[fashionicon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brazilian Girl Yeah but it's different than forcing someone else to smoke or eat trans fat. I mean, you're choosing to harm yourself. Now that's you're business. When you claim to have the authority to harm someone else, a helpless being, there's something wrong there.

Actually smoking can cause harm to others (Second hand smoking, polluting the air) as well as driving.

Quote:

I don't see why. I don't get who determined that human beings are more important than animals. What do we have that makes us more special than them, and deserving of more respect? Animals feel just the same pain and just the same fear as humans do. But why is it only awful when it happens to us? They're living beings too, feeling beings too. (and they're actually more pure than we are anyways) Only we have the ability to reason. And yet we think like they do. When a lion is hunting, they couldn't possibly think "oh that poor deer, I shouldn't catch it cause it's gonna feel too much pain, and its death would probably ruin its children life, oh darn!". They're thinking "food". But we, we do have the ability for that kind of discernment, yet some people don't make use of it. Just like the lion thinks "food", they see a chinchila and think "coat". Weren't we supposed to be "smarter"? But that's another issue anyway. And I think that it's somewhat of an utopia to expect that people will suddenly realize that animals aren't more nor less important than us, that they feel and suffer and love just like us and deserve no less respect. But everyone's like "ooh no! we can't compare animals to humans, oooh!". Rubbish.

This will proablby be my last time responding on the subject because I feel like I'm beating a dead horse (no pun intended).

I think the fact that human beings can talk gives us the upper hand. What people do could affect the way you live. Love animals, but if someone told me to choose between saving the life of an animal or saving the life of my fellow man, I'd proablby choose the latter.

Sorry, but in my opinion, you really can't compare the life of a human to that of an animal. Comparing the suffering of animals to Holocaust victims? I didn't expierence the Holocaust first hand, but I'm pretty sure it sucked for the lives of those men and women. Maybe because they are of the same species, but I'm partial to other human beings.

In no way am I condoing the treatment of these animals in these farms, but if people want to wear fur, than there really is nothing you can do about it.We live in a world that has a "Survival of the Fittest" mentality. Animals eat animals, Animals eat people. People eat animals.

and to lovelymommie,

Though I respect your opinion, it's statements like yours that let organzations such as the NRA and the KKK thrive, in my opinion.

You don't always have to be heard to get your point across. Examples such as Martin Luther King, and Ghandi seem to come to mind.

It's usually the ones who are agressive and loud who are not taking seriously.

[lovelymommie]

How would my statement make any organization thrive? Thanks for giving me so much credit, but I highly doubt any statement like mine doesn't allow organizations to thrive. I understand what you are saying, but freedom of speech should not discriminate.

Believe me, I am a very liberal, politically correct sort of person, but even the KKK or NRA should have the right to exist, demonstrate, and be as loud as they want. However, being violent or distructive is NOT o.k. and is illegal, right? PETA's campaigns although graffic are completely legal and DO get the point across. If they didn't, I don;t think they would be so successful in membership and celebrity endorsements.

NOW....some PETA members with or without PETA's endorsement have committed what I feel are crimes (pie throwing, paint throwing, vandalism, and harassment) and these people are prosecuted if caught. But posting graphic videos on their website or printing them on fliers are totally legal and people have the right to tear them up or not watch.

Their message is strong and I believe very effective. I wholly disagree that loud and obnoxious organizations are ineffective. Hey, look at how much they have us all talking right now? Isn't that the goal: to create dialogue.

I agree that this is a beaten horse kind of discussion, but at least it still thrives. I respect all of your opinions and think that PETA has succeeded in sparking a very good debate.

Been fun!

[RyanRyan]

I love animals and I hate fur, but I find that card absolutely in bad taste, horrendous.

[Spike413]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FASHIONLOVA most people know fur comes from animals but what they don t know is how cruel the ways to take fur from an animal's back really are. and that s enlightenement.

So, you're saying there are nice ways to kill an animal and skin it?

I'm sorry, but you just can't convince me that PETA is actually educating people about fur. One would have to be pretty naive to think that it's not terrible for the animal.

[fashionista-ta]

^ otoh, I'm sure we would all be stunned if presented with stats about the number of people who never stop to think about *anything,* the impact of the fur trade on animals included ...

