Verbal extremism in defense of civil liberties is no vice
I swear, I did not intend to wear black leather to that PETA demonstration. But I didn’t even know about it until that morning, and how could I have foreseen it might be rude to wear my trench coat to work that day?
posted by Jennifer Abel at 5:05 PM
Jennifer Abel is an American writer who began her career in print media three minutes before the Internet killed the industry. After starting at a small Connecticut daily she moved to the Hartford Advocate, an alt-weekly where her journalistic coups included infiltrating a Furries convention and working on a phone sex line (which fired her six hours later). Since then she’s written for, or been reprinted in, dozens of print and web outlets, including Playboy, the Guardian, Salon, AlterNet, Mashable, the Daily Dot and pretty much every website with the words "cannabis" or "legalize it" in the title. Once, when she was young and naïve and needed the money, she unwittingly edited SEO copy for a spammer. However, in light of the spambot comments she’s deleted from her own blogs since then, she figures she’s more than repaid that particular karmic debt. Jennifer is currently looking for professional, non-spam writing jobs; interested editors are enthusiastically invited to e-mail her.
18 Comments:
Bad Girl! Wearing leather to a PETA party.
Actually, the logic behind the more-extreme PETA views has always escaped me. Trapped-animal furs, sure - I can get behind not wearing those. But leather? The animal is going to be killed for food, anyway. They're down on that, too, of course, which is a place we'll probably just have to agree to disagree.
However, the synthetic option just doesn't really make sense. It's not a renewable resource (OK, maybe PETA doesn't care about sustainability), and - in the final analysis - it involved the deaths of far more animals. How many dinosaurs, etc., to make a gallon of oil?
If using petroleum-based clothing is OK because "they were already dead", then using leather from food-animals should also be OK, because "they were already dead".
Now the big admission: I actually like Rayon clothing (Rayon is a "remanufactured" plant-fiber), as well as Polyester clothing (Polyester production is generally be petrochemical-based, but need not be - it really requires an alcohol and carboxylic acid to create - and does occur naturally, although not in commercially useful forms and quantities).
I have a co-worker who is a vegetarian. A few years back, she tried going full Vegan for a while. When she told me, I asked her what her shoes were made of. (She was a very stylish dresser, and they were obviously leather.) She got all embarrassed and said, "Plastic shoes don't work!"
She still likes me anyway, thank God. Because now she is my boss.
so PETA devised a flashy marketing campaign: have a pair of attractive women (one blonde, one brunette) dress in skimpy little policewoman costumes...
No redhead?! Humph! Doesn't seem very politically correct to me. I'd bet the blonde was a bottle-blonde, too. Hmm, but now that I think about it, perhaps not. Standing around in the cold in skimpy, little outfits - maybe they both were real blondes! :-)
No redhead?! Humph! Doesn't seem very politically correct to me.
Nor very appealing.
I'm paraphrasing, but I think someone once said "There is no cause so pure that a fool will not follow it." PETA may have the best intentions, but to the extream extent to which they take thier ideals, they seem to have let the fools take over.
In unrelated news, any plans on covering Free Comic Book Day?
Jennifer,
Too bad you weren't wearing a PETA shirt under your leather coat.
I refer of course to that other PETA outfit: People Eating Tasty Animals!
I killed a few million (billion?) creatures today. My immune system does it every day. Where do we draw the line?
Reductio ad absurdum, of course, but even in less-extreme modes the issue is still valid. Do insects and their ilk count? (i.e. can a PETA purist swat mosquitoes?) How about rodents? Your vegetarian food-supplies are going to disappear really quickly if you don't allow rodent-control measures, 'cause they breed at a prodigious rate.
I've had the opportunity to discuss similar issues with members of a group that seems a little more together, while still holding to essential tenets that PETA would have to admire: Tibetan Buddhists.
