PETA Using Games To Spread Its Message 477
Cooking Mama is a series of games for the Wii and the DS in which players go through a number of steps to prepare meals using a variety of recipes. Last week, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) created their own Flash-based parody of the game, highlighting the use of meat products by having a more bloody-minded Mama do things like pull the internal organs from a Thanksgiving turkey. Cooking Mama's maker, Majesco, issued a light-hearted response, pointing out the vegetarian meals in the game. PETA then said they plan to continue making parody games as a way of "engaging the public."
Should I be bothered? (Score:5, Interesting)
Because as long as they aren't doing the whole "domestic terrorism" thing or going after kids while the parents aren't looking I don't really give a damn.
I know my food used to be alive, and I know it had internal organs. Some of them are quite tasty.
Food is cruel, then (Score:3, Interesting)
I personally don't see a clear dividing line between an animal's right to life and a vegetable's right to life. There is a continuum of intelligence, for lack of a better word, from man down to microbe. Humans should clearly have rights because society requires it; beyond that, the decision to protect or purchase is based on an arbitrary value choice.
I'm not being entirely facetious, either; the bits I've read about the lives of plants (i.e. they communicate, actively respond to their environment, and actively defend themselves) puts them about par with some insects IMHO.
Given this, I don't see why PETA types couldn't be attacked from the left, so to speak, on their callous disregard for the feelings of lettuce.
Re:Peta out of control - Now in Warcraft! (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree that PETA is out of control. They've even been parodied in World of Warcraft as the D.H.E.T.A (Druids for the Humane and Ethical Treatment of Animals), but I must refer back to Genesis in this respect. God gave Adam dominion of all life on the earth to use as he saw fit.
As it stands, this original mandate, before being cast from Eden, allows us to do what we will with these animals. Later, in Leviticus, certain restrictions on diet and deviate sexual practices (bestiality) were later forbidden, but the original mandate was never completely rescinded.
For the record, I am an Animal Control Officer for a local city and have to deal with this issue on a daily basis. I deal with cruelty as it is defined by the State of Texas and have to carry out my duties according to the statues. Some of these are lock-step with PETA's beliefs, but we also have laws in place about vandalism, criminal mischief, breaking and entering, trespassing, burglary, coercion and theft. I find that PETA crosses those lines far too often and I personally regard them as a criminal organization.
This is run of the mill from PETA (Score:3, Interesting)
PETA has previously handed out graphic pamphlets to school-age children in an effort to convince them that their parents are murderers.
From the pamphlet:
Re:Should I be bothered? (Score:4, Interesting)
I propose an "Eat a Beef Burger for PETA" day here on the Slash.
Re:Ok, Pulling the internal organs out of a turkey (Score:1, Interesting)
I present to you the rebuttal of someone who feels the need to defend vegetarians against someone else who proclaims "If you honestly think you feel better on a vegetarian diet then hey, don't let me put you down." but goes on to call us retards and basically try to explain away vegetarianism as foolishness with no real justification.
Reason 1: I saw a baby lamb on a farm and I just couldn't bear myself to kill and eat that!
Go away. This isn't a reason. It's your squeamish stomach. If you're trying to convince people not to eat meat based on this reason alone then I despise you.
First your automatically assuming every vegetarian is trying to turn you into one. The fact of the matter is that vegetarians make up about 5-6% of the population in the United States. If there were so many of us so compelled to making you into a vegetarian you'd hear much more about it. The truth is that most of us don't care about you. Secondly, why is it that you feel we should need to explain our choice to you? If it's not hurting you I don't see what say you have in it at all. This goes beyond vegetarians and I can only hope your attitude about other personal choices doesn't result in your need to bash it.
Reason 2: In this day and age it's unethical to eat meat when you can easily sustain yourself on plant sources.
This isn't a reason. The core argument here is "its unethical to eat meat". I'd like to know why.
If it's unethical to pour CFCs and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than it's unethical to eat meat. It increases your carbon footprint. The amount of energy needed to produce meat over grains is extraordinary. Also, these spare grains that could be produced on a reduced carbon footprint could go to fueling vehicles in a green fashion or feed the poor.
