETA People Eating Tasty Animals. "

I heard there was a big lawsuit over that. People Eating Tasty Animals I guess snatched up the domain real quick and the real PETA had to sue.

Or was that PDFA ? Maybe it was both. Life was easier when acronyms only had three letters dammit.

T^T



Kaliko -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 3:01:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

To me, the health, well being and lives of HUMANS is now and will always be more important than the life of an animal.



Actually, I agree with you there. Not because I think humans are inherently deserving of more care and respect, but because, being human, I naturally identify and feel empathy for my fellow humans. As much as I love dogs and turtles and kittens, if it was a choice between saving my child from a sinking ship or saving my dog, I would save my child. It doesn't mean the life of the dog has less value. It just means that - shit, it's my kid. Of course our own species is going to come first for our concern. I am skeptical of any vegetarian who claims that they would not kill a pig if he/she was starving and needed to eat, or wouldn't use medicine that was tested on animals to prevent pain and suffering.

The goal, in part, of a vegetarian diet is to reduce consumption of animals, which thereby reduces the amount of animal by-products available. There are likely other ways to accomplish what we need, but right now, using animals and animal products is how it's done and there's no reason for companies to choose to look at different ways of making things happen unless they are hit in the pocketbook. If they need to pay higher prices for by-products because there is less consumption of animals, then they will consider alternative man-made sources. In the interim, I take reasonable steps in today's society to feel better about my choices (not eating meat), and I will not forego medication that may save my life based on its origin. I will not sacrifice my life for the life of an animal, but I will continue to make choices that will hopefully lead to one day providing more freedom and better choices for everyone.



Aylee -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 4:14:38 PM)

New chicken research if you want to stay informed.

Vital reading for this thread.



zephyroftheNorth -> RE: PETA angry at NYTimes (9/30/2011 4:35:46 PM)

from Aylee's article:

quote:

4 Chicken chicken chicken
Chicken, chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken
chicken chicken—chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken


I knee it, I just KNEW it! <shudders>



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875