PETA commercial offensive

February 12, 2009

Hi Blake

I haven't conducted a Poll, but as ex President of the University of Bristol Vegan society, and current Treasurer of the same society, I am aware of the opinions of well over 300 vegans and vegetarians in my area... I don't know a single one who thinks PETA is a good advertisement for vegetarianism or animal rights.

But then most of the vegetarians and vegans I know tend to think about issues rather than just accept what an organisation tells them, and therefore tend to dislike PETA for their poor research before conducting campaigns.

BB

Peter

-

Blake Wilson

Thursday, February 12, 2009 5:23 AM

Re: Re: PETA commercial offensive

So Jo you speak for the entire UK on all things PETA? Is there poll to back up your statement, or are you basing thison your experiences and conversations with other people? As Pauline Kael (film critic for the New York Times) once wrote, disbelieving the outcome of the Nixon-McGovern election of 1972, "Nixon can't have won; no one I know voted for him."Blake

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:48 PM, jo.heartwork <jo.heartwork wrote:

Why do you feel empowered? Do you not feel empowered in your normal life without having to be stimulated by a weird advert? Surely they should be doing the advert because they are vegans who think that the advert will help to convert people to veganism, or am I just too idealistic?

I still say that, in this country at least, PETA is looked on as a ridiculous group, and have no credibility at all. I don;t think they will gain that credibility and respect unless they change their tactics. There must be ways of attracting attention without alienating a lot of people who do not like that sort of public display of sexuality.

Jo

-

whitty__

Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:11 PM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

Peter,I think I prefaced my first comment by labeling myself as a third-wave feminist; feminism isn't a cut-and-dried field any more. I find it empowering that the women in the ad are uninhibited. I'm sure they're also very well financially reimbursed for the few seconds they're on film. I believe it's more subjective than anything--you bring to it what you will.I understand others have their own opinions, however, and I validate them. Everyone just brings their own reality to the table.Whitty , "Peter" <metalscarab wrote:>> Hi Whitty> > > I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--but> > then again I'm a third-wave feminist> > Interesting... most feminists find the objectification of women for male > pleasure to be objectionable rather than humorous!> > BB> Peter>

February 12, 2009

Hi Jo

At least around Bristol they do... what Americans call " third wave

feminism " , we call " queer mutiny " . But that's probably more down to the fact

of the origins in each area: in Europe the core theories which informed it

were referred to as " queer theory " . When they adopted those concepts in

America they used the term " third wave feminism " , largely, I gather, because

those people involved had been heavily involved in active feminism

throughout the 70s and early 80s. While the American version came from

people who had been actively involved in feminism, the European came out of

those who had already abandoned feminism due to what they saw as flaws in

continuing to divide gender and create a " war " between non-sensical gender

based lines.

BB

Peter

-

" heartwerk " <jo.heartwork

Thursday, February 12, 2009 7:38 AM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

> It's strange how a movement uses the same name as a previous movement

> and yet has very little of the same ideals. That is not a criticism,

> just an observation. I often wonder why the new groups don't use

> entirely different names to suit their ideals.

>

> Jo

>

> , " whitty__ " <ravenwolf18 wrote:

>>

>> Third-wave feminism has roots in the post-punk culture of the 80s,

> but

>> isn't associated exclusively with punk. It would take too many

> posts

>> to go into all of the nuances, but it is most definitely a real

>> feminist movement here in the U.S.--much to the chagrin of some of

> the

>> second-wave feminists. Not sure if it's made it over the

> Atlantic.

>> Have you seen the television series " Sex in the City " ? The main

>> characters would definitely qualify as third-wave feminists.

>> Anyhoo...

>>

>> , " jo.heartwork " <jo.heartwork@>

>> wrote:

>> >

>> > I agree. I was trying to work out what a third-wave feminist is -

>

>> or if it is actually anything to do with feminism. I believe we're

> on

>> third-generation punk here - but it is nothing like punk - so maybe

>> the same applies to the latest 'feminism'.

>> >

>> > BB

>> > Jo

>>

>

> ---

>

> To send an email to

> -! Groups Links

>

February 12, 2009

Oh yes, there's one of those in every crowd! And being the kind of twisted, dark-humored person I can be, I do look forward to their arrival so I can sit back and watch the show! Missie Harholdand Gracie the Ibizan Houndand Jeanie the GreyhoundgreyhounddogPETA's like the flamboyant black sheep relative in everyone's family: you hope they don't show up to the family reunion...but then again, you kind of hope they do just to see what will happen.Whitty

February 12, 2009

Well, I don't know anyone who calls cookies biscuits, or elevators lifts...so no one does, eh? I only know a handful of people who voted for McCain, out of the hundreds I know, but somehow he got 47% of the vote.

Kidding aside, how's this for an explanation of PETA's obviously lack of appreciation in the UK: Animal rights in general is more of an " issue " in the US so more people are involved and it has greater exposure. And there are more vegetarians (by sheer quantity) in the US so therefore more people support a high profile organization that speaks for them and the issues they face in their own country. Since PETA mostly does its work in the US, its impact would logically be limited by its borders. I'm sure they would like to change that, but from the opposition we've seen here, that's not likely.

When I was growing up in the early 80s we heard about UK groups like Hunt Sabateurs, which had absolutely no relevance to us in Southern California. PETA's impact may simply not be relevant to you folks.

Just a thought to explain the obvious international disparity here....Blake On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:41 AM, Peter <metalscarab wrote:

Hi Blake

I haven't conducted a Poll, but as ex President of the University of Bristol Vegan society, and current Treasurer of the same society, I am aware of the opinions of well over 300 vegans and vegetarians in my area... I don't know a single one who thinks PETA is a good advertisement for vegetarianism or animal rights.

But then most of the vegetarians and vegans I know tend to think about issues rather than just accept what an organisation tells them, and therefore tend to dislike PETA for their poor research before conducting campaigns.

BB

Peter

-

Blake Wilson

Thursday, February 12, 2009 5:23 AM

Re: Re: PETA commercial offensive

So Jo you speak for the entire UK on all things PETA? Is there poll to back up your statement, or are you basing thison your experiences and conversations with other people? As Pauline Kael (film critic for the New York Times) once wrote, disbelieving the outcome of the Nixon-McGovern election of 1972, " Nixon can't have won; no one I know voted for him. " Blake

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:48 PM, jo.heartwork <jo.heartwork wrote:

Why do you feel empowered? Do you not feel empowered in your normal life without having to be stimulated by a weird advert? Surely they should be doing the advert because they are vegans who think that the advert will help to convert people to veganism, or am I just too idealistic?

I still say that, in this country at least, PETA is looked on as a ridiculous group, and have no credibility at all. I don;t think they will gain that credibility and respect unless they change their tactics. There must be ways of attracting attention without alienating a lot of people who do not like that sort of public display of sexuality.

Jo

-

whitty__

Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:11 PM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

Peter,I think I prefaced my first comment by labeling myself as a third-wave feminist; feminism isn't a cut-and-dried field any more. I find it empowering that the women in the ad are uninhibited. I'm sure they're also very well financially reimbursed for the few seconds they're on film. I believe it's more subjective than anything--you bring to it what you will.I understand others have their own opinions, however, and I validate them. Everyone just brings their own reality to the table.Whitty , " Peter " <metalscarab wrote:>> Hi Whitty> > > I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--but> > then again I'm a third-wave feminist> > Interesting... most feminists find the objectification of women for male > pleasure to be objectionable rather than humorous!> > BB> Peter>

February 12, 2009

Part of the liberation (of any group) is the appropriation of the images and language of oppression for themselves. Look at the use of the word " queer " by homosexuals and " n***** " by blacks, or the vast amount of erotica/pornography created by women.

