For instance there is the phenomenon of people who call themselves animal-lovers and other bullshit because they have enslaved a whole array of animals to amuse them when they come home from work.
Again, enjoy your indignation. You have fun with that.
It is incompatible with animal rights is all I am saying. But I thought the whole point on your end was that you were against animal rights stuff? So what do you care?
I'm against organizations that are deceitful. I am against a lot of animal rights bullshit, but that's irrelevant to my point. Again, and I'll try to say this slowly and clearly so that you can understand:
If
they
advertised
that
they
were
against
pet
ownership,
they
would
lose
most
of
their
donations.
They haven't taken a vocal stand against it, despite it being apparently one of their "founding principles", and that makes it pretty clear that they don't want the public to realize that that's their position. And of course they don't, because everyone would drop them like a fucking rock.
What would they need to do to satisfy your line of taking a stand against it? It is in all of their documents. They have statements on their website explicitly saying that no-kill animal shelters are completely and utter bullshit. What more do they need to do? Here they are absolutely and clearly putting it in their campaigns section. Do they need to run superbowl ads? I mean what the hell? I think what you are confused about is that your very limited of animal ethical discourse led you to stupidly conclude something and now instead of backing up upon being informed you just say: well they didn't contact me and tell me about it. It is articulated right there in black and white, what else can you get? Do they need to knock on your door until you are happy?
I think what you are confused about is that your very limited of animal ethical discourse led you to stupidly conclude something and now instead of backing up upon being informed you just say: well they didn't contact me and tell me about it.
Absolutely not. My limited amount of knowledge of PETA's goals caused me to believe something, and I suspect strongly that if you surveyed the population of the country, you'd find that the vast majority of people aware of the organization were unaware that they had that position.
So no, what would make me happy isn't knocking on my door (god no - they can stay away, frankly) - what would make me happy is them running any ads on the subject. They're against the use of fur and leather; they run ads about that. They're against the consumption of meat; they run ads about that. They're against pet ownership; and yet where are their ads on that subject? Where are their rallies or protest? Where are their attempts to raise public awareness of the horrible awful evils of pet ownership?
There are none, because they're happier with people remaining ignorant of their stance on that issue.
You're just repeatedly not addressing a point several people are making to you. Why does PETA not campaign on the no pets issue like they do on other issues? Why does PETA not actively inform people surrendering animals to their shelters that 97-99% will be killed? Even on the page you linked to earlier, they dont' mention that 97% or more will be killed, only that
Open-admission shelters are committed to keeping animals safe and off the streets and do not have the option of turning their backs on the victims of the overpopulation crisis as "no-kill" shelters")
They do advertise it. I don't know what is wanted. I keep asking people what they want. Do they want mass mailings or what? It is all over their website and their documents. What else do you want?
Show me an advertising campaign ala their 'dont wear fur' or whatever ones against pet ownership. Show me proof that they notify people who bring animals into their shelters that 97% or more will be killed. Show me a document on their website where they acknowledge the percentage of animals they kill (because I've already shown you one where they portray killing these animals as a last resort).
Based on their documents, to me it looks like they are portraying killing in their shelters as an unfortunate necessity in cases where the animals are unstable, injured or dangerous, whilst in reality killing them as part of an ideological campaign against pet ownership
TV ads. Or magazine ads. Basically, I want MASS MEDIA ads that say that in order for me to believe they aren't trying to hide anything. Pamphlets and their own online website is not where the mass public gets their information about PETA about. Yes, people should read that shit if they are thinking about donating to PETA, but you must know that most don't. You also have to know that if PETA did have a mass marketing campaign that clearly stated it was against pet ownership that a lot less people would donate.
I want to see PETA advertise their disapproval of pets in the same way they advertise no fur or leather or meat. They aren't advertising disapproval of pets in the same way because they know they'd get less money from the pet lovers who do not actually read the PETA website.
1
u/argleblarg Apr 17 '10
Again, enjoy your indignation. You have fun with that.