Not angry. But if you reply to me with a false equivalence then you should be prepared for it to be challenged. Ascribing emotional states to interlocutors who disagree with you and analyze your arguments because you can’t imagine someone doing so without having those states is a you problem. Nice argumentum ad passiones though. And yes, human cruelty is a greater evil than the evil of animal cruelty. Humans and animals are not morally equivalent. Using BLM as a prop to suggest otherwise as this PETA ad does is racist.
25 Likes
So what is, in your opinion, the difference between humans and non-human animals that makes this a mockery?
2 Likes
Already did.
Black people are human beings. Non-human animals are not human beings. Analogizing between them is racist. This isn’t an ad saying: “Hey, non-humans animals shouldn’t be treated unequal to humans.” That statement would be absurd, but not racist.
This ad clearly drew an analogy, not an allegory, between the oppression of black people and the treatment of animals. That’s racist. You can express a range of opinions about the treatment of non-human animals by humans and not be racist. You can’t analogize the oppression of marginalized human races to the that treatment of non-human animals by humans without being racist.
And just to be clear, I don’t think the people at PETA responsible for this ad are being consciously racist with it. I think they’re cluelessly racist, because I like to extend the benefit of the doubt.
16 Likes
Sorry for not making myself clear enough. I was curious about what exactly is the difference between humans (human beings) and non-human animals (obviously not human beings) that makes the ad a mockery of human rights.
As far as I understand your answers, you did not explain that, right?
1 Like
I thought I did, but perhaps I was insufficiently clear. I’ll try again.
Equating the civil rights struggle of humans to the advocacy by humans for any rights of non-human animals (I’m being specific because humans are members of the animal kingdom) is a mockery of the former.
Human rights aren’t morally equal to non-human animal rights. You can disagree about that and that’s one thing. It’s when an analogy is drawn to the fight of marginalized humans for their rights that it becomes a racist mockery of the latter.
11 Likes
I support animal rights, but that’s some bad advertising there. Unlikely to save a single animal, with net effect just to anger their detractors, embarrass their supporters, and polarize everyone else.
If they’ve really got the budget to produce and air a Super Bowl TVC, they have so many other angles that would work better and might have been aired.
They could have tied-in with the Game Changers guys. The film is produced by athletes and has a lot of football, could have been a win win to encourage football fans to try out a vegan lifestyle.
Or they could have gone with the environment. Since the modern livestock industry is a huge contributor to environmental problems, a different win win could have encouraged football fans to make sure we protect our planet long enough for our grandkids to enjoy Super Bowls…
Lots of opportunities, perhaps they’ll change their strategy next year.
3 Likes
6 Likes
I understand that is what you believe, you made that pretty clear. I was asking for a reason why you think they are not morally equal, what is the basis for that? There are several ways to argue that, but I’m curious how you arrive at that conclusion.
2 Likes
There are several reasons, from the practical to the deontological to the consequentialist, why I believe that. I’m confident we could rehash a debate that’s been debated numerous times and frankly by far more equipped minds than mine on both sides. On the off chance that you’re unfamiliar with them, I recommend beginning with the work of Peter Singer (who would disagree with my position, but might or might not acknowledge the racism in the ad as I can’t speak for him on things he hasn’t spoken on himself) and move out from there in the dialectical exchanges. But pursuing that line of debate would IMO be a derail of this thread, so I politely decline.
I fully recognize that you may not agree with me on whether or not the rights of humans and non-human animals are morally equal, and that presents no problem for me. However, given that belief, I think I’ve done everything I can to explain why this PETA ad is racist.
7 Likes
I am familiar with the debate, and if you are, too, we indeed can skip that.
I remember when Peta launched their campaign “Holocaust on a plate” in Germany this was discussed widely in the public and the press.
Reactions to that campaign mostly fell into two categories
- we’re doing to animals what we were doing to Jews, and that’a horrible and must stop
- they’re saying more or less that Jews are animals
Peta is pretty effective at leveraging that kind of outrage. Calling it a “mockery of human rights” is the second category.
All I’m saying is it’s what you make of it. You could also see it as a positive message.
It’s possible to compare human and non-human animals without this necessarily implying that is disrespectful to human beings.
This is what we should be looking for, anyway.
3 Likes
Yes, this isn’t their first tone-deaf campaign. They’ve launched several.
I suppose it depends on their target audience. I suspect it’s more counterproductive to their goals.
Yep.
IMO they failed.
6 Likes
Is it them though? You arrive at that judgement about that comparison, not them.You do exactly what they want you to, but the judgement is still yours.
2 Likes
While the word judgement could have the correct meaning, in this case I would choose the word assessment so as to avoid confusion with moral judgement. I certainly do morally judge PETA’s behavior, but my opinion that their campaign failed is an assessment.
Their behavior has no bearing on what I do towards anyone other than themselves. So if they want to garner my disdain, then they’re doing a swell job, but I doubt that’s they’re goal. But hey, I could be wrong about their goals.
9 Likes
They have long-standing problematic history with several disenfranchised communities.
10 Likes
PETA’s nothing if not consistent. /s
13 Likes
“The campaign appears to be brought back to people’s attention by Jack Monroe, an autistic British food writer who tweeted on Thursday asking the controversial organization to remove Monroe’s recipes from its site.
Hi @peta can you please remove my recipes from your website with immediate effect coz I wrote them with my autism. Thanks. pic.twitter.com/1PhJZSJC8l
— jack monroe 
(@BootstrapCook) September 7, 2017
The thing that makes me maddest about that @Peta ‘autism’ campaign is the frowny face. The deliberate negative stereotyping of autistic folk
— jack monroe (@BootstrapCook) September 7, 2017
The not very subtle undertones of ‘oooh you wouldn’t want an autistic child now would you?’
I just can’t even… I just…
— jack monroe (@BootstrapCook) September 7, 2017”
Anti vax levels of pseudoscience as well.
13 Likes
Every time PETA tries to make themselves relevant, they seem to force their own irrelevance. This ad proves the point by their co-opting a serious human social issue to create a false equivalence.
Also, some plants eat some animals and some animals eat some (stupid) people. Just sayin’… You can’t square the circle of life.
Disclaimer: I own leather, feathers and fur in various forms. And I have been observed scrambling, frying and consuming the delicious unborn spawn of various birds from time to time, but I don’t own a car. Don’t read anything into that.
3 Likes
Given how football fans treated Kapernick for his kneeling, it’s probably a good thing this ad was refused for the super bowl.(if that’s truly what happened) They’d be barbecuing bald eagles to own the libs. Not that I believe PETA actually cares, but still.
Isle of Dogs.
i took this as even the animals sympathize with kneeling as protest ??
not as some sort of speciesist possibly false equivocation of veganism and intramural humanoid racism ?? inclusive sympathy rather than mocking ?
but , i am often askew to society , so maybe i am twisting this to fit my own narrative and overlooking the majority perception ?
1 Like
