I was at a Peta sponsored event a few weeks ago, guess what, no one was naked or in KKK robes...I must have been in the wrong place!!!

damn, i'm sorry...that must have been boring

PETA discussions so often devolve into a discussion of ends vs. means.

Yeah hanging out with like minded people and informing others about the horrors of circuses was boring, although I was mistaken, a few people were dressed as clowns....



It was as fun as the always are.



I am in the minority here, I feel Peta serves a purpose. Are they 100% correct in everything the do or say, no. But they do a hell of a lot.

I'm sure that had to be horrible! I didn't know PETA protests were that bad!

Everybody here should immediately start protesting the PETA protests. *sarcasm*



Seriously though, you are right. They may not make the best decisions about certain things and they may have "radical" protesting ideas, but they are one of the most cited sources on here...

It's not about "ends vs. means" for me, it's about "action vs. inaction." Even Gandhi said that it's better to do something (even something that he thought of as negative - violence), than to do nothing at all.



For me, as an activist, who sees that most people are profoundly unwilling to get out on the streets and do activism for animals, I support those who get up off their apathetic behinds and do something. In the end, there's no perfect activism, because different things work for different people at different times. For some people seeing a WhyVegan pamphlet will turn them veg. For other people a crazy protest will cause them to go to a website, at which point they may become veg; that same person might be someone who would have turned down a WhyVegan pamphlet on the street. For some, getting hassled for wearing fur will make them unwilling to buy it because they don't want the trouble, and talking to them about compassion does nothing at all; for others they just need to see a video and they'll never by fur again. For some people, demonstrations against them will make them give up torturing monkeys for good (unfortunately I haven't really seen another way that activists have affected vivisectors so directly - compassion or justice for animals doesn't mean a thing to them). In a struggle as big as this, it will take a lot of different strategies. PETA's or some other group's strategies and beliefs don't seriously affect me or my ability to advocate for animals - I do my own activism.



I've also seen that no matter what you do as an activist, someone will criticize it because it's not being done to their satisfaction. I think that's part of the reason why activists burn out - that kind of easy infighting, complaining that keeps people focused on PETA and other activists rather than on the actual animal abusing industries. I've seen objectively successful activism in which the armchair activists still found something to criticize. Not that any group is above criticism, but the complaining about other activists seems obsessional and simplistic (re. PETA, 'because they've done something I don't agree with they are all bad - they're just like nazis'). The challenge to people who can't stop criticizing activism they don't like is to get out there and do activism you do like.

exactly!

Fixed that for ya.

Money for what purpose?



How much does Ingrid Newkirk make? (it's public record)

I would assume that printing flyers, posters, t-shirts, etc (which they give out for free if you are part of their street team) cost money....

http://www.veganoutreach.org/ for example hand out pamphlets,booklets and such. None gets naked,wears kkk outfits, or makes comparisons between the meat industry and the holocaust. Sounds dull I know but atleast they appear as sane normal people which gives them more credibilty to the average person on the street.

And how do you know what Alot of people on this thread did last week? are you watching me in my bathroom?

And they also have no clear definition of the word Vegan.





And yes that was a mighty wind you blew last week



Every article or ad that get mentioned here are the ones that are outrageous, or over the top not the everyday things that are done by the majority of people who support Peta. I don't send them money, I don't agree with 100% of what they do, but I am not going to refuse to go to a sponsored event out of fear that some arm chair activist might get their eco-friendly panties in a bunch.

It's better than doing nothing, but I don't think you'd get the media exposure PETA does.

Showing in the street does increase the public attention an organization gets, but is it positive attention?



If I ran around naked downtown screaming "We shouldn't eat cows! We shouldn't eat cows!" while lighting off firecrackers, I'd make the news.



I doubt I'd convert anyone to veganism though.

Would you also have an extremely well-known name attached to yourself, with an easy to find website where people were confronted with information about animal cruelty, and videos? Part of the reason for publicity is to get people to the website to look around and to learn.

Being well-known is not necessarily a positive attribute.



PETA's stunts run the risk of associating veg*nism with people who are considered nuts by the population at large.



People might observe a nutter for the humor value, but his or her ideas are unlikely to be considered seriously.

It's positive in the example above in that your crazy stunt would be much more valuable if it got people to your website that extensively showed animal abuses in the meat, vivisection, fur, etc. industries. There's no doubt that for each of PETA's crazy stunts, people go to their website to see what it's all about.

There are more extreme groups in every movement I can think of. It's preferrable that most groups hand out pamphlets and such, but you also should have a group or two who does things similar to PETA. Otherwise animal rights would receive little media exposure and it wouldn't be discussed very often. You should have both as far as I am concerned.

When women stood outside the White House with signs ridiculing the President for ignoring their rights, people thought they were nuts! Especially because it was during a war. Hmm...I'm pretty sure that I'm allowed to post my opinion on this forum because of those RADICAL FEMINISTS that supposedly brought women a bad name. Apparently, the radical protests did something to help the cause...

Just think how much more quickly women's rights would have been obtained if they showered naked on the sidewalk!

Also, I do consider some feminists nuts, at least partially so.



Consider Margarette Sanger. Great for women's rights, but at the same time, horribly, horribly racist.

Considering how scandalous bloomers were, I'd say showering would have garnered a lot of ..... attention ....

Strip clubs: Bastions for woman rights!

Lol, talk about hypocrisy. Using up water for a demonstration while complaining about the world's water consumption seems more than a little stupid to me.



Once again, PETA has managed to make veggies look like idiots.

You may want to take a look at the picture. They had a typical camp type shower.

I did look at the picture.. and even if they only used that bag once (although wouldn't that make for quite a short demonstration?), I still think it's stupid to use up water while protesting against the fact that so much water is used up to feed animals killed for consumption.



Water is an invaluable resource and the amount of drinkable water left on/in the Earth is decreasing much too quickly. Every little bit that's wasted counts, and that's why I feel so strongly against this demonstration.

And if the water was recycled throughout the day????

Where's all the water going? It must all still be here or is it being exported to other planets?

I've been smuggling water to Mars.



You wouldn't believe what the Martians pay for it.