I live in a red state, I know whereof I speak

[twilight fairy]

I've actually got to say PETA is the organization which 'awakened' me - it showed me the animal cruelty in slaughterhouses, and ever since that, for two and a half years, I've been a vegetarian.
This topic is complicated..it's not like if PETA were all docile and polite and timid people would even pay any attention to them..yet some are turned off by their overly scandalous actions. Sighh..

[Bonchic]

PETA needs to chill out a little, they're really starting to do more damage on their own name

[MarryMeTomFord]

Quote:

Originally Posted by travis_nw8 has PETA ever done anything productive and positive for the welfare of animals?

Peta's not an animal "rescue" or "welfare" organization, so theyre not set up to do that kind of work anyways. They are here to create aawreness of the plight of animals, to have us adopt more ethical ways around animals. When they do say it in a nice, "nonviolent, noninterfering" manner, noone takes any notice and their message is lost. It is only because of all of our insensitivity that they have to resort to such antics as pouring sauce, defamation campaigns, and barging into fashion shows. This is the only way they get any air time or exposure. Whats wrong with that?

And if you look at the larger scheme of things, if people can get away with killing an innocent animal for its skin, then why can't Peta do the same in the media to the one who, lets face it, single handedly glamorizing and promoting the use of fur in America.

[MarryMeTomFord]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brazilian Girl Is THIS really more revolting than THIS? Wow.

Yes- Absolutely my thoughts

[Crea]

Anyone else think its silly how this "campaign" is being sent to all Vogue staffers?
I'd like to think most staffers at Vogue at least have enough knowledge to know about the cruelty behind fur. (Some/most who maybe support fur?)

And plastering her face inside urinals...seriously? If its really PETA who did this then I think that's plain proof that they're losing focus and aiming to attack a person as opposed to a fashion.

The loud and aggressive definitely garner the most attention, but not always the most respect.

At my university, three students stationed themselves outside a popular event and quietly handed out PETA flyers/posters of racoons to students in line. I could hear lots of "aww's" and "omg's", and I think that was more effective than any pie-throwing/paint-splashing move.
Granted, it was an entirely different venue and target audience, but I still don't see what good smashing pies into designers/editors' faces do besides of getting a few laughs. Because of stuff like that, to me they'll always be the occasional amusing interruption in fashion shows

But thanks to those who showed the more substantial side of PETA and the good work they've done.
And I'd have to acknowledge this certainly did stir up dialogue, like it did in this thread, but then again, this is a fashion-oriented community and we're bound to be more susceptible to such news. The words "Anna Wintour" mean nothing to most of my friends...
Its really a pity these few silly, ineffective campaigns ruin a noble, worthy cause.

[VainJane]

Quote:

^ otoh, I'm sure we would all be stunned if presented with stats about the number of people who never stop to think about *anything,* the impact of the fur trade on animals included ... I live in a red state, I know whereof I speak

I don't quite get what that means...

[fashionicon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crea Anyone else think its silly how this "campaign" is being sent to all Vogue staffers? I'd like to think most staffers at Vogue at least have enough knowledge to know about the cruelty behind fur. (Some/most who maybe support fur?) And plastering her face inside urinals...seriously? If its really PETA who did this then I think that's plain proof that they're losing focus and aiming to attack a person as opposed to a fashion. The loud and aggressive definitely garner the most attention, but not always the most respect. At my university, three students stationed themselves outside a popular event and quietly handed out PETA flyers/posters of racoons to students in line. I could hear lots of "aww's" and "omg's", and I think that was more effective than any pie-throwing/paint-splashing move. Granted, it was an entirely different venue and target audience, but I still don't see what good smashing pies into designers/editors' faces do besides of getting a few laughs. Because of stuff like that, to me they'll always be the occasional amusing interruption in fashion shows But thanks to those who showed the more substantial side of PETA and the good work they've done. And I'd have to acknowledge this certainly did stir up dialogue, like it did in this thread, but then again, this is a fashion-oriented community and we're bound to be more susceptible to such news. The words "Anna Wintour" mean nothing to most of my friends... Its really a pity these few silly, ineffective campaigns ruin a noble, worthy cause.

Well put.

