As a shameless carnivore, I’m not a likely PETA supporter. The campaigns are needlessly provocative, silly, and substance-free. This is of course, my opinion only, and a lackluster one at that. Let those kooky morally righteous beautiful people have their fun, cavorting naked in advertisements. My shoulders barely cared enough to shrug.
But this incident is really so vile, I’m speechless:
Ashley Byrne, a Washington, D.C.-based campaign coordinator with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), talks with Memphis police officers during a recent demonstration outside City Hall that coincided with World Vegetarian Week. When officers inquired about the well-being of intern Shawn Herbold (bottom) and volunteer Thomas Olsen, a sweat-soaked Herbold replied that she was in pain and feeling nauseated from the heat after being wrapped in cellophane for 30 minutes, and also asked how much longer she needed to stay there. Byrne let her know it wouldn’t be much longer and left her under the hot afternoon sun for 30 minutes more while debating with the officers. link
Yeah, this holier-than-thou hag wrapped two kids in plastic and left then in the blazing sun for over an hour. To demonstrate (against? for? can you tell?) World Vegetarian Week. And by the way? The East Coast is experiencing a heat wave of unbearable magnitude right now. I can only image what PETA would say if someone wrapped cute kittens and puppies in plastic and let ’em bake in 100 degree heat. Hypocrite, much?
Larger version of this image (warning: close up is disturbing) and more on PETA’s activities in India, after the jump.
Respect for animals is an intrinsic part of most South Asian cultures, whether veg/non-veg or mono/polytheistic. We’ve talked about vegetarianism and the appropriation of Hindu iconography in previous posts, but what are we to make of PETA’s growing influence in India? While South Asian food and a pantheon of deities have been imported to the West (vegans and vegetarians flock to Indian restaurants, images of Ganesh appear on flip-flops and sofa cushions, etc.) do we really need Western PETA-style philosophies exported back East?
PETA has blog on the activities of its Indian affiliates, The PETA Files. Below, scenes from an anti-leather demonstration in Bangalore. Frankly, I’m about as confused as the cops.
Photo of Interns by Mike Brown / The Commercial Appeal
Hmm… they could have just gotten up and left, they are not idiots. The animals don’t have that option. PETA gets maximum mileage out of minimal resources. If you have the guts search for videos of ‘meet your meat’.
Respect for animals is an intrinsic part of most South Indian cultures, whether veg/non-veg or mono/polytheistic.
just a minor note, we’ve mentioned this before, but most peoples’ surprise it turns out that north & west india are the centers of obligate vegetarianism, not the south. in fact, kerala is the one place where i’ve regularly heard that hindus eat beef (in fact, someone wrote in to NPR yesterday to criticize the generalization that hindus don’t eat beef by implying that that was marginalizing the practices of kerala hindus!!! 🙂
i’ll post the link to the story when i find it re: rates of vegetarianism.
Razib,
That was a typo – I meant to say South Asian, not South Indian. Sorry, fixed.
ok, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_in_specific_countries#India According to the 2006 Hindu-CNN-IBN State of the Nation Survey, 31% of Indians are vegetarians, while another 9% consumes eggs. Among the various communities, vegetarianism was most common among Jains, Brahmins at 55%, and less frequent among Muslims (3%) and residents of coastal states respectively. Other surveys cited by FAO [2], and USDA [3][4] estimate 20%-42% of the Indian population as being vegetarian. These surveys indicate that even Indians who do eat meat, do so infrequently, with less than 30% consuming it regularly; although the reasons are partially economical.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2006/08/14/stories/2006081403771200.htm The survey shows that regional location matters more than caste or community. As expected, the lowest proportion of vegetarian families are in coastal States such as Kerala (two per cent), Tamil Nadu (eight per cent), Andhra Pradesh (four per cent), Orissa (eight per cent) and Bengal (three per cent). Most land-locked States, especially in the west and north, are places with the highest proportion of vegetarian families: Rajasthan (63 per cent), Haryana (62 per cent), Punjab (48 per cent), Uttar Pradesh (33 per cent), Madhya Pradesh (35 per cent) and Gujarat (45 per cent).