Racism/sexism isn't defined by surface images and obvious implications. Its about intent, context, and power. If you think the good folks at PETA, who I guarantee you include plenty of feminists of all waves, are " demeaning women " by treating them as " sexual objects purely for the titilation of men " , you are, in my opinion, missing the point because you're blinded by the immediate impact of the ad and your conditioned response to erotic images of women ( " oh, scantily clad women! this is sexist! " ). And you just don't like PETA in the first place, so very little (if any) of their work will have any appeal to you because of this barrier.

Just a thought. Blake On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Peter <metalscarab wrote:

Hi Whitty

The point of feminism is to recognise women and men on an equal footing. The

reason it is " feminism " rather than " equalitism " is because we still live in

a society where women are treated as second class. Such treatment has always

been accepted by some women, but the fact that they accept it does not make

it acceptable.

If PETA used scantily clad men having sex with vegetables, alongside the

women, then the feminist argument would work just fine. However, while PETA

continue to use a sexist base for their advertising and continue to demean

women and treat them as sexual objects purely for the titilation of men, it

is not possible to support them from a feminist standpoint.

I find it quite odd that you use the term " third wave feminsim " to support

sexism. Third wave feminism is usually linked to aspects of queer theory and

transgender concepts. A core element of it is rejection of heteronormative

gender dualities.... by using women only in the advertisement, PETA are

perpetuating the very stereotypes that third wave feminism seeks to

challenge and remove from society.

Perhaps you're more of a " fourth wave feminist " ?

BB

Peter

-

" whitty__ " <ravenwolf18

Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:11 PM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

> Peter,

>

> I think I prefaced my first comment by labeling myself as a third-wave

> feminist; feminism isn't a cut-and-dried field any more. I find it

> empowering that the women in the ad are uninhibited. I'm sure they're

> also very well financially reimbursed for the few seconds they're on

> film. I believe it's more subjective than anything--you bring to it

> what you will.

>

> I understand others have their own opinions, however, and I validate

> them. Everyone just brings their own reality to the table.

>

> Whitty

>

> , " Peter " <metalscarab wrote:

>>

>> Hi Whitty

>>

>> > I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--

> but

>> > then again I'm a third-wave feminist

>>

>> Interesting... most feminists find the objectification of women for

> male

>> pleasure to be objectionable rather than humorous!

>>

>> BB

>> Peter

>>

>

> ---

>

> To send an email to

> -! Groups Links

>

February 12, 2009

Interesting thought Blake, I can see where you are coming from...............

Peter vv

Blake Wilson <mbw Sent: Thursday, 12 February, 2009 3:42:12 PMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Part of the liberation (of any group) is the appropriation of the images and language of oppression for themselves. Look at the use of the word "queer" by homosexuals and "n*****" by blacks, or the vast amount of erotica/pornography created by women. Racism/sexism isn't defined by surface images and obvious implications. Its about intent, context, and power. If you think the good folks at PETA, who I guarantee you include plenty of feminists of all waves, are "demeaning women" by treating them as "sexual objects purely for the titilation of men", you are, in my opinion, missing the point because you're blinded by the immediate impact of the ad and your conditioned response to erotic images of women ("oh, scantily clad women! this is sexist!"). And you just don't like PETA in the first place, so very little (if any) of their work will have any appeal to you because of this barrier. Just a thought. Blake

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Peter <metalscarab@ gmail.com> wrote:

Hi WhittyThe point of feminism is to recognise women and men on an equal footing. The reason it is "feminism" rather than "equalitism" is because we still live in a society where women are treated as second class. Such treatment has always been accepted by some women, but the fact that they accept it does not make it acceptable.If PETA used scantily clad men having sex with vegetables, alongside the women, then the feminist argument would work just fine. However, while PETA continue to use a sexist base for their advertising and continue to demean women and treat them as sexual objects purely for the titilation of men, it is not possible to support them from a feminist standpoint.I find it quite odd that you use the term "third wave feminsim" to support sexism. Third wave feminism is usually linked to aspects of queer theory and transgender concepts. A core element of it is rejection of

heteronormative gender dualities... . by using women only in the advertisement, PETA are perpetuating the very stereotypes that third wave feminism seeks to challenge and remove from society.Perhaps you're more of a "fourth wave feminist"?BBPeter

- "whitty__" <ravenwolf18@ ><@gro ups.com>Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:11 PM Re: PETA commercial offensive

> Peter,>> I think I prefaced my first comment by labeling myself as a third-wave> feminist; feminism isn't a cut-and-dried field any more. I find it> empowering that the women in the ad are uninhibited. I'm sure they're> also very well financially reimbursed for the few seconds they're on> film. I believe it's more subjective than anything--you bring to it> what you will.>> I understand others have their own opinions, however, and I validate> them. Everyone just brings their own reality to the table.>> Whitty>> @gro ups.com, "Peter" <metalscarab@ ...> wrote:>>>> Hi Whitty>>>> > I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed

it--> but>> > then again I'm a third-wave feminist>>>> Interesting. .. most feminists find the objectification of women for> male>> pleasure to be objectionable rather than humorous!>>>> BB>> Peter>>>>>>> ------------ --------- --------- ------

>> To send an email to > -unsubscr ibe

February 12, 2009

Thanks Peter. Hopefully I come across a little better when I lay off the sarcasm and insults. As you'd think anyone would, eh? Our minister usually leaves us with a word or two to think about during the week. A couple of weeks ago it was:

" Be nice " . B. On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:

Interesting thought Blake, I can see where you are coming from...............

Peter vv

Blake Wilson <mbw

Thursday, 12 February, 2009 3:42:12 PMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Part of the liberation (of any group) is the appropriation of the images and language of oppression for themselves. Look at the use of the word " queer " by homosexuals and " n***** " by blacks, or the vast amount of erotica/pornography created by women.

Racism/sexism isn't defined by surface images and obvious implications. Its about intent, context, and power. If you think the good folks at PETA, who I guarantee you include plenty of feminists of all waves, are " demeaning women " by treating them as " sexual objects purely for the titilation of men " , you are, in my opinion, missing the point because you're blinded by the immediate impact of the ad and your conditioned response to erotic images of women ( " oh, scantily clad women! this is sexist! " ). And you just don't like PETA in the first place, so very little (if any) of their work will have any appeal to you because of this barrier.

Just a thought. Blake

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Peter <metalscarab@ gmail.com> wrote:

Hi WhittyThe point of feminism is to recognise women and men on an equal footing. The reason it is " feminism " rather than " equalitism " is because we still live in a society where women are treated as second class. Such treatment has always

been accepted by some women, but the fact that they accept it does not make it acceptable.If PETA used scantily clad men having sex with vegetables, alongside the women, then the feminist argument would work just fine. However, while PETA

continue to use a sexist base for their advertising and continue to demean women and treat them as sexual objects purely for the titilation of men, it is not possible to support them from a feminist standpoint.

I find it quite odd that you use the term " third wave feminsim " to support sexism. Third wave feminism is usually linked to aspects of queer theory and transgender concepts. A core element of it is rejection of

heteronormative gender dualities... . by using women only in the advertisement, PETA are perpetuating the very stereotypes that third wave feminism seeks to challenge and remove from society.Perhaps you're more of a " fourth wave feminist " ?