[Kimkhuu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fashionicon Wearing fur is a choice, and is also a need for some parts of the country. Though I would never be caught dead in fur, I don't think it would be a good idea for me to throw a pie at someone who does, or throw red paint on them.

Sweetie, we're in 2005, there's so MANY alternatives to fur, please don't tell us that in some countries it is a need!

And please, I am so annoyed when people try to sort out pointless actions taken by a few Peta members and generalize from there on. It's simply unrepresentative. It's really important to focus on the good they've done so far. People are making a mountain out of a molehill....! It's simply nonobjective (mainly because of the media) to focus on minor incidents instead of focusing on the organization in general!

Peta has done a LOT of good to animals, but most people don't even care about it. They're too busy buying fur because to them, it has become a need... What need!? Wearing fur is not a question of choice or belief, the consequences are a well known fact, but people refuse to see the reality: tortured/killed animals for such a SUPERFICIAL "need"..... Does wanting a "cute" trendy coat JUSTIFY the slaughter of animals? Of course NOT!

Killing animals for fur is SIMPLY unacceptable, selfish and in no case it can be justifiable. Is it me or people have become so cold... it's not about being sensitive to the cause or not, it's just a plain fact that some people have a hard time accepting.

People are so WEIRD, they make the pie throwing incidents seem 1000000 times more scandalous than the real issue..... COME ON....! I am really deceived.

[Kimkhuu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fashionicon Sorry, but in my opinion, you really can't compare the life of a human to that of an animal. Comparing the suffering of animals to Holocaust victims? I didn't experience the Holocaust first hand, but I'm pretty sure it sucked for the lives of those men and women. Maybe because they are of the same species, but I'm partial to other human beings. In no way am I condoing the treatment of these animals in these farms, but if people want to wear fur, than there really is nothing you can do about it.We live in a world that has a "Survival of the Fittest" mentality. Animals eat animals, Animals eat people. People eat animals.

Although animals are less close to us compared to other human beings, they still have the capacity to suffer.

And second, there is SOMETHING to do..... It's wrong to think we live in the survival of the fittest society, the "declaration universelle des droits de l'homme" exists to promote our rights so we can be protected from inequalities (may it be physical, mental, or $). Same needs to go for animals, they are predisposed to being killed by us because they are weaker than us in terms of killing tools, but that doesn't justify us killing them!

There is ALWAYS something to do, step by step it is possible to make a difference when thinking twice before buying something, especially fur because it is DIRECTLY linked to INTOLERABLE CRUELTY. Buying IS voting!

[fashionicon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kimkhuu Sweetie, we're in 2005, there's so MANY alternatives to fur, please don't tell us that in some countries it is a need! And please, I am so annoyed when people try to sort out pointless actions taken by a few Peta members and generalize from there on. It's simply unrepresentative. It's really important to focus on the good they've done so far. People are making a mountain out of a molehill....! It's simply nonobjective (mainly because of the media) to focus on minor incidents instead of focusing on the organization in general! Peta has done a LOT of good to animals, but most people don't even care about it. They're too busy buying fur because to them, it has become a need... What need!? Wearing fur is not a question of choice or belief, the consequences are a well known fact, but people refuse to see the reality: tortured/killed animals for such a SUPERFICIAL "need"..... Does wanting a "cute" trendy coat JUSTIFY the slaughter of animals? Of course NOT! Killing animals for fur is SIMPLY unacceptable, selfish and in no case it can be justifiable. Is it me or people have become so cold... it's not about being sensitive to the cause or not, it's just a plain fact that some people have a hard time accepting. People are so WEIRD, they make the pie throwing incidents seem 1000000 times more scandalous than the real issue..... COME ON....! I am really deceived.

Who cares what year it is? If my only source of warmth was animal fur, I'd take it.

These aren't individual PETA members, these are things the organzation is doing as a whole. There are countless sites of such evidence, for example: http://www.consumerfreedom.com/press...fm/release/137

I would love nothing more than to focus on the good the group does, but with its outlandish behavior, it's kind of hard.

I have no respect for someone who dosen't care about the lives of their fellow human beings, who wants to put a ban on people owning pets. Because I'm sure a 30 pound pomerian is much better off in the jungles of africa, than in a human home.

Sorry, there's just no convinving me. To me,they are nothing but a group of ridiclous radicals. And that's my opinion.