I guess PETA people are talking about more “humane” way of killing animals for food ; something like “organic” non-vegetarianism. The crass, profit making mentality of many of the meat industriies has led to degeneration of the way animals are handled. This is the focus of PETA (albeit in an overly dramatic way sometimes ). Note that it is beleived that mad-cow disease originated because cows were being fed non-vegetarian stuff. So even if one doesn’t share PETA’s philosophy because one is non-vegetarian, reasons like safe and healthy meat itself can be a cause for being sympathetic to its cause ( this is not very different from being safety, quality and cleanliness consciousness in other areas like environment etc. )
That was a typo – I meant to say South Asian, not South Indian. Sorry, fixed.
ah, ok.
Razib, re: the source you cite in #4–Gujarat is not land-locked!
Jain influence across Gujarat claims responsibility for vegetarianism.
The picture reminds me of one of my favorite shows: Dexter.
The New York Times put it well in an editorial referencing two recent scientific studies about industrial meat production (economies of scale to make cheap meat for “shameless carnivores”):
“No matter what you call it, it adds up to the same thing. Millions of animals are crowded together in inhumane conditions, causing significant environmental threats and unacceptable health risks for workers, their neighbors and all the rest of us.
“…the so-called efficiency of industrial animal production is an illusion, made possible by cheap grain, cheap water and prisonlike confinement systems.
“In short, animal husbandry has been turned into animal abuse. Manure � traditionally a source of fertilizer � has been turned into toxic waste that fouls the air and adjacent water bodies. Crowding creates health problems, resulting in the chronic overuse of antibiotics.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/31/opinion/31sat4.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
I would add that e.coli outbreaks come typically originate in these animal farms. They also produce 20%+ of our nation’s greenhouse gas emissions. They also waste ungodly amounts of water and energy. They also produce health problems in farm workers (slaughterhouse workers have it rough, too). One of my group’s engineers had to be hospitalized after suffering lung damage from H2S emissions from a hog confinement barn. Should we be eating food produced under toxic conditions like that, which are commonplace in industrial animal farming? Should we treat animals that way? I don’t see how anyone, “carnivore” or otherwise, can tolerate all the horrible things that occur, environmentally, ethically, and economically, in the name of cheap meat.
I quite agree, old egg, meat should remain exclusively the province of those of us with “High hats and narrow collars; White spats and lots of dollars,” what, what?
I eat meat, and I wear it too. I have no qualms about it, and I’m always perplexed as to how vocal and off-put some vegetarians can be. To each their own, I say. I don’t tell people why they should eat meat, so why should I hear about how I shouldn’t, how gross it is etc.
Has anyone else had this experience?
5 · Priya said
10 · CondeKedar said
The question is whether PETA has hijacked the cause for its own self-aggrandizing purposes. The organization appears to be more about shock tactics than actual solutions. Food hygiene, environmental impact, even cruelty to animals…yes, I agree, these are absolutely valid points and the meat industry (like the leather and pet industries) is pretty awful. I called myself a “shameless carnivore” (please click and read the read linked comment in the post) because I eat everything, not because I turn my nose up at vegetarian fare.
I dislike PETA because it’s turned a good cause (reforming the meat industry) into one apparently espoused by nutty “limousine liberals”. And I especially dislike the way its tactics have been exported to South Asia. The PETA “cause” appears to be that seals and puppies and pandas need saving from all these mean mean people. There’s no serious philosophical underpinning at this point…it’s just emotional transference buttressed by moral righteousness.
12 · tevadi said
For the longest time I could care less whether someone eat meat or not. Recently I have come to the realization that if I have a POV it is perfectly ok to share is as long as I back it up. This passion is no different than the passion one has for sports, religion, politics, entertainment or for that matter spread of democracy.
