What I admire about PETA, and what you don't

I have long been an admirer of PETA's publicity stunts. PETA constantly leverages a small outlay of promotional costs into a bounty of publicity, resulting in exactly what they want: Conversation about animal rights.

PETA feels, rightly, that the treatment many animals receive in our culture, especially in industrial food processing, is deplorable and beneath the moral standards of any nation seeking to call itself civilized. PETA also knows that the militant secrecy of the slaughter industry keeps the average person from perceiving the literally unimaginable suffering that goes on inside the tightly sealed walls of our modern abattoirs (and it's a far cry from what used to happen on the family farm).

So PETA is faced with a problem: The vast majority of people would be compelled to their point of view on the slaughter industry (i.e., it's a nightmare, and standards for maintaining and killing animals should be raised) if only people knew the facts and thought about them. But how to get the facts out there when no powerful entity in our culture is particularly keen on acknowledging them?

Wisely, PETA uses outrage. Specifically, outrage at PETA. They pull stunts that you can't believe they would pull ("Holocaust on Your Plate" featuring actual Holocaust images, "Buckets of Blood" handed out to children), virtually forcing you to condemn their outrageous actions.

You say, "Yes, the way animals are treated by slaughterhouses is terrible, but it's wrong to equate animals with human Holocaust victims."

The important thing to PETA is the first part of that sentence. Because it's true that a lot of people who say it have never expressed that thought in their lives. PETA gladly brings upon itself the condemnation in the latter half of that statement in order get an obviously true but hidden fact into the mainstream conversation.

And it works. When PETA asks if you think animals should have the same rights as people, they're really getting you to say, "No, the only rights they deserve are..."

And if you answer with only "the right not to suffer," you have validated every publicity stunt PETA has ever launched. "The right not to suffer" didn't used to be the reflexive, default answer. Because of PETA, it is today.

And that's what I admire about PETA.

However, since my goal in marveling at PETA's brilliant publicity stunts is not to give the entire organization and its leadership an unequivocal endorsement (for the record: I'm an omnivore; I have killed my own food, and I'll likely do it again), here are some critical links sent in by readers:

www.PetaKillsAnimals.com
"Hypocrisy is the mother of all credibility problems, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has it in spades. While loudly complaining about the 'unethical' treatment of animals by restaurant owners, grocers, farmers, scientists, anglers, and countless other Americans, the group has its own dirty little secret."

Animal Crackers
"On Friday, Dec. 16, 2005, CNN's Anderson Cooper aired a segment on PeTA's policy of wantonly killing animals in their Norfolk 'shelter'."

Feministing
"I must say, PETA makes me want to go eat a hamburger. The naked chicks schtick is getting mighty old. They lost me for good during their 'holocaust on a plate' campaign, but every time I see a video or ad like this one, I want to be a carnivore simply out of spite. Because, clearly, they care more about the dignity of a trout than they do about the dignity of a human being."

Actually, Jill of Feministing gets it wrong in that last sentence. PETA cares more about the suffering of a trout than the dignity of a human being (if dignity is understood as a positive pictorial representation). I rarely come across an argument against the imagery in PETA's ad campaigns that doesn't contain basic failures of understanding like this one.

Not that PETA cares. Look what's in the middle of Jill's condemnation of PETA:

I agree with a lot of PETA’s goals. I wish we were less dependent on meat-food. I think the meat industry is abhorrent in their treatment of animals. I think there need to be stricter regulations when it comes to animal testing — especially cosmetic testing, which is largely unnecessary at this point. I think we need to raise awareness about animal abuse in all its forms.

PETA: Bruised by an attack on PETA as "sexist and racist."

Animal rights: Advanced a tiny bit more.