Thread: PETA has gone too far this time...

I'm actually of the belief that PETA does NOT defend animals, but rather subliminally encourages animal abuse by bringing up graphic shit that was never supposed to be brought up in the first place. It's like they're trying to advertise animal violence to people and desensitize them to it. I was never on board since they insist on objectifying women, only women, to get their "message" across, and especially since they took it a step further to attempt to combine animal violence with porn. That move would either traumatize you and make you disinterested in sex from then on, or make you sexually aroused by animal violence (or even another disturbing tactic, relating naked exploited women to dead animals, further dehumanizing women).

In short, I hate PETA, and I don't think their true values are anything like they claim them to be.

Can we merge this with this.

And then lock it.

Tnx.

I don't see a reason for merge or lock. It's not the same topic (exactly) and it deserves discussion. IMO anyway.

What is the most effective form of advertising.

Um - Prohibition? Censorship?

On a serious note, that game sucked.

Where's the link to the original article/page/game/whatever? I'm not sure why you didn't post it in the first place. Do you want a discussion or do you want to rant?

I think this is among the tamer things PETA have done. They've gone too far long, long ago. This is nothing.

Originally Posted by XeL

Where's the link to the original article/page/game/whatever? I'm not sure why you didn't post it in the first place. Do you want a discussion or do you want to rant?

Website: Mario Kills Tanooki | PETA.org

News on the subject:
PETA: Mario is pro-fur • Eurogamer.net
Nintendo responds to PETA Mario pro-fur claim • Eurogamer.net

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

I'm actually of the belief that PETA does NOT defend animals, but rather subliminally encourages animal abuse by bringing up graphic shit that was never supposed to be brought up in the first place. It's like they're trying to advertise animal violence to people and desensitize them to it.

I disagree. I believe it's important to show people what's really going on behind the curtains. Do you think it's wrong to show pictures and movies from the concentration camps of nazi Germany? Are we not supposed to see anything for what it really is? Your statement is beyond my comprehension.

I was never on board since they insist on objectifying women, only women, to get their "message" across, and especially since they took it a step further to attempt to combine animal violence with porn. That move would either traumatize you and make you disinterested in sex from then on, or make you sexually aroused by animal violence (or even another disturbing tactic, relating naked exploited women to dead animals, further dehumanizing women).

What exactly are you talking about here? How do they insist on objectifying women?

Edit: Thanks, Morten.

Why did you bother to write that huge wall of text over this.

I love how literally the only things that Nintendo fans care about are things directly related to Nintendo.

PETA euthanizes 90% of the animals in its care - meh.

PETA demonizes Mario - THIS HAS GONE TOO FAR.

Get a life, seriously. There are more important things.

Originally Posted by XeL

What exactly are you talking about here? How do they insist on objectifying women?

How's this for objectifying women?



From the Other PETA thread: http://www.dreamviews.com/f36/peta-l...rights-121951/

Originally Posted by Xei

I love how literally the only things that Nintendo fans care about are things directly related to Nintendo.

PETA euthanizes 90% of the animals in its care - meh.

PETA demonizes Mario - THIS HAS GONE TOO FAR.

Get a life, seriously. There are more important things.

Anecdote time!

Initially, PETA's issue with the Tanooki suit made me upset. However, from there, I started doing research and discovered a number of other things that make PETA reprehensible, like its opposition to the medical testing of animals. Hopefully, this will not only make other gamers upset, but it will be a gateway for them to do research into PETA's stupid behavior.

Granted, my hope may be too much for casual-game loving, drooling Nintendo fans Nintendo fans, but other members of the more level-headed PC gaming Master Race (like me) might discover fun facts about PETA via the Tanooki issue.

Originally Posted by kookyinc

a number of other things that make PETA reprehensible, like its opposition to the medical testing of animals.

Wait - so you support medical experimentation on animals, like spraying hair spray into their eyes until it blinds them, or testing to failure to discover how much of a particular chemical it takes to cause cancer or death?

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

Wait - so you support medical experimentation on animals, like spraying hair spray into their eyes until it blinds them, or testing to failure to discover how much of a particular chemical it takes to cause cancer or death?

What are the alternatives?

Apparently... <- For the record, that's a URL.

The whole Mario scandal was just a joke, with only decent intentions. Hm. I mean, obviously, looking at that goofy flash-game it's easy to justify the view that it was all tongue-in-cheek.

Sorry guys. Time to get worked up over something else.

Doh!

TBH, I had just woke up when I saw this, and I didn't read the OP or look at any links. Damn Tommo, why didn't you say something??!!

Yeah, they keep lowering the bar on underhanded advertising, don't they?