BBPeter

- " whitty__ " <ravenwolf18@ >

<@gro ups.com>Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:11 PM Re: PETA commercial offensive

> Peter,>> I think I prefaced my first comment by labeling myself as a third-wave> feminist; feminism isn't a cut-and-dried field any more. I find it> empowering that the women in the ad are uninhibited. I'm sure they're

> also very well financially reimbursed for the few seconds they're on> film. I believe it's more subjective than anything--you bring to it> what you will.>> I understand others have their own opinions, however, and I validate

> them. Everyone just brings their own reality to the table.>> Whitty>> @gro ups.com, " Peter " <metalscarab@ ...> wrote:

>>>> Hi Whitty>>>> > I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed

it--> but>> > then again I'm a third-wave feminist>>>> Interesting. .. most feminists find the objectification of women for> male>> pleasure to be objectionable rather than humorous!

>>>> BB>> Peter>>>>>>> ------------ --------- --------- ------

>> To send an email to > -unsubscr ibe

February 12, 2009

I said that I don't know anyone who supports PETA or thinks that they do a good job. I didn't say there weren't any at all. I did say that everyone I have spoken to about PETA has a very bad opinion of the group. Mostly they laugh at PETA as if it is pathetic or ridiculous. Make of that what you will. If it is big in America and one of your favourite groups, I am sorry that you are offended, but that is the way it is in this neck of the woods.

Jo

-

Blake Wilson

Thursday, February 12, 2009 3:26 PM

Re: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Well, I don't know anyone who calls cookies biscuits, or elevators lifts...so no one does, eh? I only know a handful of people who voted for McCain, out of the hundreds I know, but somehow he got 47% of the vote. Kidding aside, how's this for an explanation of PETA's obviously lack of appreciation in the UK: Animal rights in general is more of an "issue" in the US so more people are involved and it has greater exposure. And there are more vegetarians (by sheer quantity) in the US so therefore more people support a high profile organization that speaks for them and the issues they face in their own country. Since PETA mostly does its work in the US, its impact would logically be limited by its borders. I'm sure they would like to change that, but from the opposition we've seen here, that's not likely. When I was growing up in the early 80s we heard about UK groups like Hunt Sabateurs, which had absolutely no relevance to us in Southern California. PETA's impact may simply not be relevant to you folks. Just a thought to explain the obvious international disparity here....Blake

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:41 AM, Peter <metalscarab > wrote:

Hi Blake

I haven't conducted a Poll, but as ex President of the University of Bristol Vegan society, and current Treasurer of the same society, I am aware of the opinions of well over 300 vegans and vegetarians in my area... I don't know a single one who thinks PETA is a good advertisement for vegetarianism or animal rights.

But then most of the vegetarians and vegans I know tend to think about issues rather than just accept what an organisation tells them, and therefore tend to dislike PETA for their poor research before conducting campaigns.

BB

Peter

-

Blake Wilson

Thursday, February 12, 2009 5:23 AM

Re: Re: PETA commercial offensive

So Jo you speak for the entire UK on all things PETA? Is there poll to back up your statement, or are you basing thison your experiences and conversations with other people? As Pauline Kael (film critic for the New York Times) once wrote, disbelieving the outcome of the Nixon-McGovern election of 1972, "Nixon can't have won; no one I know voted for him."Blake

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:48 PM, jo.heartwork <jo.heartwork > wrote:

Why do you feel empowered? Do you not feel empowered in your normal life without having to be stimulated by a weird advert? Surely they should be doing the advert because they are vegans who think that the advert will help to convert people to veganism, or am I just too idealistic?

I still say that, in this country at least, PETA is looked on as a ridiculous group, and have no credibility at all. I don;t think they will gain that credibility and respect unless they change their tactics. There must be ways of attracting attention without alienating a lot of people who do not like that sort of public display of sexuality.

Jo

-

whitty__

Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:11 PM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

Peter,I think I prefaced my first comment by labeling myself as a third-wave feminist; feminism isn't a cut-and-dried field any more. I find it empowering that the women in the ad are uninhibited. I'm sure they're also very well financially reimbursed for the few seconds they're on film. I believe it's more subjective than anything--you bring to it what you will.I understand others have their own opinions, however, and I validate them. Everyone just brings their own reality to the table.Whitty , "Peter" <metalscarab wrote:>> Hi Whitty> > > I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--but> > then again I'm a third-wave feminist> > Interesting... most feminists find the objectification of women for male > pleasure to be objectionable rather than humorous!> > BB> Peter>

February 12, 2009

I have said before 'nice' is a nice word.

Jo

-

Blake Wilson

Thursday, February 12, 2009 6:22 PM

Re: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Thanks Peter. Hopefully I come across a little better when I lay off the sarcasm and insults. As you'd think anyone would, eh? Our minister usually leaves us with a word or two to think about during the week. A couple of weeks ago it was:"Be nice". B.

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Peter VV <swpgh01 (AT) talk21 (DOT) com> wrote:

Interesting thought Blake, I can see where you are coming from...............

Peter vv

Blake Wilson <mbw

Sent: Thursday, 12 February, 2009 3:42:12 PMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Part of the liberation (of any group) is the appropriation of the images and language of oppression for themselves. Look at the use of the word "queer" by homosexuals and "n*****" by blacks, or the vast amount of erotica/pornography created by women. Racism/sexism isn't defined by surface images and obvious implications. Its about intent, context, and power. If you think the good folks at PETA, who I guarantee you include plenty of feminists of all waves, are "demeaning women" by treating them as "sexual objects purely for the titilation of men", you are, in my opinion, missing the point because you're blinded by the immediate impact of the ad and your conditioned response to erotic images of women ("oh, scantily clad women! this is sexist!"). And you just don't like PETA in the first place, so very little (if any) of their work will have any appeal to you because of this barrier. Just a thought. Blake

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Peter <metalscarab@ gmail.com> wrote:

Hi WhittyThe point of feminism is to recognise women and men on an equal footing. The reason it is "feminism" rather than "equalitism" is because we still live in a society where women are treated as second class. Such treatment has always been accepted by some women, but the fact that they accept it does not make it acceptable.If PETA used scantily clad men having sex with vegetables, alongside the women, then the feminist argument would work just fine. However, while PETA continue to use a sexist base for their advertising and continue to demean women and treat them as sexual objects purely for the titilation of men, it is not possible to support them from a feminist standpoint.I find it quite odd that you use the term "third wave feminsim" to support sexism. Third wave feminism is usually linked to aspects of queer theory and transgender concepts. A core element of it is rejection of heteronormative gender dualities... . by using women only in the advertisement, PETA are perpetuating the very stereotypes that third wave feminism seeks to challenge and remove from society.Perhaps you're more of a "fourth wave feminist"?BBPeter

- "whitty__" <ravenwolf18@ >

<@gro ups.com>Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:11 PM Re: PETA commercial offensive

> Peter,>> I think I prefaced my first comment by labeling myself as a third-wave> feminist; feminism isn't a cut-and-dried field any more. I find it> empowering that the women in the ad are uninhibited. I'm sure they're> also very well financially reimbursed for the few seconds they're on> film. I believe it's more subjective than anything--you bring to it> what you will.>> I understand others have their own opinions, however, and I validate> them. Everyone just brings their own reality to the table.>> Whitty>

> @gro ups.com, "Peter" <metalscarab@ ...> wrote:>>>> Hi Whitty>>>> > I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--> but>> > then again I'm a third-wave feminist>>>> Interesting. .. most feminists find the objectification of women for> male>> pleasure to be objectionable rather than humorous!>>>> BB>> Peter>>>>>>

> ------------ --------- --------- ------ >> To send an email to > -unsubscr ibe

February 12, 2009

Hi Peter

Oh, thanks. I didn't know anything about these things.

