discussion surrounding PETA ad

[ChildeOfPoetry]

How do you feel about the discussion in this video?

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof ... eta.ad.cnn

[Tookie]

You know, I'm anti-censorship, but I think it's just a little bit far. I don't think it's objectifying women at all, but seriously, I don't need to see women pleasuring themselves with vegetables on TV. It's not like people are choosing to see this - I know there are lots of people who only watch the Superbowl for the ads, but there are also people who watch it for the football. Call me a prude, but I wouldn't want to be the one having to change the channel because my kids were watching.
There are lots of places for healthy sexuality to be on display, but I think that I'd deem this one inappropriate. The Paris Hilton one wasn't quite as... blatant, but it was still pretty out there. I've watched the banned ads from the Superbowl before, and I don't remember ever seeing one quite as racy as PETA's.

I'm probably biased, though, because I hate PETA with a burning passion - and I'm a vegetarian-recently-turned-"flexitarian". But I do it for very different reasons than PETA. I've studied the animal rights movement, and IMO, they are the bottom of the barrel.

Also, I want to see that study. PETA likes to ignore the fact that it's entirely possible to be an unhealthy vegetarian. I could eat pizza and ice cream for every meal and still be vegetarian.

[cwbyrvr]

How do you feel about? Please give us a bit of your own opinion to help better kick off discussion.

[Neko]

I'm not supporting censorship when I say this. I just think the ad is stupid. It doesn't even remotely make me consider becoming a vegetarian or a PETA supporter. It doesn't do anything. It's just rock music and chicks. Sure, it'll catch people's attention but only due to skin and how idiotic they look rubbing up on veggies.

I'm not offended or shocked. I simply, honestly, wholly believe this is one of the dumbest commercials I have ever seen.

[ChildeOfPoetry]

I don't think it's objectifying women at all,

I’ve always been baffled by the “it’s objectifying” argument that people bring up all the time. I understand that a first step to systemic violence is to objectify your target (women, homosexuals, etc.) so that the violence can be justified. But what exactly is “objectification”? I meet feminists who are angry that mainstream pornography depicts mostly male pleasure, but the second we show a woman in a sexual situation getting sexual pleasure, we’re “objectifying women”. Is any kind of female sexual expression “objectifying women”? If not, what expresses are? It’s something that completely baffles me.

Call me a prude, but I wouldn't want to be the one having to change the channel because my kids were watching.

This brings me to the question of “Do kids really need to be shielded from sex? If so, what kind of sex?” I admit, this is probably not the kind of ad I’d want to use to teach my (hypothetical) kids about sex.

There are lots of places for healthy sexuality to be on display, but I think that I'd deem this one inappropriate.

I’d be curious why.

I'm probably biased, though, because I hate PETA with a burning passion - and I'm a vegetarian-recently-turned-"flexitarian". But I do it for very different reasons than PETA. I've studied the animal rights movement, and IMO, they are the bottom of the barrel.

I’ve been a hardcore vegan for almost a decade now and I also absolutely hate PETA. I can’t believe how many people fail to see right through them. I do support animal rights, but I like to think I’m a reasonable person too.

Also, I want to see that study. PETA likes to ignore the fact that it's entirely possible to be an unhealthy vegetarian. I could eat pizza and ice cream for every meal and still be vegetarian.

A lot of their statistics are way out there and it completely shatters their credibility.

I'm not supporting censorship when I say this. I just think the ad is stupid. It doesn't even remotely make me consider becoming a vegetarian or a PETA supporter. It doesn't do anything. It's just rock music and chicks. Sure, it'll catch people's attention but only due to skin and how idiotic they look rubbing up on veggies.

I'm not offended or shocked. I simply, honestly, wholly believe this is one of the dumbest commercials I have ever seen.

I agree with this. If I wanted to bring people to the cause, I’d like to appeal to their rationality and compassion and show them that a vegan diet is best for humans, the animals, and the environment. I can’t understand what they could possibly get out of converting people who think they will have better sex or get laid more often by eating veggies. But PETA is such a ridiculous organization so I guess the answer is that in itself..

How do you feel about? Please give us a bit of your own opinion to help better kick off discussion.

M’eh, I like to read people’s opinions and respond because I haven’t really formed mine yet. Helps to read other opinions and let it sit awhile. I’m very new to feminism.

Also, just a heads up, my post was more about the conversation than the actual PETA ad. I thought it was interesting that a male was arguing for “respect for women” when the two women were arguing that the ad does not disrespect women. I am certainly one to embrace men as allies in the movement, but I thought this guy was just downright rude in his arguing for “respect for women”. He kept interupting the PETA woman and wouldn’t let her speak. That’s not respect! So if he doesn’t respect women, why is he arguing about “respect for women” in the PETA ad?