Look, what I'm saying is that PETA has done some stupid stuff in the past. I have heard that they mercy kill thousands of animals, and the number of animals actually adopted numbers less than 50 in a year. I have always disliked their advertising campaigns, ever since the "rather be naked than wear fur", because it certainly gets your attention, but in a pornographic way, which in my book is in no way positive.

It seems that PETA is just trying to get attention, which they have, but it almost seems like they don't care if it's positive or negative. While I appreciate them busting animal abusers, they seem to be like some celebrities at disaster sites: there to get attention, but otherwise riding around in a limo, doing nothing to help.

After finding out that it's a sarcastic campaign, I am just annoyed that they even did this. Good job, PETA, you made gamers everywhere look like idiots. sigh... and I fell for it too...

Unless they were serious until the backlash, and saw that it could be turned into a sarcastic approach from another perspective. I hope this is the case.

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

Wait - so you support medical experimentation on animals, like spraying hair spray into their eyes until it blinds them, or testing to failure to discover how much of a particular chemical it takes to cause cancer or death?

I can't make a comment on beauty product testing as I know absolutely nothing about beauty products. I was hoping that it was clear that I only meant "testing medicine on animals" when I said "medical testing of animals".

As asked by Seroquel, is there any other option? Yes, it's unfair to the animals to be brought into life only to be blasted with radiation, given cancer, and then die because because an ultimately useless treatment was given. But you know what else is unfair? A 9-year-old dying of leukemia.

So let's weigh the pros and cons.

Pros of not testing on animals: Some animals do not suffer and die because of humans testing medicine on them.
Cons of not testing on animals: Humans continue to die of Disease X because there is no cure, and simply making up some medicine as a solution and testing it on a human is too unethical and risky for any research firm to fund.


Pros of testing on animals: Medicine can be made to treat things like cancer. Fewer humans suffer and die because of diseases like cancer. The human wealth of knowledge is expanded.
Cons of testing on animals: Some animals suffer and die because of humans testing medicine on them.

Yes, I'm a Speciest. I value human life over that of other animals. But I think the pros outweigh the cons. It's imperfect, unfair, and unfortunate, but until someone genetically engineers masochistic animals, it's a system that must be used.

Yes, I have to say that to most extents, I agree with "kookyinc". The world is a somewhat dark place sometimes, and that cannot be helped. I am not necessarily of the opinion that humans lives are more important than the lives of other species. Perhaps we are more important to our Earth and galaxy as a whole than say, your common house rat. It is not that our being human offers us some sort of higher soul, should you be a spiritual person, it's rather that because we are human and therefore have the minds and bodies to experiment and think, it becomes our responsibility to protect and defend our resources, such as oil, coal, animal lives, and our own lives.

Sometimes we have to go to rather drastic measures to actually be able to effectively and appropriately protect ourselves and our things.

The world is, unfortunately, not nearly as bright and rainbow filled as many would prefer it be painted as. It is rather dark, and I'm afraid that 'animal testing' is very much not one of the darkest things that our world has to offer. All the optimism in the world can't change the way that Earth and its inhabitants spin.

Ok, well said, and I gotta say, there's no simple solution. As much as I hate t, I have to agree that torturing and killing countless rats monkeys and dogs is better than letting people suffer form diseases that could otherwise be cured.

I do hate to think about how drugs are tested though.

"How much of this drug does it take before kidney failure sets in? How about fatal liver damage? Do excessive doses of it cause any other problems? Give me a few hundred rats.. "

Lifeinsteps, I'm not sure I understand your stance. Are you saying you're in favor of animal testing then?

Animal testing is an unfortunate truth; if every drug fabricated were tested on prisoners, then we would see thieves with lethal drugs, rather than death row prisoners like we have now. What I don't like about it is that some companies use way over the top doses to see what effects there are. I say increase it until bad effects start to set in, and have that scaled and set as the limit.

Also, I agree that the world is a dark place. While it looks nice, in reality, those that get a little unlucky often end up killed at some point as a result. There is no avoiding this, and I don't want people to be cruel to animals, but we can't stop animals being cruel to each other.

Also, thread derail.

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

Um - Prohibition? Censorship?

Something that pisses people off, or is stupid or ridiculous or disgusting. Cause they talk about it and only spread the advertising.

So basically their advertising works because you're all too stupid to see that's all they're doing. Prove me wrong and just stop talking about these idiots every time they do something retarded.

Also, just gonna quote this right here coz it makes me feel good. I'm gonna put it in bold too.

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

Doh!

TBH, I had just woke up when I saw this, and I didn't read the OP or look at any links. Damn Tommo, why didn't you say something??!!

Yeah, they keep lowering the bar on underhanded advertising, don't they?