BBJo

-

Peter

Thursday, February 12, 2009 10:47 AM

Re: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Hi JoAt least around Bristol they do... what Americans call "third wave feminism", we call "queer mutiny". But that's probably more down to the fact of the origins in each area: in Europe the core theories which informed it were referred to as "queer theory". When they adopted those concepts in America they used the term "third wave feminism", largely, I gather, because those people involved had been heavily involved in active feminism throughout the 70s and early 80s. While the American version came from people who had been actively involved in feminism, the European came out of those who had already abandoned feminism due to what they saw as flaws in continuing to divide gender and create a "war" between non-sensical gender based lines.BBPeter- "heartwerk" <jo.heartwork >Thursday, February 12, 2009 7:38 AM Re: PETA commercial offensive> It's strange how a movement uses the same name as a previous movement> and yet has very little of the same ideals. That is not a criticism,> just an observation. I often wonder why the new groups don't use> entirely different names to suit their ideals.>> Jo>> , "whitty__" <ravenwolf18 wrote:>>>> Third-wave feminism has roots in the post-punk culture of the 80s,> but>> isn't associated exclusively with punk. It would take too many> posts>> to go into all of the nuances, but it is most definitely a real>> feminist movement here in the U.S.--much to the chagrin of some of> the>> second-wave feminists. Not sure if it's made it over the> Atlantic.>> Have you seen the television series "Sex in the City"? The main>> characters would definitely qualify as third-wave feminists.>> Anyhoo...>>>> , "jo.heartwork" <jo.heartwork@>>> wrote:>> >>> > I agree. I was trying to work out what a third-wave feminist is ->>> or if it is actually anything to do with feminism. I believe we're> on>> third-generation punk here - but it is nothing like punk - so maybe>> the same applies to the latest 'feminism'.>> >>> > BB>> > Jo>>>>>>> --->> To send an email to > -

February 12, 2009

Nice is good,

Just being positive, is a bonus, so many people are negative these days, you seldom hear, In my opinion, or personally I belive, its all...your wrong, or thats rubbish. We all have differing opinions, we should remember thats what they are, unless we are talking about heavily researched data, and can produce it.........

Peter vv

Blake Wilson <mbw Sent: Thursday, 12 February, 2009 6:22:45 PMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Thanks Peter. Hopefully I come across a little better when I lay off the sarcasm and insults. As you'd think anyone would, eh? Our minister usually leaves us with a word or two to think about during the week. A couple of weeks ago it was:"Be nice". B.

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Peter VV <swpgh01 (AT) talk21 (DOT) com> wrote:

Interesting thought Blake, I can see where you are coming from........ .......

Peter vv

Blake Wilson <mbw

@gro ups.comThursday, 12 February, 2009 3:42:12 PMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Part of the liberation (of any group) is the appropriation of the images and language of oppression for themselves. Look at the use of the word "queer" by homosexuals and "n*****" by blacks, or the vast amount of erotica/pornography created by women. Racism/sexism isn't defined by surface images and obvious implications. Its about intent, context, and power. If you think the good folks at PETA, who I guarantee you include plenty of feminists of all waves, are "demeaning women" by treating them as "sexual objects purely for the titilation of men", you are, in my opinion, missing the point because you're blinded by the immediate impact of the ad and your conditioned response to erotic images of women ("oh, scantily clad women! this is sexist!"). And you just don't like PETA in the first place, so very little (if any) of their work will have any appeal to you because of this barrier. Just a thought.

Blake

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Peter <metalscarab@ gmail.com> wrote:

Hi WhittyThe point of feminism is to recognise women and men on an equal footing. The reason it is "feminism" rather than "equalitism" is because we still live in a society where women are treated as second class. Such treatment has always been accepted by some women, but the fact that they accept it does not make it acceptable.If PETA used scantily clad men having sex with vegetables, alongside the women, then the feminist argument would work just fine. However, while PETA continue to use a sexist base for their advertising and continue to demean women and treat them as sexual objects purely for the titilation of men, it is not possible to support them from a feminist standpoint.I find it quite odd that you use the term "third wave feminsim" to support sexism. Third wave feminism is usually linked to aspects of queer theory and transgender concepts. A core element of it is rejection of

heteronormative gender dualities... . by using women only in the advertisement, PETA are perpetuating the very stereotypes that third wave feminism seeks to challenge and remove from society.Perhaps you're more of a "fourth wave feminist"?BBPeter

- "whitty__" <ravenwolf18@ >

<@gro ups.com>Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:11 PM Re: PETA commercial offensive

> Peter,>> I think I prefaced my first comment by labeling myself as a third-wave> feminist; feminism isn't a cut-and-dried field any more. I find it> empowering that the women in the ad are uninhibited. I'm sure they're> also very well financially reimbursed for the few seconds they're on> film. I believe it's more subjective than anything--you bring to it> what you will.>> I understand others have their own opinions, however, and I validate> them. Everyone just brings their own reality to the table.>> Whitty>

> @gro ups.com, "Peter" <metalscarab@ ...> wrote:>>>> Hi Whitty>>>> > I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--> but>> > then again I'm a third-wave feminist>>>> Interesting. .. most feminists find the objectification of women for> male>> pleasure to be objectionable rather than humorous!>>>> BB>> Peter>>>>>>

> ------------ --------- --------- ------ >> To send an email to > -unsubscr ibe

February 12, 2009

I certainly fall into negativistic traps. I'd like to get out of them. B. On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:

Nice is good,

Just being positive, is a bonus, so many people are negative these days, you seldom hear, In my opinion, or personally I belive, its all...your wrong, or thats rubbish. We all have differing opinions, we should remember thats what they are, unless we are talking about heavily researched data, and can produce it.........

Peter vv

February 12, 2009

ï»¿

I do so agree with you Peter - which is why I say when it is research or opinion of mine or those I know. Obviously, I expect the same of others.

Jo

-

Peter VV

Thursday, February 12, 2009 7:59 PM

Re: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Nice is good,

Just being positive, is a bonus, so many people are negative these days, you seldom hear, In my opinion, or personally I belive, its all...your wrong, or thats rubbish. We all have differing opinions, we should remember thats what they are, unless we are talking about heavily researched data, and can produce it.........

Peter vv

Blake Wilson <mbw Sent: Thursday, 12 February, 2009 6:22:45 PMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Thanks Peter. Hopefully I come across a little better when I lay off the sarcasm and insults. As you'd think anyone would, eh? Our minister usually leaves us with a word or two to think about during the week. A couple of weeks ago it was:"Be nice". B.

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Peter VV <swpgh01 (AT) talk21 (DOT) com> wrote:

Interesting thought Blake, I can see where you are coming from........ .......

