It’s common for charities to ask donors to exercise their giving spirit during the holidays. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) sure does. They join several other nonprofits in asking supporters to give heavily and often as we transition from one year to another.
And…it works:
PETA’s 2010 donations totaled $33 million ($35 million if you add on merchandise sales and other revenue). So where did your money go last year? According to PETA’s 2010 annual report:
- “A vegans make better lovers” campaign where PETA campaigners publicly made out on a bed on the streets of Nashville, TN.
- Disruption of the Westminster dog show (Because animal lovers deserve to be targeted?)
- A campaign comparing pregnant women to fattened sows to protest farmed meat
- Dressing as a giant vanilla condom promote animal birth control in Beirut (Because Beirut has few other controversies to deal with currently)
- PETA also says it has given over $843 thousand in grants to researchers looking at animal alternatives. Sounds good right? But one should do the math here. The amount is 2 percent of the money PETA spent last year. In comparison, they spent 17 percent of their money (your money) on fundraising to raise more money. In addition, research is expensive (sad but true)… An $800,000 split among several researchers as PETA has done…will not go far at all.
PETA's questionable anti-farmed meat stunt
Other notable PETA investments in the past:
- Killing thousands of pets each year after taking them in
- Capitalizing on high profile murders including the killing of George Tiller in 2009, a gruesome beheading in Canada (also this) and a murder on a pig farm
- A campaign comparing animal use to the holocaust the slaughter of 6 million Jews during WW II- Titled: Holocaust on Your Plate
- The purchase of a cemetery plot located near the deceased Colonel Saunders donned with a headstone that reads KFC tortures birds (stay classy PETA!)
- A campaign to urge Ben and Jerry’s ice cream to drop cow milk in favor of human milk (other than the yuck factor…. achieving what exactly?)
- The shmeat campaign – a meat alternative…don’t think – just watch here. If you are not convinced that it was just a publicity stunt then read this
So how can you better spend your donation dollars? Why not support your local humane society so that they can directly care for animals or the ASPCA? Or of course you can keep paying for expensive and often sexist or offensive stunts …your decision
Regards
Jim
Don’t forget providing a front for the Animal Liberation Front….
http://activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/o/21-people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals
Oh, noes! You’re starting to sound like that hack Martosko over at Humanewatch. Sure you really want to take the low road here? I was under the impression you were at least trying to keep the conversation reasonable. Not like any of your readers are probably PETA contributors.
“Disruption of the Westminster dog show (Because animal lovers deserve to be targeted?)”
Uhhhh no, as you should have the mad research skills to be able to determine–they believe that the obsession with “purity” in our breeds, aside from being sorta creepy contributes to the overpopulation of pets and so the death of adoptable animals through euthanasia and their suffering in labs through surrender to class B dealers.
“A campaign to urge Ben and Jerry’s ice cream to drop cow milk in favor of human milk (other than the yuck factor…. achieving what exactly?)”
Well, pointing out that there is something “yucky” to use your technical term in drink milk from cows. Impregnating females and killing their male offspring in order to produce an unnecessary foodstuff is not particularly defensible (at least the research you’re defending here has some benefit in our society).
Now, I’m no fan of many of PETA’s cheap campaign stunts, but they’ve done more to expose the sort of abuse that goes on behind closed doors than almost any other organization. Presumably that’s why you’ve borrowed the trashy attack tactics of Martosko. When the businesses start to feel it, they bring out the cheap attack dogs. Are you guys really going there?
Once again, the irony is lost on you. This post points out the repeated examples of how PeTA uses the donations from its contributors to take the lowest road possible.
Sexual objectification of women and minorities? Check.
Supporting a Fred Phelps/Westboro Baptist Church style of protest, personal attack and harassment? Check.
Killing countless dogs and cats for no purpose whatsoever? Check.
Insulting indigenous people around the world whose cultural traditions involve raising animals for food and sustenance? Check.
Throwing parties attended by countless celebrities who are far better known for alcohol-fueled nights in Vegas and spending immense amounts of money cavorting at the latest LA club? HUGE CHECK.