/on soapbox/ So my one line pitch is ‘animals have five senses just like us, the only difference between us and them is intelligence, they feel pain and suffering like us, so if you like to learn then you should read up on vegetarianism. /off soapbox/
not just kerala – even in Tamil Nadu many Hindus eat beef. No – not the brahmins – but many others. However beef is slowly being replaced by chicken. I love my meat – does not mean that I eat it daily. It is a treat to eat it just a couple of times a week. And Sunday is a meat day 🙂
PETA can go and get stuffed. Leather is great – remember it is organic 😉 – not a byproduct of Oil.
does that mean because you suppport the Philly Eagles and I support the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, you try convert me to your cause…
when will these white kids grow up…. thats right when the trust fund matures!
I haven’t read the comments – but just wanted to say that we shouldn’t mix up the issue of ethical treatment with vegetarianism. The one does not imply the other, necessarily. Or shouldn’t. I hold no brief for PETA, and don’t know whether they take the first to imply the second. I too am put off by some of their tactics – but on this one, since there are commercial interests involved, let’s be doubly sure who said what to whom, and who told us. If true as reported, this is rank hypocrisy of the worst kind.
On the ethics-vegetarianism issue, I’ll go so far as to say that, depending on the circumstances, occasionally, ethical treatment of animals could even imply eating animal meat. So the two things are separate. The natural food chain has some herbivores, but also many carnivores, and most animal species are probably omnivores. So the idea that one animal species might eat another, however abhorrent that may be to some of us, is a part of nature. The ethics can certainly come in when you consider how the animals are killed, but given its widespread occurrence in nature, hardly on the vegetarianism/non-vegetarianism issue itself.
Finally, these kinds of shock campaigns can have real impacts. A close relative in India has now stopped wearing leather footwear, in the belief that the very making of leather is wrong.
16 · melbourne desi said
Nope, but I have to prove it why my team is better with just facts, no bullshit. Then I leave it to you what you want to embrace.
good logic. john too will rise to the challenge because mccain pizzas have rising crust.
Just an interesting observation. I am a vegetarian and have been one forever. I do not expect people around me to be vegetarians especially in the US. Since we have official parties at home, we cater everything and it is served in my house. It so bothers other Indians who are vegetarians ONLY on certain days. They think that I should forbid meat in my house. Another observation was when a vegetarian meal was ordered for a group of about 150 people. Some thought it was my idea! When they found out it was a not me but an observing Jewish person they scratched their heads :-). I don’t care to convert anybody. I am who I am. I try to not wear leather, do not eat yogurt unless it is Penn State Creamery yogurt labelled vegetarian and I do not force my beliefs on anybody. Without PETA I am sure many may not have known of the horror of slaughter-houses. If they did not resort to such extremes I doubt if anybody would have paid them any attention 🙂
i am a vegetarian, but i find proselytizing vegetarians as annoying as jehovah’s witnesses and obamaniacs.
there’s a difference. these interns don’t look cute in the least.
Re 5:
Priya, if PETA limited itself merely to talking about more “humane” ways of killing animals for food, I wouldn’t have too many issues with them. However, I find their position on other issues, particularly the use of animals for research, to be quite extreme.
I have met my meat in person–as a vet student intern in factory farms and slaughterhouses. It is not a pretty sight, yet perhaps because I am an animal myself (and I am not putting myself down) I eat meat and feed my children meat. My family and I limit our meat consumption for several reasons–health, not to take more from our environment than our body needs, taste (having eaten farmers’ backyard chickens I can taste the difference between factory-farmed poultry and free-range poultry), etc.
My mother who has always been a vegetarian is contemptuous of my omnivorous habit. The last time I was in India, though, I was contemptuous of her proud decision not to kill the rats overpopulating her sewage. Trained as a public health professional in addition to being a small-or large-animal doctor, I wanted to slap her with a public health violation notice so the responsibility of the decision could be taken out of her. I tried to tell her that she was aiming for too high a value; that she was pretending to be an absolutist when in reality there is so much killing of animals going on in her name without her knowing it. For example, ecological destruction so we can have a time-share condo in Ooty, a car, and flight tickets to Singapore shopping malls and the tourist experience in Thailand has perhaps affected the populations of non-domesticated animals in ways that we don’t even think about. I said that we know so little since so few environmental impact assessment studies are being done. But so she recognizes the animal species, “I asked her what about all the animals used in medical research? Surely, you are not going to give up your medicines, why even contact lens solution, are you?” Since she didn’t actually see or touch or handle them like I handle my meat, she didn’t think she was doing anything wrong.