Peter vv

Blake Wilson <mbw

@gro ups.comThursday, 12 February, 2009 3:42:12 PMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Part of the liberation (of any group) is the appropriation of the images and language of oppression for themselves. Look at the use of the word "queer" by homosexuals and "n*****" by blacks, or the vast amount of erotica/pornography created by women. Racism/sexism isn't defined by surface images and obvious implications. Its about intent, context, and power. If you think the good folks at PETA, who I guarantee you include plenty of feminists of all waves, are "demeaning women" by treating them as "sexual objects purely for the titilation of men", you are, in my opinion, missing the point because you're blinded by the immediate impact of the ad and your conditioned response to erotic images of women ("oh, scantily clad women! this is sexist!"). And you just don't like PETA in the first place, so very little (if any) of their work will have any appeal to you because of this barrier. Just a thought. Blake

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Peter <metalscarab@ gmail.com> wrote:

Hi WhittyThe point of feminism is to recognise women and men on an equal footing. The reason it is "feminism" rather than "equalitism" is because we still live in a society where women are treated as second class. Such treatment has always been accepted by some women, but the fact that they accept it does not make it acceptable.If PETA used scantily clad men having sex with vegetables, alongside the women, then the feminist argument would work just fine. However, while PETA continue to use a sexist base for their advertising and continue to demean women and treat them as sexual objects purely for the titilation of men, it is not possible to support them from a feminist standpoint.I find it quite odd that you use the term "third wave feminsim" to support sexism. Third wave feminism is usually linked to aspects of queer theory and transgender concepts. A core element of it is rejection of heteronormative gender dualities... . by using women only in the advertisement, PETA are perpetuating the very stereotypes that third wave feminism seeks to challenge and remove from society.Perhaps you're more of a "fourth wave feminist"?BBPeter

- "whitty__" <ravenwolf18@ >

<@gro ups.com>Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:11 PM Re: PETA commercial offensive

> Peter,>> I think I prefaced my first comment by labeling myself as a third-wave> feminist; feminism isn't a cut-and-dried field any more. I find it> empowering that the women in the ad are uninhibited. I'm sure they're> also very well financially reimbursed for the few seconds they're on> film. I believe it's more subjective than anything--you bring to it> what you will.>> I understand others have their own opinions, however, and I validate> them. Everyone just brings their own reality to the table.>> Whitty>

> @gro ups.com, "Peter" <metalscarab@ ...> wrote:>>>> Hi Whitty>>>> > I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--> but>> > then again I'm a third-wave feminist>>>> Interesting. .. most feminists find the objectification of women for> male>> pleasure to be objectionable rather than humorous!>>>> BB>> Peter>>>>>>

> ------------ --------- --------- ------ >> To send an email to > -unsubscr ibe

February 12, 2009

hi... whitty...?... nice to hear your voice of reason amid the wailing...i too support peta for even the small steps they do achieve... we are not all brilliant and pure...;-)

here is another of their very small victories to be shredded for those that care...

small steps lead a long way... criticism seldom anywhere....PETA: Quiznos adopts new animal-welfare policyby Sara Gandy http://www.9news.com/money/article.aspx?storyid=109637 & catid=344DENVER (AP) - Animal-rights activists say Quiznos has agreed to a new animal-welfare policy for the eggs, pork and turkey it buys.AdvertisementPeople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said Tuesday it worked out the agreement with the Denver-based sandwich chain. A Quiznos executive didn't immediately return a phone message.PETA says Quiznos will buy more eggs from cage-free chickens, more pork raised in crate-free environments and more turkeys that are killed using a method that PETA described as more humane.The changes will be phased in.PETA Vice President Bruce Friedrich says his group still prefers that diners buy Quiznos' vegetarian sandwich but he praised the chain for the new standards.

lovelife...

colin sky

-

whitty__

Wednesday, February 11, 2009 5:27 AM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

Peter, I have family in Green Bay, so you pulled me into this topic, albeit late. I think that some types of people get incensed easily over what they consider "moral" issues, especially in the heartland of America. I personally think that Americans are more than a tad prudish and censor things that can seem a bit ridiculous in hindsight. It seems to me that we could do with a little more sexually suggestive innuendos in popular American culture if it would remove the pedestal of moral superiority we tend to enjoy standing on all the time.I also think that PETA knew darn well that the commercial wouldn't be aired (they've had suggestive ads banned before), but they were also keenly aware that all of the hype and moral outrage would give them more airtime in the world forum--regardless of whether or not it was aired on television. I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--but then again I'm a third-wave feminist with a stomach for wry and biting humor. My conservative friends were "embarrassed" by it when they viewed it on my Facebook page--but, they viewed the whole darn thing before they reacted to it, so the message was delivered whether they liked it or not. Even if they won't give up their hamburgers, subconsciously they will now equate vegetarians with virility, and that's not such a bad thing. , Peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:>> Anyone here from Green Bay? this person is, and this is their point of view :> GREEN BAY â€" This is an open letter to PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). In the past, I applauded organizations whose focus and efforts were directed at stopping inhumane treatment of animals, especially pets.> However, I am totally disgusted and morally outraged with your noisome "veggie love" commercial. Not only do you portray this food group in a virulent sexually arousing manner, but exploit women and degrade their bodies in the process.> Did PETA truly believe any positive feedback, financial support, or conversion of meat-lovers would be forthcoming after this scurrilous commercial? Who, exactly, was your target audience? Does anyone at PETA have children who watch TV?> Credit is due NBC for their perspicacious call to pull this ad from the Super Bowl knowing families would be incensed. After reading numerous online blogs, it appears you've managed to repulse and alienate PETA members and nonmembers alike. If the point of this commercial was to attract attention to your cause, you succeeded by drawing attention to PETA, a very perverse and bizarre organization. If the purpose was to promote a vegan-type lifestyle, your pornographic vegetables proved a failure.> Sherry Kralovetz-Puce> Â > Peter vv> ,_._,___>

February 13, 2009

Colin

We are all allowed to express opinions on this list. It is unacceptable to be rude simply because you disagree with those opinions. Please try to be less immature with your responses in future, and don't insult people just because you disagree with them

Peter

-

colin sky

Thursday, February 12, 2009 11:17 PM

Re: Re: PETA commercial offensive

hi... whitty...?... nice to hear your voice of reason amid the wailing...i too support peta for even the small steps they do achieve... we are not all brilliant and pure...;-)

here is another of their very small victories to be shredded for those that care...

small steps lead a long way... criticism seldom anywhere....PETA: Quiznos adopts new animal-welfare policyby Sara Gandy http://www.9news.com/money/article.aspx?storyid=109637 & catid=344DENVER (AP) - Animal-rights activists say Quiznos has agreed to a new animal-welfare policy for the eggs, pork and turkey it buys.AdvertisementPeople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said Tuesday it worked out the agreement with the Denver-based sandwich chain. A Quiznos executive didn't immediately return a phone message.PETA says Quiznos will buy more eggs from cage-free chickens, more pork raised in crate-free environments and more turkeys that are killed using a method that PETA described as more humane.The changes will be phased in.PETA Vice President Bruce Friedrich says his group still prefers that diners buy Quiznos' vegetarian sandwich but he praised the chain for the new standards.

lovelife...

colin sky

-

whitty__

Wednesday, February 11, 2009 5:27 AM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