Trying to ride as many sad examples of pop cultural mayhem (octomom?) and despair (the Holocaust, etc) as far as it will go? Sadly, also a check.
It doesn’t matter whether you call someone a hack or not. What matters is when people stand up and call an attention-grabbing, laughable pillar of the animal rights ‘industry’ exactly what it is: a corporation that rakes in money off the backs of innocent dogs, cats, women and men who suffer while it parties the Hollywood nights away.
So, PeTA, which is more important to you? Animal rights and welfare? Or booze, glitz and celebrities? I think that the average concerned citizen can draw their own conclusions.
How low can Pimps for Everything That’s Abominable go!
Ripping off vastly-loved video game icons in the craziest most absurd way imaginable? Check.
Sending stupid arrogant tattooed criminals from the Animal Liberation Front (which is pro-peta) into colleges and K-12 schools for the sole purpose of brainwashing students into accepting a peta-approved diet whether they really want to or not? Check.
Being stupid hypocrites for animals since 1980? Check,
Brainwashing people into going naked for their cause against their will? Giant economy-sized check!
No wonder HSUS doesn’t stand for People Eating Tasty Animals!
PETA has been very successful in drawing attention to the ways in which industries abuse animals behind closed doors. It draws attention to the fact that the way people eat causes incalculable amounts of suffering and death.
There’s a lot not to like about their sensationalism, but the preening over sexual objectification of women and minorities (?) is a red herring. Guerilla performance art in the tradition of the yippies is uncomfortable (the women in the rape cage (or is that just the gestation cage?) is a shocking image IT’S MEANT TO BE! That’s what we do to sows without even the slightest thought.
Your “checks” are the standard smear campaign–what we call ad hominem arguments.(Alcohol fuelled celebrity bashes. . .. really? how many charities would survive that standard?)
Insulting indigenous peoples by criticizing how they treat animals????? Really, I suppose we can’t criticize indigenous people’s other beliefs either.
Killing dogs for no reason–well, yeah I’m with you on this one, and I wish PETA and HSUS etc would get on board with No Kill. But, don’t turn to local shelters to avoid the killing-they don’t just kill a few thousand animals each year, they kill in the neighborhood of 3-4 million animals. PETA and HSUS are on the wrong side of this one. But, somehow I doubt you can take the high-road on this one.
Martosko is a corporate stooge paid by agribusiness to smear HSUS to undermine their very successful campaigns in bringing the states up to 1970′s humane husbandry standards. He’s a hack who uses half truths and misrepresentations as has been well documented on humanewatch.info.
Stick to the issues, not the ad hominems and cheap misrepresentations.
If your concern is with ad hominem attacks, I urge you – once again – to look no further than PeTA itself.
Let’s take the rather straightforward case of researchers Ed Walsh and JoAnne McGee in Omaha NE. PeTA sent infiltrators into their labs, gathering “evidence” that was used to launch federal investigations into the auditory physiology studies they were performing in cats. Those investigations would affect their personal and professional lives forever.
Months later, many tens of thousands of dollars spent, countless hours of investigations, endless PeTA claims that Walsh and McGee had violated the AWA and animal welfare…. after threats against their lives and that of their son… after someone tried to run their car off the road…
Federal investigators find what? That they had never violated any rules or harmed animal welfare in any way. That the PeTA allegations were without merit. That, in essence, it was “all made up”.
http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.3612,y.0,no.,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx
How’s that for an ad hominem attack? Need more examples? Happy to provide them.
Please learn the meaning of the words you are using. Nothing you describe meets the definition an ad hominem fallacy. Even if we grant that these allegations were unfounded or untrue, there does not seem to be an ad hominem fallacy committed as you describe these things. Wikipedia can be your friend, or perhaps a class in logic. :)
What we have in the case you are describing is the failure to provide evidence of wrongdoing. I’m not sure where the threats originated, but those too are not ad hominem fallacies, even if, as you suggest, they came from PETA.