I stopped arguing after that. It was futile.
A good site to read about our collective dependence on animals, historically and currently, for health and medicine, our concepts of animal rights vs animal welfare, and other stuff is this. Several things are surprising and enlightening.
I disagree with PETA on a lot of issues including their appropriation of the word ‘murder’ in their sentence, “Meat is Murder.’ ‘Meat is Killing’ is more appropriate.
People who do not make conscious decisions about what they eat, what they wear, what they do, what sports team they support or what stocks they buy, annoy me. They are probably doing what their friends or parents do. What a waste!!
Malathi, you seem to have thought about your action and consequences, good for you.
According to the 2006 Hindu-CNN-IBN State of the Nation Survey, 31% of Indians are vegetarians, while another 9% consumes eggs.
The above number does not reflect the true nature of meat eating in India. I think a much higher percentage of Indians are functional vegetarians.
21 · Mytri said
Even Greenpeace, a well respected environmental organization has been accused of shock tactics. This is a universal problem with any advocacy, advisory or lobbying organization which tries to garner the attention of public or govt.
Reg. veg vs. non-veg There are many reasons one is a vegetarian (a) religion (b) animal love/ethical treatment of animals(c) parental influences i.e. eating a particular diet right from birth and thus leading taste-bud ossification (d) personal choice due to influence of friends/spouse etc. The problem is that if one is vegetarian ( mainly shown by desi-culture ignorant Americans )people assume that it is due to religious beliefs
13 · cicatrix said
Ah that is an interesting point. Something similar to DesiNJ@25’s comment, there is a whole body of population in America and especially in the developing countries, who don’t think and make choices in life, whether it is religion or food based on logical reasoning. Mainly they think & work from the heart than head. This tactic of appealing to emotion is similar to that used by Karl Rove and Bush. And I guess to influence the people and govt these advocacy organizations adopt the same tactic smetimes to their own detriment.
I agree. and i am with you. we need more decisions that come from the heart.
As a vegetarian, I find there are so many things about Peta’s that one can applaud:
The movement to boycott Indian leather and try to put itsgreedy workers who earned unseemly profits out of work. It was high time someone skinned those fat cats.
The movement to ban medical research on animals, especially since it has clearly been shown by the Royal Society that no significant breakthrough in modern medicine has depended on animal research.
Peta’s courageous decisions in the past to support the destruction of information gained from previous medical research. It might have harmed a few people and have put researchers at risk, but sometimes a life matters little when compared to a principle. In this age of ambiguity I love the moral clarity of Peta’s stand “Send back items that you have from companies that test on animals” and the way Peta officials live by their principles
Their outstanding work in animal shelters and their high success rate in placing rescued animals
. Peta’s work was truly path breaking. In this meat based society, who would have even thought of exposing the gruesome nature of slaughter houses? Or made an impact on American society in this matter.
It may be fashionable to laugh at the Peta interns, but their sense of awareness of mans place is truly evolved. Despite their failaure now, I hope that try again and achieve an award that they truly deserve
If vegetarians eat vegetables, what do humanitarians eat? ~Anon
i have to admit, that was a pretty cruel tactic – and i aldo found it odd that the two interns were the ones who ere suffering, but learly weren’t gung-ho about this particular dispaly for their cause – seems to me that if ms byrne was so intent on using this particular method of protest, perhaps she should have bloody well (pun intended) switched places with her interns.
as to the issue of ethical treatment vs vegetarianism – i find it odd, considering that the meat is being raised to be slaughtered. i understand the toxins, health etc reasons. but from a moral point of view, it seems far fetched to really be all that concerned with the welfare of animals while they’re living, if you’re OK with eating them for meat(and no, i’m not a vegetarian).
lol http://www.peta-sucks.com/
it seems far fetched to really be all that concerned with the welfare of animals while they’re living, if you’re OK with eating them for meat(and no, i’m not a vegetarian).