Peter, I have family in Green Bay, so you pulled me into this topic, albeit late. I think that some types of people get incensed easily over what they consider "moral" issues, especially in the heartland of America. I personally think that Americans are more than a tad prudish and censor things that can seem a bit ridiculous in hindsight. It seems to me that we could do with a little more sexually suggestive innuendos in popular American culture if it would remove the pedestal of moral superiority we tend to enjoy standing on all the time.I also think that PETA knew darn well that the commercial wouldn't be aired (they've had suggestive ads banned before), but they were also keenly aware that all of the hype and moral outrage would give them more airtime in the world forum--regardless of whether or not it was aired on television. I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--but then again I'm a third-wave feminist with a stomach for wry and biting humor. My conservative friends were "embarrassed" by it when they viewed it on my Facebook page--but, they viewed the whole darn thing before they reacted to it, so the message was delivered whether they liked it or not. Even if they won't give up their hamburgers, subconsciously they will now equate vegetarians with virility, and that's not such a bad thing. , Peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:>> Anyone here from Green Bay? this person is, and this is their point of view :> GREEN BAY â€" This is an open letter to PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). In the past, I applauded organizations whose focus and efforts were directed at stopping inhumane treatment of animals, especially pets.> However, I am totally disgusted and morally outraged with your noisome "veggie love" commercial. Not only do you portray this food group in a virulent sexually arousing manner, but exploit women and degrade their bodies in the process.> Did PETA truly believe any positive feedback, financial support, or conversion of meat-lovers would be forthcoming after this scurrilous commercial? Who, exactly, was your target audience? Does anyone at PETA have children who watch TV?> Credit is due NBC for their perspicacious call to pull this ad from the Super Bowl knowing families would be incensed. After reading numerous online blogs, it appears you've managed to repulse and alienate PETA members and nonmembers alike. If the point of this commercial was to attract attention to your cause, you succeeded by drawing attention to PETA, a very perverse and bizarre organization. If the purpose was to promote a vegan-type lifestyle, your pornographic vegetables proved a failure.> Sherry Kralovetz-Puce> Â > Peter vv> ,_._,___>

February 13, 2009

Ok, negativistic PETA haters on this list:I challenge you to say anything remotely negative about this acheivement. particularly in the UK. there. go. have fun. blake ps: if you somehow think PETAs efforts in this issue is " bad taste " or " sexist " you seriously have a wacky pre programmed issue stuck up your ass.

blake On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 4:17 PM, colin sky <colinsky wrote:

hi... whitty...?... nice to hear your voice of reason amid the wailing...i too support peta for even the small steps they do achieve... we are not all brilliant and pure...;-)

here is another of their very small victories to be shredded for those that care...

small steps lead a long way... criticism seldom anywhere....PETA: Quiznos adopts new animal-welfare policyby Sara Gandy http://www.9news.com/money/article.aspx?storyid=109637 & catid=344DENVER (AP) - Animal-rights activists say Quiznos has agreed to a new animal-welfare policy for the eggs, pork and turkey it buys.AdvertisementPeople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said Tuesday it worked out the agreement with the Denver-based sandwich chain. A Quiznos executive didn't immediately return a phone message.PETA says Quiznos will buy more eggs from cage-free chickens, more pork raised in crate-free environments and more turkeys that are killed using a method that PETA described as more humane.The changes will be phased in.PETA Vice President Bruce Friedrich says his group still prefers that diners buy Quiznos' vegetarian sandwich but he praised the chain for the new standards.

lovelife...

colin sky

-

whitty__

Wednesday, February 11, 2009 5:27 AM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

Peter, I have family in Green Bay, so you pulled me into this topic, albeit late. I think that some types of people get incensed easily over what they consider " moral " issues, especially in the heartland of America. I personally think that Americans are more than a tad prudish and censor things that can seem a bit ridiculous in hindsight. It seems to me that we could do with a little more sexually suggestive innuendos in popular American culture if it would remove the pedestal of moral superiority we tend to enjoy standing on all the time.I also think that PETA knew darn well that the commercial wouldn't be aired (they've had suggestive ads banned before), but they were also keenly aware that all of the hype and moral outrage would give them more airtime in the world forum--regardless of whether or not it was aired on television. I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--but then again I'm a third-wave feminist with a stomach for wry and biting humor. My conservative friends were " embarrassed " by it when they viewed it on my Facebook page--but, they viewed the whole darn thing before they reacted to it, so the message was delivered whether they liked it or not. Even if they won't give up their hamburgers, subconsciously they will now equate vegetarians with virility, and that's not such a bad thing. , Peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:>> Anyone here from Green Bay? this person is, and this is their point of view :> GREEN BAY â€ " This is an open letter to PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). In the past, I applauded organizations whose focus and efforts were directed at stopping inhumane treatment of animals, especially pets.> However, I am totally disgusted and morally outraged with your noisome " veggie love " commercial. Not only do you portray this food group in a virulent sexually arousing manner, but exploit women and degrade their bodies in the process.> Did PETA truly believe any positive feedback, financial support, or conversion of meat-lovers would be forthcoming after this scurrilous commercial? Who, exactly, was your target audience? Does anyone at PETA have children who watch TV?> Credit is due NBC for their perspicacious call to pull this ad from the Super Bowl knowing families would be incensed. After reading numerous online blogs, it appears you've managed to repulse and alienate PETA members and nonmembers alike. If the point of this commercial was to attract attention to your cause, you succeeded by drawing attention to PETA, a very perverse and bizarre organization. If the purpose was to promote a vegan-type lifestyle, your pornographic vegetables proved a failure.> Sherry Kralovetz-Puce> Â > Peter vv> ,_._,___>

February 13, 2009

I would like to apologise to the list for not having put Blake on moderation after his previous rude e-mail. I assumed he would have had the sense to take note when a moderator told him to stop being rude. Rest assured that this has now been corrected, and no more rude e-mails from Blake will make it to the list.

Blake - to clarify the one simple rule we have on this list: keep it polite. If you continue to be unnecessarily rude you will find yourself removed from the list without further warning.Peter

February 13, 2009

Hi Peter,

I'm a little surprised at how firmly confident everyone is about what

my definition of feminism should or shouldn't be. Of course I'm not

advocating sexism, however I think there is more than one way to view

a pro-veggie ad with women in it. You're arguing from a second-wave

feminism perspective and I understand the argument and the pros/cons

of both.

I'm a little hesitant to divert the conversation away from vegan

issues, but I'm confident in my understanding of feminism. One of my

majors in graduate school was Women's Studies and last I checked my

personal philosophical and world view, I was still a third-wave

feminist. Really. Not making this stuff up, I promise.

, " Peter " <metalscarab wrote:

>

> Hi Whitty

>

> The point of feminism is to recognise women and men on an equal

footing. The

> reason it is " feminism " rather than " equalitism " is because we

still live in

> a society where women are treated as second class. Such treatment

has always

> been accepted by some women, but the fact that they accept it does

not make

> it acceptable.

>

> If PETA used scantily clad men having sex with vegetables,

alongside the

> women, then the feminist argument would work just fine. However,

while PETA

> continue to use a sexist base for their advertising and continue to

demean

> women and treat them as sexual objects purely for the titilation of

men, it

> is not possible to support them from a feminist standpoint.

>

> I find it quite odd that you use the term " third wave feminsim " to

support

> sexism. Third wave feminism is usually linked to aspects of queer

theory and

> transgender concepts. A core element of it is rejection of

heteronormative

> gender dualities.... by using women only in the advertisement, PETA

are

> perpetuating the very stereotypes that third wave feminism seeks to

> challenge and remove from society.

>

> Perhaps you're more of a " fourth wave feminist " ?

>

> BB

> Peter

February 13, 2009

Peter,

Did I miss something?

I didnt see a rude post?

Anyone on here offended? or is this just a moderator, not being moderate? or did I miss something?