I can’t say whether the testimony of a whistleblower and seven months of undercover investigation involves “ad hominem” attacks, I’d have to read the complaint they lodged that prompted the USDA’s investigation. If all they were doing was attacking Walsh and whatshername that might be ad hominem. I presume they were providing complaints of specific violations whether those were supported by evidence or not is a different matter. The falsity of the complaint, assuming that is true, however is not ad hominem.
C, it sounds more like you’re projecting your ignorance of the expression “ad hominem” -as well as your credophillic delusion that PETA and the Animal “Rights” movement are in any way supported by objective facts or that they do anything to help or aid animals- onto people who actually know what they’re talking about.
I don’t agree with all of PETA’s methods, but I really don’t see how most of their campaigns should concern ‘speaking of research’.
‘Speaking of research’, if this name is to be considered accurate, should have no concern with PETA’s campaigns regarding vegetarianism/veganism, and in fact, if you believe animal welfare is important, should support PETA’s sentiments on these issues (if not the methods used).
Of course, if you feel PETA factually misrepresent areas of biomedical research, go ahead and criticise them *on these issues*. Otherwise it simply implies ‘Speaking of research’ is not a pro-animal testing campaign, but rather an anti-vegetarian campaign.
“I don’t agree with all of PETA’s methods, but I really don’t see how most of their campaigns should concern ‘speaking of research’.”
How about because PETA fabricates false information designed to negatively impact Animal Research? How about the fact that they actively fund and encourage terrorists like the ALF and SHAC to commit violent acts against animal testing researchers? This despite the fact that they themselves abuse and kill animals daily?
Your Apologism is too obvious.
Oh come on! All these comments and no one mentioned that if PETA pulled the stunt with the naked woman in a cage in America their donations would go through the roof!
Rather than supporting PETA who funnels tons of money to Animal Rights organizations and has that loon Ingrid Newkirk at the helm, I donate to the ASPCA who actually do on the ground work to relieve animal suffering and promote animal welfare. They don’t just talk about it and pull stupid publicity stunts.
I agree with C. We do puts all types of animals in little cages and ship them all over the world!! What the difference with a pregnant women in there? Dont tell me well its a human. Becuase humans are mammals and animals! Yes people! We are animals and we are no better than any other type of animal suck it were not the ‘ruler’ of the world. So why are we putting other animals in there that are in my opinion better than us? Other animals only kill when they need to eat, dont have greed, excess, or bountys of food at cosco. This is sad and horrifying to me. Excuse me if this sounds wrong but couldnt we just make up a sign up to have humans tested that need or want money? Or people that have the death sentence? Becuase some products that are tested on animals have made humans die, not just becuase of a allergy they have but becuase all animals react differently. Pigs and squirrels can eat acorns humans cant they die. So think about it shouldnt we come up with a even better alternitive? Becuase at the moment i will not buy anything animal tested. And of u love animals u should too.
You are an example of the ignorance of humans. You have never taken into account the thousands of years humans lived on this exact planet before us killing animals and using them to their benefit so that they could survive and eventually give birth to a sad excuse for human life like yourself. People who have an utter ignorance of how a species lives will fall into PeTA’s bullsh*t. Humans kill other animals in order to survive. Its what we do, so deal with it or put a bullet in your brain.
Most hilarious comments. Ever.
Did any of these people who are against this article.. not understand that only 2% of the money is given to something decent? I guess you don’t know when you are deluded, because you are deluded. Isn’t that so silly…
If animals are not ours to eat, or use for clothing, WHO’S ARE THEY? We are the supreme species on this planet and we are still alive today because we have used animals to our benefit for thousands of years. By telling a caveman to take off his only clothing (from an animal) and to stop eating his main food source, you would have ended the entire human race. Enough said, People Eating Tasty Animals for life! ITS TIME FOR DEER SEASON!
People Eating Tasty Animals = Psychopathic Evil Thugs for Animals = Plonkers Endlessly Terrorizing All since 1980