1) integrate pain and misery over time (e.g., chickens with beaks chopped off)
2) cruelty to animals has a coarsening and dehumanizing affect on humans and their treatment of other humans (some would argue). e.g., what about the marine that just threw a puppy off a cliff???
since when did people support teams based on facts? I used the said example precisely for to elicit that response. I may do something or support something just coz I like it. Like sex ;). Facts dont get in the way.
PETA has made a significant dent in the public’s consciousness regarding the ethical treatment of animals – and vegetarian or not – you cannot fault them for that. Also, its not cool to call other women “hags” even if you are outraged by the said woman’s hypocritical behavior and politics.
Before you condign Peta to sensationalists, recognize that Peta has been quite effective in filling the epistemic gap on how meat in the USA is raised, slaughtered and distributed.
There are acres of vile septic lakes on pig farms in North Carolina. The stench from Texas cattle ranches reaches miles down the interstate. The ghastly poultry pens in Arkansas are notorious for fouling the streams and rivers.
These are just the environmental issues. Peta delves into the borogryphic inducing topics such as slaughterhouses. The sanitized cellophane wraps in the grocery store have sanguinary tale to tell. Good for Peta for telling it.
Without PETA I am sure many may not have known of the horror of slaughter-houses.
Upton Sinclair! PETA is for the ‘U R 2 COOL’ texting monkeys.
Re 21:
Mytri, Upton Sinclair’s novel, “The Jungle”, not only exposed this, but led to the passage of the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, which established the Food and Drug Administration.
“I eat meat, and I wear it too. I have no qualms about it, and I’m always perplexed as to how vocal and off-put some vegetarians can be. To each their own, I say. I don’t tell people why they should eat meat, so why should I hear about how I shouldn’t, how gross it is etc.
Has anyone else had this experience?”
I never try to convert anyone to vegetarianism. However, many non-vegetarians have tried to convert me. Usually this is over a meal when I order vegetarian and they don’t. I usually don’t even bring it up, but the non-veg. does and then goes into making a case why it’s not bad.
Maybe it’s guilt or whatever.
As a male, and if the person I’m eating with is also a guy, the arguments in favor of eating meat often revolve around the notion that it’s more macho to eat meat or something like that.
I’d say Peta’s tactics go for shock because they get free media coverage so it’s economical.
37 · amaun said
beware all non-veggie parents, your teenage kids are going to become veggies. It seems that this is a rising fad amongst US teenagers. for multiple reasons
The veggie vs non-veggie impassioned posts reminds me of the emacs vs. vi debate.
Those of you breathlessly citing Upton Sinclair’s novel The Jungle should note his reaction to the book’s reception: “I aimed for the heart of America, and hit it squarely in the stomach.”
speaking of Upton Sinclair
Also in today’s Times:
Like UPS, I find that non-vegetarians attack me more than I see vegetarians attack non-vegetarians. I really do think it’s guilt. I don’t care what you do, just leave me alone, I’m not judging. But I have been a lifelong vegetarian. Usually the ones that make a big deal about vegetarianism are the ones that haven’t been vegetarians their whole lives. Though it’s a bit disconcerting to hear anyone say I don’t really care about the animals, I’m just doing it because I’m used to it. If that were the case, why would I be so insistent on vegetarian meals every time I go out?
BJ, The article doesn’t talk about it but one other contributing factor may be this: contemporary, urban, children are vaguely sheltered from the concept that meat = ex living animal. All they see is a clean cut or a casserole mush or a TV-dinner tray that looks nothing like what one would have been used to seeing at an old-fashioned butcher’s (if the older generation was privileged enough not to kill its own meat in the countryside, that is). Contemporary parents too are uncomfortable about having a blunt and honest discussion. Little wonder that the child, upon entering the teen years, explores and rebels.