Reason 3: It's unethical to cause suffering. Thus it is unethical to eat meat. Now we're getting somewhere! So if in the future we hooked up newly born cows to a Virtual Reality system ala. the matrix, where there was no suffering, disconnected cows would remain virtually in the world (no percieved death or loss) and execution was done painlessly and with the cow blissfuly unaware, it'd be okay to eat meat? Somehow I don't think a real vegan's going to say yes. So what's the real reason?
Can we stick with reality here? We don't even need VR to make vegetarianism a legitimate and healthy choice yet you feel the need to combat it. So until this technology exists how about you not being a hypocrite? I'm not even asking you to be a vegetarian but simply don't be a dick to those who choose to be.
Reason 4: It's unethical to kill.
What, now plants aren't life?
Ever notice that in your little diatribe that reasons 2-5 are the same thing stated in different ways? Do you really need to flesh out your argument that much to feel vindicated? Anyway, no one is really questioning your right to live here. but if you are so logical you must be able to do the math: in order to produce meat you need to feed it grains. most of these gains end up not being part of the final product just as most ore of a metal ends up being waste products. So naturally these grains would be better used in eating them directly. Less grain would need to be harvested to feed the same numbers of people. It's a pretty simple concept.
But let me ask you: If you're not concerned about the debated right of animals and are willing to eat them why do you care if we eat grains?
Reason 5: Plants aren't on the same level as human beings.
Then why are cows? Rabbits? Sheep? Birds? Insects? Where is this magical, arbitrary line that says it's okay to eat a pumpkin but not to eat a fish?
Probably somewhere along the same lines that civilization used the same magical, arbitrary line to condemn cannibalism and the murdering of children who were born with abnormalities. Let's not be ridicu
Re:lol peta (Score:3, Interesting)
I've raised geese for foie gras before. The little gals actually like it. After the second or third time they figure out "damn, I don't even have to chew?" and come running up at feeding time and try to swallow the feed tube and your hand with it.
Sure, if you didn't eat them, they'd die of liver failure shortly thereafter, but that's why you kill them before they get sick:)
Re:Should I be bothered? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Peta out of control (Score:3, Interesting)
I disagree with "shock theater" It's not "shock theater" - it's reality that is just never ever shown on any media.
If every meat eater has to kill his own animals there would be a whole lot more vegetarians.
You argument is 100% moot.
If every person had to build their own house there would be a whole lot more homeless. If every person had to assemble their own pens there would be a whole lot less writers. If every person had to plant their own food there would be a whole less vegetarians, and so on.
It's called 'division of labor' and it's the foundation of society and civilization. Get used to it.
Re:Oh really? (Score:3, Interesting)
> meat is produced in a machine. They really have no idea where an egg comes from.
Sure, and there are also people who think that spaghetti noodles might grow on trees, that buying a sticker to put on their cellphone can improve the battery life, that homeopathy works, that the government could make us all rich just by printing more money if they were only willing to do so, that they won't need to work for a living or pay their mortgage anymore if Obama[1] is President, and all manner of other nonsense. What's your point?
[1] Note to Obama fans: it's just an example. I'm not blaming Obama for the fact that there are idiots in the world. Obviously, if Obama had never run for President, there would be idiots in the world anyway. That's not his fault. It's an immutable fact of life. And I'm sure you can think of an idiotic claim someone has made in support of a candidate from the other party. As I said, people believe all kinds of nonsense.
Re:Their next game - Pet Killers (Score:3, Interesting)
The average euthanasia rate for animal shelters is 60%. The average for PETA owned shelters, which have budgets millions of dollars more than the other shelters, is over 90%. PETA does this to tug on wallet strings. Their official stance is "Ketamine is cheaper than kibble. We could save them all if only more people donated." True champions of animal rights. Not OK to kill for food. OK to kill if food is too damn expensive and they have attack ads to fund. It goes beyond that. Their roving death vans don't even bring animals back to the shelter. They pick them up and promise to find good homes for these cute newborn kittens, and they put them down right there in the van as soon as the doors are closed, then dump them in the dumpster at the end of the day. PETAs director says this is acceptable, says that the people want to be fooled, they know it's impossible to find homes for these animals, that's why they call PETA to do their dirty work. And this is nothing new. In 1994 PETA staged a daring raid to rescue some roosters and rabbits from testing. Then they immediately put them down, saying there was no room at their shelters.
So you're right, PETA primarily makes banners telling children that they are going to hell for drinking milk, and assaulting women wearing fur (and telling children to attack their mothers for wearing fur), and telling people that putting animals down is wrong, and animal testing is wrong, and we should just let AIDS run its course and wipe out all of humanity to spare the poor defenseless animals. Get yourself sterilized, breeding a purebred human is just as cruel and vain as breeding a purebred dog. Ben & Jerry's should switch from cow milk to human milk to be less cruel. PETA also use their funds to domain squat Vouge magazine, and Barnem and Bailey, while suing People for Eating Tasty Animals for doing the exact same thing back to them! They stage vocal protests when animals are killed in terrorist attacks, begging and pleading for the terrorists to stick to suicide bombings, and make sure there are no animals near by. Posters showing chained up black people next to chained up animals "Animals are the new slaves/" Don't drink milk kids, drink beer instead! Replace that milk mustache with a foam mustache. (Not targeting kids honest!) "Your daddy is a murderer. Keep your pets away from him he might not be able to keep his violent urges constrained to fish for long!" "Your daddy is lying to you and teaching you the wrong lessons about right and wrong. Teach him the truth about murder." They plead with places like Hamburg, NY, and Rodeo, California, to change their names to less cruel names. They buy up stock in fast food restaurants to try to get enough votes to get meat off the menu. Great investment. When Steve Irwin died, PETA's stance was that he was a cheap reality star teaching animal cruelty to children.
And with all that money spent, their poor unfunded animal shelters put down 90% of the animals received, sometimes within minutes of receiving them, sometimes before they even get to the building. Sometimes they put down the animals they sue to save from euthanasia, or animal testing, right after they get them. If their $20 million in donations per year cannot fund animal shelters, they should leave it to the non-profits to run them. They seem to be saving almost half of the animals they receive, unlike PETA, who doesn't even TRY. The founder of PETA got involved in animal rights after she brought kittens to an animal shelter, and learned they had been put down. That's the most utterly ironic thing ever, that she would now be in charge of animal shelters that put down more animals than any other shelter, by an astronomical degree. The fact that you think this is acceptable policy is sickening. When is it not acceptable? Would it only be unacceptable when it reaches 100% death rate, that they NEVER make it all the way to the shelter before being put down, instead of just most of the time?
Oh yes, don't forget to not use a leash, or tie your dog up, that's cruel. Getting hit by cars is natures way to keep the population down. If you only had let your animals run unsupervised, PETA would have less animals to put down.
Re:Which games? (Score:3, Interesting)
Kinda makes me think Rockstar should add various domesticated pets and wildlife to the next GTA game.
Imagine mowing down a whole herd of deer in a tank!
Re:lol peta (Score:3, Interesting)
In my experience, waterfowl of any species will take the route that fills their gullet the fastest. They are both GREEDY and lazy, and if you can show them a way to stuff themselves that they can't do on their own or that takes less effort (ie. requires no foraging), they'll gladly participate!
I kill my own dinner (Score:3, Interesting)
I was never raised on a farm. I grew up in seattle. I've never gone hunting or killed any animal larger then an insect.
But after I got married, we decided to move into the country, and eventually started raising and slaughtering our own animals.
I started with chickens, and moved up to rabbits and goats. Several had names and use to be breeders, but later turned into stew.
It did take some practice to learn to kill a chicken or rabbit with a single stroke, but I didn't let failure hold me back. I learned by talking to other farmers and practicing.
Personally, I think if more people butchered their own meat, there'd be fewer vegetarians. I'm actually more open try trying out new meats after raising my own.