[Mordak]

PETA campaigns make me want to headdesk until my brains leak out my ears.

In response to the video :Vegetarians have better sex? With broccoli? What the fuck. A big double standard about meat friendly ads? What about meat friendly sexually provocative ads? Is that what this ad was responding to? Is there an advert somewhere on the planet that has women jumping into jaccuzis or leaning on the kitchen counter and rubbing themselves with steaks and sausages?

I loathe PETA. http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
and http://www.petakillsanimals.com/article_detail.cfm?article=134

Also their campaign against the Australian wool industry makes me really mad. I dunno about you guys who're all "zomg museling is cruel", but I grew up on a farming station where unmulsed lambs died from maggot infestation where their bums would literaly rot from the inside out due to shit and flies and ensuing infection. Mulseing to me = A little bit of pain, a lot of benefit and a lot less deaths from flystrike. Sure skin gets cut off and it hurts for a few days, but it is far more humane than the cruelty of letting sheep die slowly and even more painfully of a problem so easily fixed.

[drunken dragon]

I loathe PETA. http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

Holy SHIT, only 7 out of like 2,100 animals were adopted and the rest were killed?! Are you kidding me?

PETA is an entirely radical group, and this ad just proves that further. I haven't ever seen an advertisement for McDonalds or Burger King with THOSE kinds of images. And I'm against radical censorship, too. That kind of imagery is just fine (and tame, even) for maybe a movie or something, but certainly not for a commercial on public television where young children could be nearby.

[ChildeOfPoetry]

Holy SHIT, only 7 out of like 2,100 animals were adopted and the rest were killed?! Are you kidding me?

Of course! Cats and dogs in people's homes are enslaved for the pleasure of humans. It's disgusting and killing them saves them from this life of entrapment. *sarcasm*

I haven't ever seen an advertisement for McDonalds or Burger King with THOSE kinds of images.

To be fair, Paris Hilton's burger ad comes pretty close

[Neko]

I haven't ever seen an advertisement for McDonalds or Burger King with THOSE kinds of images.

To be fair, Paris Hilton's burger ad comes pretty close

That was really the first thing that came to my mind too. But that was a long loooong time ago. I don't watch TV all that much so I don't know of any other sexy-meats commercials. I can't personally think of anything that the vegetable sex ad would be a response to.


Also, just to build on my last post... I know very little about PETA. And I'm sure there are many who can say the same--probably not on this forum--especially a lot of the folks watching the super bowl. This ad doesn't make a good impression on me at all. It might on the sports buffs who like women in their underpants but I can sure as hell tell you that it won't turn them into vegetarians.

[drunken dragon]

Holy SHIT, only 7 out of like 2,100 animals were adopted and the rest were killed?! Are you kidding me?

Of course! Cats and dogs in people's homes are enslaved for the pleasure of humans. It's disgusting and killing them saves them from this life of entrapment. *sarcasm*

I haven't ever seen an advertisement for McDonalds or Burger King with THOSE kinds of images.

To be fair, Paris Hilton's burger ad comes pretty close

Yeahh, but there was nothing that had to be blurred out. Not really.
Okay maybe.

[Enigma]

I got peta to mail me a vegetarian starter kit! When I first became a vegetarian and it was supposed to have stickers and recipes and that sort of thing. But they sent me a pretty sad little flyer and then sold my address to credit card companies. I know it was them because I was 15! No company should have been sending me any official mail let alone preapproved credit card applications. lol. I didn't even have a job. So yeah I'm not a fan of peta. But that ad.. a bit too sexy for the superbowl maybe since it's supposed to be family viewing but for late night non-kid shows I think it'd be fine. It reminds me of a victoria's secret ad or something though and I'm not sure they ban those.

[ChildeOfPoetry]

Wow, Enigma. That is crazy that they sold your address! How deceitful.

[Rainbow Dolphins]

Looks like a Victoria's Secret ad to me. With pumpkins.

Both the women in that video were kind of moronic. The one chick was like "well if you're against disrepecting women in the media, how about all the chicks who get killed in slasher films? huh? why aren't you against THAT!?" and the guy's just like "well I am...". It seems like a typical segment like that where nobody listens to what anyone else is saying. I don't think you can argue that just because he wasn't very "respectful" to these two outwardly hostile people who happen to be women he's being hypocritical about respect for women. They were just as rude as he was.

And, really, that Paris Hilton ad WAS just as bad if not worse. The only difference is it didn't reference sex directly... it certainly alluded to it. At least the PETA one had a clear message, the burger king or whatever it was one didn't make any sense. Here's a hot mostly naked chick washing a car! Cheeseburgers!!! What?