My daughter was nearly 4 when she realized the word ‘chicken’ was used at our dinner table AND her favorite story book. When she asked me if they were one and the same, I gently let her know about where omnivorous humans stand in the food chain (we eat and can also be eaten).
I am all for people learning to eat only as much as their body needs — be it meat or any other food, even sugar. (Moderation in every area of life appeals to me). Even if I cook a meat or fish dish, I let my kids decide if they actually want to eat it. I believe their bodies know more about how much of animal or plant protein they need that day than I could ever know. Invariably, at least 1 out of 3 will not eat each time–they take turns in refusing, I swear–but on average, each child decides to eat some amount of meat at least once in 2 or 3 weeks.
One of PETA’s campaigns in India is about how “bad” cow’s milk is for humans. Middle-class has just somewhat graduated to being able to buy milk in unlimited quantities and the poorest of the poor will probably consider it a gift if their toddler can get half-a-glass of milk a day. But here comes PETA with absolutely no irony or historical understanding…well, why don’t we give up our sugar-sweetened tea and coffee drinking habits instead? Can not the plantations be allowed to go back to whatever wild lands they used to be?
Razib, I am not an ethologist, so my interest in this area is somewhat cursory. But I am under the impression that the above argument is based on retrospective case-studies and case-series, not population-based studies, whether retrospective or prospective.
Also, what if the marine had thrown a snake or a lizard or a rabid puppy? Would it have made news? Don’t get me wrong, I am immersed in the ethos of the puppies-are-cute culture, but I can never quite turn away from the internal inconsistencies.
Khoof, to answer your question from another thread: I am not yet from Guelph.
Someone who advertises the fact that she is a ‘shameless meat eater’ (despite knowing the utter cruelty with which farm and other animals live and die) writes a post of this kind mainly to be sensationalist herself. My friends and I used to read Cicatrix’s posts, but have little respect for her after this one.
One way is to eat (or use in other ways) every last scrap of the animal that has been killed just as hunter-gatherer cultures did–which means you have to eat the chicken heads, chicken feet, pigs’ feet, pigs’ snout, fish heads. Definitely not appealing, right? But you see this still happening in peasant cultures and in lower socio-economic groups. They embrace fully and efficiently eveything the life that they killed could give them. This way they kill fewer individual animals. In urban cultures, the best cuts are for humans, the scraps are for pet foods, for example. But to sell that pet food, the pet food company needs you to adopt or buy your own cute little puppy (or puppies). At one time, when I was growing up, we (including my vegetarian mom) owned 4 dogs (the max # we have ever owned at any one time). Go figure.
killing in one blow is better than torture? i understand the issue of pain and suffering, but in my opinion, it would be more justified when coming from one who didn;t intend to kill the animal in the end.
i don’t see how this is any different. eating meat IS cruelty to animals, whether it serves one purpose or another. if we take e.g. a chiclken being thrown off a cliff vs being raised for meat – in the end, the chicken still dies.
this is an interesting concept from a parent. i gave up meat for two years and started eating it again upon medical advice. but i still have issues with eating meat, so only eat enough to fulfill my quota, and there are definitely meals or days when i just don’t want it. but my parents are a bit freaked out by it – if meat is in front of me, they feel that i must eat it no matter what. i def. like your approach better, malathi!
ak,
IMO, killing in one blow is better than torture. Yes, the animal will die in both cases, but atleast it didnt have to endure prolonged suffering. Eating meat by itself is not being cruel to animals. You dont see PETA going after tigers who hunt and kill their prey. Yes, an animal is killed. But that cannot be attributed to meat eaters’ cruel nature. As some people on this board have elucidated much better than i probably can, Nature is full of carnivores – man included – and there’s nothing wrong with killing an animal for meat.
non-vegetarians attack me more than I see vegetarians attack non-vegetarians. I really do think it’s guilt.
It’s not guilt, it’s evolution. In general, carnivores attack herbivores.