Peter vv

Peter Kebbell <metalscarab Sent: Friday, 13 February, 2009 2:53:14 PMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

I would like to apologise to the list for not having put Blake on moderation after his previous rude e-mail. I assumed he would have had the sense to take note when a moderator told him to stop being rude. Rest assured that this has now been corrected, and no more rude e-mails from Blake will make it to the list.Blake - to clarify the one simple rule we have on this list: keep it polite. If you continue to be unnecessarily rude you will find yourself removed from the list without further warning.Peter

February 13, 2009

I see nowt wrong with that, a step in the right direction.

I am pleased to announce that there is nothing programmed or otherwise stuck up my ass!

Peter vv

Blake Wilson <mbw Sent: Friday, 13 February, 2009 8:57:19 AMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Ok, negativistic PETA haters on this list:I challenge you to say anything remotely negative about this acheivement. particularly in the UK. there. go. have fun. blake ps: if you somehow think PETAs efforts in this issue is "bad taste" or "sexist" you seriously have a wacky pre programmed issue stuck up your ass. blake

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 4:17 PM, colin sky <colinsky (AT) ihug (DOT) co.nz> wrote:

hi... whitty...?.. . nice to hear your voice of reason amid the wailing...i too support peta for even the small steps they do achieve... we are not all brilliant and pure...;-)

here is another of their very small victories to be shredded for those that care...

small steps lead a long way... criticism seldom anywhere....PETA: Quiznos adopts new animal-welfare policyby Sara Gandy http://www.9news. com/money/ article.aspx? storyid=109637 & catid=344DENVER (AP) - Animal-rights activists say Quiznos has agreed to a new animal-welfare policy for the eggs, pork and turkey it buys.AdvertisementPeople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said Tuesday it worked out the agreement with the Denver-based sandwich chain. A Quiznos executive didn't immediately return a phone message.PETA says Quiznos will buy more eggs from cage-free chickens, more pork raised in crate-free environments and more turkeys that are killed using a method that PETA described as more humane.The changes will be phased in.PETA Vice President Bruce Friedrich says his group still prefers that

diners buy Quiznos' vegetarian sandwich but he praised the chain for the new standards.

lovelife...

colin sky

-

whitty__

@gro ups.com

Wednesday, February 11, 2009 5:27 AM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

Peter, I have family in Green Bay, so you pulled me into this topic, albeit late. I think that some types of people get incensed easily over what they consider "moral" issues, especially in the heartland of America. I personally think that Americans are more than a tad prudish and censor things that can seem a bit ridiculous in hindsight. It seems to me that we could do with a little more sexually suggestive innuendos in popular American culture if it would remove the pedestal of moral superiority we tend to enjoy standing on all the time.I also think that PETA knew darn well that the commercial wouldn't be aired (they've had suggestive ads banned before), but they were also keenly aware that all of the hype and moral outrage would give them more airtime in the world forum--regardless of whether or not it was aired on television.

I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I viewed it--but then again I'm a third-wave feminist with a stomach for wry and biting humor. My conservative friends were "embarrassed" by it when they viewed it on my Facebook page--but, they viewed the whole darn thing before they reacted to it, so the message was delivered whether they liked it or not. Even if they won't give up their hamburgers,

subconsciously they will now equate vegetarians with virility, and that's not such a bad thing. @gro ups.com, Peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:>> Anyone here from Green Bay? this person is, and this is their point of view :> GREEN BAY Ã¢â‚¬" This is an open letter to PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). In the past, I applauded organizations whose focus and efforts were directed at stopping inhumane treatment of animals, especially pets.> However, I am totally disgusted and morally outraged with your noisome "veggie love" commercial. Not only do you portray this food group in a virulent sexually arousing manner, but exploit women and degrade their bodies in the process.> Did PETA truly believe

any positive feedback, financial support, or conversion of meat-lovers would be forthcoming after this scurrilous commercial? Who, exactly, was your target audience? Does anyone at PETA have children who watch TV?> Credit is due NBC for their perspicacious call to pull this ad from the Super Bowl knowing families would be incensed. After reading numerous online blogs, it appears you've managed to repulse and alienate PETA members and nonmembers alike. If the point of this commercial was to attract attention to your cause, you succeeded by drawing attention to PETA, a very perverse and bizarre organization. If the purpose was to promote a vegan-type lifestyle, your pornographic vegetables proved a failure.> Sherry Kralovetz-Puce> Ã‚ > Peter vv> ,_._,___>

February 13, 2009

Peter,

Telling people to grow up? c,mon?

Peter vv

Peter <metalscarab Sent: Friday, 13 February, 2009 8:29:48 AMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Colin

We are all allowed to express opinions on this list. It is unacceptable to be rude simply because you disagree with those opinions. Please try to be less immature with your responses in future, and don't insult people just because you disagree with them

Peter

-

colin sky

@gro ups.com

Thursday, February 12, 2009 11:17 PM

Re: Re: PETA commercial offensive

hi... whitty...?.. . nice to hear your voice of reason amid the wailing...i too support peta for even the small steps they do achieve... we are not all brilliant and pure...;-)

here is another of their very small victories to be shredded for those that care...

small steps lead a long way... criticism seldom anywhere....PETA: Quiznos adopts new animal-welfare policyby Sara Gandy http://www.9news. com/money/ article.aspx? storyid=109637 & catid=344DENVER (AP) - Animal-rights activists say Quiznos has agreed to a new animal-welfare policy for the eggs, pork and turkey it buys.AdvertisementPeople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said Tuesday it worked out the agreement with the Denver-based sandwich chain. A Quiznos executive didn't immediately return a phone message.PETA says Quiznos will buy more eggs from cage-free chickens, more pork raised in crate-free environments and more turkeys that are killed using a method that PETA described as more humane.The changes will be phased in.PETA Vice President Bruce Friedrich says his group still prefers

that diners buy Quiznos' vegetarian sandwich but he praised the chain for the new standards.

lovelife...

colin sky

-

whitty__

@gro ups.com

Wednesday, February 11, 2009 5:27 AM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

Peter, I have family in Green Bay, so you pulled me into this topic, albeit late. I think that some types of people get incensed easily over what they consider "moral" issues, especially in the heartland of America. I personally think that Americans are more than a tad prudish and censor things that can seem a bit ridiculous in hindsight. It seems to me that we could do with a little more sexually suggestive innuendos in popular American culture if it would remove the pedestal of moral superiority we tend to enjoy standing on all the time.I also think that PETA knew darn well that the commercial wouldn't be aired (they've had suggestive ads banned before), but they were also keenly aware that all of the hype and moral outrage would give them more airtime in the world forum--regardless of whether or not it was aired on television. I think it was brilliant and I laughed outloud when I

viewed it--but then again I'm a third-wave feminist with a stomach for wry and biting humor. My conservative friends were "embarrassed" by it when they viewed it on my Facebook page--but, they viewed the whole darn thing before they reacted to it, so the message was delivered whether they liked it or not. Even if they won't give up their hamburgers, subconsciously they will now equate vegetarians with virility, and that's not such a bad thing. @gro ups.com, Peter VV <swpgh01 > wrote:>> Anyone here from Green Bay? this person is, and this is their point of view :> GREEN BAY Ã¢â‚¬" This is an open letter to PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). In the past, I applauded organizations whose focus and efforts were

directed at stopping inhumane treatment of animals, especially pets.> However, I am totally disgusted and morally outraged with your noisome "veggie love" commercial. Not only do you portray this food group in a virulent sexually arousing manner, but exploit women and degrade their bodies in the process.> Did PETA truly believe any positive feedback, financial support, or conversion of meat-lovers would be forthcoming after this scurrilous commercial? Who, exactly, was your target audience? Does anyone at PETA have children who watch TV?> Credit is due NBC for their perspicacious call to pull this ad from the Super Bowl knowing families would be incensed. After reading numerous online blogs, it appears you've managed to repulse and alienate PETA members and nonmembers alike. If the point of this commercial was to attract attention to your cause, you succeeded by drawing attention to

PETA, a very perverse and bizarre organization. If the purpose was to promote a vegan-type lifestyle, your pornographic vegetables proved a failure.> Sherry Kralovetz-Puce> Ã‚ > Peter vv> ,_._,___>

February 13, 2009

Hi WhittyMerely highlighting what third wave feminism is. I'm intrigued as to how the perpetuation of a gender divide fits into the concepts of queer theory which inform third wave feminism.Incidentally, since we're sharing qualifications, I'm currently researching for a history doctorate, and as part of that I teach undergraduate history - a part of which is gender perspectives throughout history.