[Storage and Disposal]

MY thoughts? CNN can suck it! Thank you, CNN, for once again providing us with a story barely suitable for Fox News.

[cwbyrvr]

I wouldn't have aired that ad. But that's just because I'm against propaganda and that's all fucking PETA is. Plus is it far more sexual than most ads (even the Paris Hilton one). Did anyone else notice that a chick was putting some sort of vegetable down her pants? And possibly (and most likely, though simulated, I'd be shocked to find it was real, haha) into her vagina?

[DWH]

Also, to be fair, the Paris Hilton commercial did stir up a whole bunch of controversy on its own. I never saw the commercial air, but I definitely knew about it. And it's definitely ever so slightly more subtle than the PETA ad.

Sigh. One of my friends just went vegan because he watched some PETA videos. I have no problem with veganism, but let's face it: PETA is not a good source of information to rely upon. I wonder if he'd have the same resolve if he were as cynical about the organization as I am?

[Dragonrider]

I thought it was a shame that the news anchor woman was not as unbiased as she could have been.

[k7fcb]

I don't think it's objectifying women at all,

I’ve always been baffled by the “it’s objectifying” argument that people bring up all the time. I understand that a first step to systemic violence is to objectify your target (women, homosexuals, etc.) so that the violence can be justified. But what exactly is “objectification”? I meet feminists who are angry that mainstream pornography depicts mostly male pleasure, but the second we show a woman in a sexual situation getting sexual pleasure, we’re “objectifying women”. Is any kind of female sexual expression “objectifying women”? If not, what expresses are? It’s something that completely baffles me.

I think we ought to touch on this some more... We see women doing sexy or sexual things for men all the time in ads, on tv, online, in films, etc. What's more shocking for people is women masturbating and pleasuring themselves. That's why it's causing so much hullabaloo. If these women were just as undressed, crawling around and being sexy, but not masturbating and perhaps rubbing up on men, the ad would be way less of an issue, and would probably have been aired as it would be no different from the Paris Hilton ad. The ad would be considered far less provocative whether or not it actually is.

[Tookie]

I think we ought to touch on this some more... We see women doing sexy or sexual things for men all the time in ads, on tv, online, in films, etc. What's more shocking for people is women masturbating and pleasuring themselves. That's why it's causing so much hullabaloo. If these women were just as undressed, crawling around and being sexy, but not masturbating and perhaps rubbing up on men, the ad would be way less of an issue, and would probably have been aired as it would be no different from the Paris Hilton ad. The ad would be considered far less provocative whether or not it actually is.

I don't know. I think if it were men in the commercial, with, I don't know, pumpkins with holes drilled into the sides, it would be equally shocking. I think that for me, it's the fact that I consider masturbation to be sex, while I wouldn't consider women rubbing up against men (or vice versa) unless it was clearly frottage, to be a form of sex. Gender doesn't play a role in it for me... it's the fact that hey, women are having (solo) sex on television and here I was just trying to watch the Superbowl. Yeah?
But then, I don't watch TV anymore. For all I know, outright sex is the norm in advertising these days.

None of these reasons get any publicity or acknowledgment because PETA is too busy pulling stupid shit.

So very true. I am becoming increasingly convinced that the entire organization is a sham, just because I simply cannot believe half of the things they claim, and the way they go about claiming them.

[ChildeOfPoetry]

I don't know. I think if it were men in the commercial, with, I don't know, pumpkins with holes drilled into the sides, it would be equally shocking.

Sure, it would be equally as shocking, but it's unlikely the "we're objectifying and disrespecting men" argument would come up with as high a frequency as it does with women.

[Dragonrider]

Speaking of ridiculous PETA claims: Sea Kittens!

http://www.peta.org/sea_kittens/

[Tookie]

Oh and let's not forget their games!

Mama Kills Animals.

[Mathmo]

Speaking of ridiculous PETA claims: Sea Kittens!

http://www.peta.org/sea_kittens/

Oh yes ... this has provided much amusement among my social circle (and we are all agreed that yes, we *would* hurt Sea Kittens (only for the purposes of eating them, of course, no gratuitous violence towards animals)).

[yeahyeahyeah]

PETA is a massive clusterfuck which gives animal rights, vegetarian and vegan lifestyles a bad name.

[miketheheadlesschicken]

I actually was reading a discussion of PETA's use of women's sexuality in their ads and protests earlier today...http://anybody.squarespace.com/anybody_ ... t-wom.html
It links to a few articles on different campaigns. I'm leaning toward feeling like "respect for women" is actually a legitimate argument against PETA. Or at the very least feeling that PETA is generally composed of idiots.