PETA offers Up Another Few Doses of Misogyny in the Name of Animal Welfare.

Okay, PETA, seriously. Enough is enough.

I remember sitting in a women’s studies class almost seven years ago looking at a PETA ad that objectified women and having a very in-depth discussion about why this was a very concerning practice for a so-called progressive or left-leaning organization. (for yet another look at an organization that claims to be left-leaning but also includes misogyny as a regular business practice, see this post). I’m pretty sure I even remember there being letter writing campaigns… some sort of organized response… And yet PETA continues to astound me with their incredibly objectifying ads. Why is it that sexism seems to be the last frontier? The message from PETA is alarmingly clear – it’s okay to objectify women and treat them like you treat the animals we’re trying to save, as long as you stop treating animals like that.

The first such ad from their recent releases featured Alicia Silverstone naked emerging from a pool talking about not eating animals. (She is, as I said, naked, and a feast for the eyes – yes, please do pay very close attention to the disturbing, often overlooked, similarities in wording between the phrases used to talk about women and those used to talk about the animals that are consumed.) If you click on the link above to the PETA site about the ad, you will also notice some very submissive shots of Alicia around the page. I think it is amazing that we have stars who are speaking out about animal rights and about the importance of eliminating animal products from out diets. I am, however, dreadfully ashamed about PETA's insistence on using women's bodies to sell that idea the same way corporations use women's bodies to sell products. Ironically, it appears that Texas has pulled the ad - presumably due to it being a bit indecent. I may not agree with their reasons, but I do agree that this ad should be pulled.

The next ad released was about the ABCs of animal birth control. Now, I know what you are thinking, "The ABCs? So, it's going to be modeled after an elementary school classroom or something simple like that..." Not even close. Well, maybe it is close if you are a hormonal adolescent having sexual fantasies during class. For this ad, we have the illustrious Dita Von Teese (seriously, I couldn't make this up). The LA Times may have captured it best with their opening paragraph about the ad:


A new ad features burlesque queen Dita Von Teese as the teacher of every schoolboy's dreams: She's cinched in by a powder-pink corset, wearing stilettos and fishnet stockings -- and well aware of the effect she's having on the apt pupil sitting at her feet.

I don't even feel like I should have to comment about why that's wrong, it is wrong on too many levels. This is a woman who has apparently been in Playboy and other similarly progressive (yes, that is sarcasm) publications. We cannot continue to let organizations that are based on the rights of one group (animal or human) exploit other groups to further their cause. I am a vegetarian and have been for almost 5 years now. I consider it a very important part of my life and part of a progressive belief system that will lead us all to a better world. Treating women as sex objects does not fit into that worldview.

PETA's contact info proved as elusive as their sense of morality, but you can find some of the options here. I'm going to read over said options myself so I know where to send my thoughts... There is a spot to report cruelty to animals. Since humans technically are animals, I suggest using that link and explain to them all about this evil organization that is using animals in horrendous ways and saying it's for a good cause. PETA will love that.

Oh, and if you haven't already done so, please read Carol Adams' The Sexual Politics of Meat. I've mentioned it before and will continue to do so until everyone, including PETA, reads it.

American Politics

Okay, here's the truth: Our political system is devastated. It is certainly a far cry from what it was meant to be and anyone who is not part of the mega-wealthy elite knows that an average citizen's say in the process is minimal at best. The rogue administration is set on making decisions as it will - the constitution and public opinion be damned. (And really, after the American public put the Shrub in office, they did prove that they are not the brightest so why should even the Shrub himself trust our opinion?) Bush has even gone so far as to admit that he doesn't take public opinion into account when making policy decisions. In other words, he makes the decisions he wants to make based on his own beliefs and opinions - which is why we're in such a bad state now. And NOTHING has been done about that.

All of this sets a nasty precedent for future administrations, which is why it might be best for a complete shift in our political system to occur. It would certainly be in our best interest. For now, our political system is an interesting game, if nothing else. So, when I engage in it, I look at it that way - knowing there are much better and more meaninful ways to make change in the world around me but also understanding that the people in office impact my life in lots of meaninful ways.

That being said, the current presidential candidates don't give me a lot of hope about our future, either. Or, better yet, the fact that the media has so much sway over who the final two candidates will be and what we will hear from them doesn't give me a lot of hope. Nor does the fact that it always only comes down to two "real" candidates without any third party having a real chance. I believe that instant run-off voting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting) would make some improvement in that area and clear up some of the "I didn't vote for Nader because I knew he wouldn't win" mentality because no vote would be "lost". I think I'm going to write the people who supposedly represent me and suggest as much. There are obviously a number of other problems with the ways in which we "elect" people in this country, but reform has to start somewhere. (In Texas, if there are more than two candidates running for governor, a simple majority isn't even required to win the election... If you want to talk about problems...) If and when I write a letter, I'll post it here.

However, I will give you some Dennis Kucinich videos to watch because I think he has a lot of good things to say about where he would like to see our country go. If we had instant run-off elections, candidates like Dennis would have a much better shot of being heard and maybe even in getting elected to our highest office. Think about it.