In particular, I have had some nice talks with several Rimpoche and a Lama. Simply stated, they adhere to a principle of "nonviolent compassion", and strive not to harm any living thing. They are aware of, and fully acknowledge, the impossibility of living such an ideal. Rather, they promote it as a guidance for shaping your mindset, to be aware of your impact on "others" in the world, and to try to minimize the negative aspects of that impact.
It's actually much more complicated than that. For example, they use the term "Compassion" a lot, but what they actually mean does not really translate well into that English word (or any other, so far as I know). And, their rich philosophy extends much farther than the narrow considerations of whether or not you are "doing violence" to others.
Nice column. Aim for the center column in the WSJ someday, except that the news department of the WSJ is actually somewhat leftist so you'd have to tone down the mockery.
Manuella Holterhoff made her first mark with a review of Disneyland on the op ed page, which was actually closer to your column in tone.
Actually, the logic behind the more-extreme PETA views has always escaped me.
If you think they are extreme, check out this latest idiocy from Austria.here
I suppose next that someone will demand special education classes for them at tax-payers' expense. Of course, in the US special classes would not do - they'd have to be permitted to attend class with regular students. (Equal treatment and all that.)
In case it isn't immediately clear, the link leads to an article about a chimpanzee. The photo of the little guy didn't show up on the linked page for some reason.
Please, bear with me; that is the first time that I have ever posted a link in anyone's comments section. I'm surprised that it worked at all. (See Jennifer, what I've learned to do? I told you I've come a long way. I'm gonna really start tearing 'em up over at H&R. ;-) )
Please, bear with me; that is the first time that I have ever posted a link in anyone's comments section. I'm surprised that it worked at all. (See Jennifer, what I've learned to do? I told you I've come a long way.)
Indeed you have, Smartass my love. I like to think of this blog as place where we can all learn, share and grow.
Isn't that heartwarming? Or is that feeling I'm getting actually heartburn?
Isn't that heartwarming?
I'd suppose that would depend on whose heart you're referring to.
Or is that feeling I'm getting actually heartburn?
That's our Jennifer: such a sweet thang! :-)
('course, it could be angina, you being a smoker and all. Perhaps you should get a physical.)
Actually, Smartass, it was indigestion. Now that I've belched I feel fine. Must've been the Mexican food I had at lunch yesterday.
Now that I've belched I feel fine.
Belching ?! Horrors! How very unlady-like. Next you'll be eating beans and blowing me kisses. ♥♥♥♥ :-)
any plans on covering Free Comic Book Day?
Unfortunately, I don't know enough about it to write anything on the topic. Though I did enjoy the Bongo (Simpsons) comic book my SO picked up for me.
I happen to work at one of the world's leading killers of mice.
I have not personally done a mouse experiment (I'm a mathematical/computational guy) but I have based my work on experiments that killed many a mouse.
To further piss off PETA, I always wear leather jackets to science conferences.
Thoreau, I'm all for new techniques to reduce the hegemony of rodents.
However, to be the PETA's advocate, here, (and because I'm interested): what (if any) consideration does your company give to minimizing "pain and suffering" (for the rodent, as well as - obviously - for the actual customer) in its techniques?
Last year I had a serious mouse problem. One of the "solutions" I eventually tried is a special poisoned bait which works by dehydrating the mouse. The claim (I have no way to verify it) is that the mouse basically falls asleep, and never wakes up. Seemed like a pretty "humane" way of killing them.
I generally consider snap-traps pretty quick-kill devices (and thus, relatively pain-free), but these mice were adept at eating the bait without setting off the trap.
Understand - I'm not losing any sleep over the fate of exterminated house-mice. In fact, my ultimate solution - a new cat who is an excellent mouser - is notoriously prone to torturous endings for small furry and feathered creatures.
However, I just wondered...how much (if any) consideration does the pest-control industry give to "humaneness"? It's probably not a major issue to most consumers, but some consumers might differentiate based on such issues (clearly, I did to some extent).
Yes, I,ve been thinking about this subject too ...does anyone know of a pain free mouse and rat bait?
Post a Comment
<< Home