BBPeter2009/2/13 whitty__ <ravenwolf18

Hi Peter,

I'm a little surprised at how firmly confident everyone is about what

my definition of feminism should or shouldn't be. Of course I'm not

advocating sexism, however I think there is more than one way to view

a pro-veggie ad with women in it. You're arguing from a second-wave

feminism perspective and I understand the argument and the pros/cons

of both.

I'm a little hesitant to divert the conversation away from vegan

issues, but I'm confident in my understanding of feminism. One of my

majors in graduate school was Women's Studies and last I checked my

personal philosophical and world view, I was still a third-wave

feminist. Really. Not making this stuff up, I promise.

, " Peter " <metalscarab wrote:

>

> Hi Whitty

>

> The point of feminism is to recognise women and men on an equal

footing. The

> reason it is " feminism " rather than " equalitism " is because we

still live in

> a society where women are treated as second class. Such treatment

has always

> been accepted by some women, but the fact that they accept it does

not make

> it acceptable.

>

> If PETA used scantily clad men having sex with vegetables,

alongside the

> women, then the feminist argument would work just fine. However,

while PETA

> continue to use a sexist base for their advertising and continue to

demean

> women and treat them as sexual objects purely for the titilation of

men, it

> is not possible to support them from a feminist standpoint.

>

> I find it quite odd that you use the term " third wave feminsim " to

support

> sexism. Third wave feminism is usually linked to aspects of queer

theory and

> transgender concepts. A core element of it is rejection of

heteronormative

> gender dualities.... by using women only in the advertisement, PETA

are

> perpetuating the very stereotypes that third wave feminism seeks to

> challenge and remove from society.

>

> Perhaps you're more of a " fourth wave feminist " ?

>

> BB

> Peter

---

To send an email to -! Groups Links

<*>

/

<*> Your email settings:

Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:

/join

( ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:

-digest

-fullfeatured

<*>

February 13, 2009

I don't know much about feminism. I don't have the time to read alot.

But I know that I am a feminist or whatever word you want to use

that means equality for all genders.

I know what offends me when I see it. When someone is seen as a

sexual object or perpetuated as such it makes it so much harder

for others of that same gender to be taken seriously.

I don't see why PETA needs to use sex to sell their message. It is a

stupid way to draw attention to themselves. They have done much harm

to the way ommivores think of people who care about animals.

I don't think that people are thinking about how animals suffer when

they see a woman with plastic breasts surgically implanted on her.

I could care less if, I as a vegan, is thought of as beautiful or

sexy. I want the right to be a regular person.

PETA should portray vegans as regular people. Not sexy. Not radicals.

Not weirdos. Just diversified people who care of all ages. Because

that is the truth.

I think that their tatics have damaged people's perception of us. I

would never trow paint at someone's fur coat. There are many, many

other Animal Rights groups that are working hard to make a difference

in the lives of animals. However,they get no attention. Instead

whenever there is an animal issue in the media everyone thinks of

PETA.

I don't like them. They can't even use the word vegan. It's always go

vegetarian. As if veganism is such a dirty word.

When they use sexism in their ads they turn me off. I don't see any

other causes using women with plastic boobs in bikinis to promote

their cause. I boycott them, just like I would in general any sexist

commercial which offends me. I care about equal rights for animals

AND about equal rights for women. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Anouk

, " jo.heartwork " <jo.heartwork

wrote:

>

> I agree. I was trying to work out what a third-wave feminist is -

or if it is actually anything to do with feminism. I believe we're

on third-generation punk here - but it is nothing like punk - so

maybe the same applies to the latest 'feminism'.

>

February 13, 2009

ï»¿

I have only just read the emails (23.10 on Friday) but I don't see any reason for bad language or abusive comments. They could easily could cause offense, and are usually used to try to do so.

Jo

-

Peter VV

Friday, February 13, 2009 5:49 PM

Re: Re: PETA commercial offensive

Peter,

Did I miss something?

I didnt see a rude post?

Anyone on here offended? or is this just a moderator, not being moderate? or did I miss something?

Peter vv

Peter Kebbell <metalscarab > Sent: Friday, 13 February, 2009 2:53:14 PMRe: Re: PETA commercial offensive

I would like to apologise to the list for not having put Blake on moderation after his previous rude e-mail. I assumed he would have had the sense to take note when a moderator told him to stop being rude. Rest assured that this has now been corrected, and no more rude e-mails from Blake will make it to the list.Blake - to clarify the one simple rule we have on this list: keep it polite. If you continue to be unnecessarily rude you will find yourself removed from the list without further warning.Peter

February 13, 2009

Hi Anouk

Thanks for this post - it says what I think, but so much better than I have been able to express it :-)

BBJo

-

flower child

Friday, February 13, 2009 10:59 PM

Re: PETA commercial offensive

I don't know much about feminism. I don't have the time to read alot. But I know that I am a feminist or whatever word you want to use that means equality for all genders.I know what offends me when I see it. When someone is seen as a sexual object or perpetuated as such it makes it so much harder for others of that same gender to be taken seriously.I don't see why PETA needs to use sex to sell their message. It is a stupid way to draw attention to themselves. They have done much harm to the way ommivores think of people who care about animals. I don't think that people are thinking about how animals suffer when they see a woman with plastic breasts surgically implanted on her. I could care less if, I as a vegan, is thought of as beautiful or sexy. I want the right to be a regular person.PETA should portray vegans as regular people. Not sexy. Not radicals. Not weirdos. Just diversified people who care of all ages. Because that is the truth. I think that their tatics have damaged people's perception of us. I would never trow paint at someone's fur coat. There are many, many other Animal Rights groups that are working hard to make a difference in the lives of animals. However,they get no attention. Instead whenever there is an animal issue in the media everyone thinks of PETA. I don't like them. They can't even use the word vegan. It's always go vegetarian. As if veganism is such a dirty word. When they use sexism in their ads they turn me off. I don't see any other causes using women with plastic boobs in bikinis to promote their cause. I boycott them, just like I would in general any sexist commercial which offends me. I care about equal rights for animals AND about equal rights for women. Two wrongs don't make a right. Anouk , "jo.heartwork" <jo.heartwork wrote:>> I agree. I was trying to work out what a third-wave feminist is - or if it is actually anything to do with feminism. I believe we're on third-generation punk here - but it is nothing like punk - so maybe the same applies to the latest 'feminism'.>

Sign In

PETA commercial offensive

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest