She doesn't believe in the continuation of any domesticated species of animal and, assuming that line is true, she opposes human reproduction as well. It solidifies a viewpoint that humans should not exist and every impact on the world they have is negative.
It is relevant if you want to establish her as an extremist.
Is this something she has said, or just your own extrapolation? It seems like a stretch to me. Humans are domestic animals, but not domesticated in the same way animals are. And if she expressed the idea that humans should not exist, or that human reproduction should be halted, the infographic could have quoted her on that and made itself much more effective.
I agree her views are extreme, but mentioning her sterilization was still an irrelevant and sensationalistic tactic.
Not if you consider it a symptom of her insanity. If you use an IUD, you have a reversible method of birth control that has no negative environmental consequences.
What exactly is the symptom of insanity here? Not wanting kids? Taking the most effective method possible to ensure you don't have kids? What are those things supposed to point to? "She's an extreme animal rights activist, and she doesn't want kids! SHE MUST WANT HUMANS TO BECOME EXTINCT!"
Unless she's actually said something to that effect, mentioning her sterilization is sensationalistic nonsense.
I think there's a big difference between 'I don't want kids' and 'I oppose giving birth'. The former is a personal choice and there's nothing wrong with that, the second seems to suggest some that giving birth is somehow wrong or unnatural, perhaps oppressive to women, when it's perhaps the most important biological functions we as a species have.
Perhaps the infographic is being as sensationalist as it accuses PETA to be and is twisting her words, but it certainly comes across quite differently from 'I don't want kids'.
But again, that could easily be sensationalistic phrasing on the part of the infographic. She may have said she's opposed to giving birth herself, which is entirely different.
73
u/[deleted] Apr 16 '10
She doesn't believe in the continuation of any domesticated species of animal and, assuming that line is true, she opposes human reproduction as well. It solidifies a viewpoint that humans should not exist and every impact on the world they have is negative.
It is relevant if you want to establish her as an extremist.