Hey Meat Eater – PETA Kicks Your Skanky Ass
By The Late Mitchell Warren
PETA is a terrorist organization founded in the United States, and one of the most successful terrorist organizations worldwide, with two million proud and extremely vocal members. Of course, PETA claims to be the largest animal rights group in the world, but let’s be honest: PETA has earned its reputation by subtly or fully endorsing acts of terror perpetrated against meat eaters. Most of PETA’s successes have resulted not from pursuing non-violent resistance but from extreme aggression—the same aggression that this animal-loving organization claims embodies the meat industry.
The basic philosophy of PETA is that “animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on or use for entertainment.” Vegetarians and vegans can certainly relate to the principles that PETA holds dear. Ideally, nobody should enjoy the suffering of an animal. We use the term “animal” broadly here; any living organism characterized by voluntary movement could be called an animal, including human beings. The first point to consider is when we should we take the label of “animal” off of a suffering creature? A kitten writhing in pain and screeching pained meows qualifies as an animal to most of us, and most people are quite disturbed when they hear stories of people mindlessly abusing small animals. Americans are equally baffled when they hear of Chinamen devouring kitten legs and doggy steaks. To most people, dogs and cats qualify as animals.
The line of decency is blurred when we talk about cows, pigs, venison, buffalo, and of course salmon and tuna fish. To many people, an “animal” refers to something cute and cuddly, something that they deem acceptable to their aesthetic; all the other life forms are relegated to the status of food. This argument becomes clouded when we consider the fact that people are animals. We don’t especially the like the idea of our own kind suffering in concentration camps or being slaughtered in war. Yet, many would consider the meat industry as openly dictatorial when it comes to imprisoning animals, subjecting them to cruel conditions, and shamelessly using their body parts as product. This suggests that it’s not necessarily concentration camps that human beings are opposed to. We advocate cruelty if we are willing to bite into a McDonald’s hamburger. Anyone who eats fast food is apparently willing to agree with the philosophy that concentration camps can serve a valuable purpose in society. Consider some of the conditions that “food animals” must endure in harvesting plants.
Birds: Practically all birds raised for food are factory farmed meaning they are housed their entire lives in waste-infested buildings where the ammonia levels are so high they cause pain to the skin, eyes and respiratory tracts of birds. Additionally, at least a third of all chickens, turkeys and ducks are de-beaked to prevent the groups from pecking each other. Gee, wiz, not even allowed a suicide weapon at this point. Aside from starvation, birds are also subject to immobilization (because of close crowding) which brings asphyxiation or dehydration to the lucky un-survivors. What happens to the birds that serve their purpose of laying eggs? They are either sold for slaughter, or perhaps fed into a Fargo-esque wood chipper while still live and still flapping. Another option is that of gassing chickens, which is ironically, one of the more humane ways of disposal. Now you know why Daffy Duck and Foghorn Leghorn were so uptight.
(Peter Cheeke, Contemporary Issues in Animal Agriculture, Inma Estevez, “Ammonia and Poultry Welfare”, Settling Doubts About Livestock Stress, Agricultural Research Magazine)
Pigs: Harvested pigs see no sun for their short lives, being denied even a pile of hay or mud to die in. Piglets are grabbed away from mum 10 days after birth and are fed hormone-laced food. Scientists speculate that the unnatural diet creates a craving to suck and chew, which results in pigs biting the tail of other pigs in front of them. Unfortunately, pigs (being one of the smartest animals alive) eventually become depressed and stop caring. Pigs also live in very small cages so small that they can’t even turn themselves around for comfort. Though we’re sure excessive cruelty is “rare”, extreme reports have shown farm workers torturing pigs and piglets with rods, slamming the littlest and unhealthiest creatures onto concrete for a slow death, castration and de-tailing while the animals are still alive. Sick pigs are bludgeoned to death immediately while healthier pigs await a much more holy fate. Looks like Babe and Wilbur didn’t have a happy ending after all. (sources: 60 Minutes, Associated Press, PETA, Michael Pollan, “An Animal’s Place,” The New York Times Magazine)
Cows: The treatment of cows is less horrific than that of poultry or pigs, since presumably cows get to roam around fields before meeting their maker. Nevertheless, udder breakdown is still a problem, as it results from an unnaturally high production of milk. Actually young cows are removed from their mothers immediately after birth and forced to start lactating and giving birth before they are of a mature age. Many larger farms tend to confine cows in small barns or indoors and restrained with stanchions. Once a cow is done with milk production they are killed at about 5 years of age, despite their natural living span being in excess of 20 years. Dairy cows are usually not allowed to nurse their calves, while male calves (like male chicks) are slaughtered immediately or kept for castration and veal-icious purposes. It’s little surprise that cows often develop metabolic disorders as well as mastitis, disabilities, infertility and of course, mad cow disease. Last but not least, would you believe cows also have their tails cut off, their horns removed and their, er, superfluous nipples diced? Not surprising to hear thousands of calves die prematurely due to digestive problems because this scene is a bit of a moo-drag. (USDA APHIS VS, Dairy 2007, Part I: Reference of Dairy Cattle Health and Management Practices in the United States, 10/07)
But What About Me???
Welcome back. We’re assuming you skipped over that boring section of animal suffering and are now wondering how all of this pertains to you? Now we have to assume that it is the quality of the animal that determines if we are doing something morally wrong. Now in defense of Adolph Hitler (and how many times is Subversify going to allow that statement?) at least that Nazi tyrant didn’t drape himself in a Jew headdress and make man-skin jackets out of the handicapped. He had the decency to dispose of their bodies, because evidence suggests that mankind would be less willing to work hard on a political campaign when there are decapitated human heads looking on.
This is another one of PETA’s “beefs” with most American meat-eaters. Not only do they campaign against factory farming but also fur farming, animal testing, animals being subjected to show business, animal fighting (such as cockfighting or bullfighting) and population control. Now consider that if PETA were an organization devoted to the suffering of humans, their acts of terrorism (both outright persecution of meat eaters to more subversive campaigns designed to destroy meat-harvesting organizations internally) few would be outraged by their actions. In fact, PETA would probably be held in higher esteem—er, at least in the same way as some countries tolerate Hamas.
PETA has the gall to suggest that all creatures, including the insignificant and ugly ones, should have the same rights as human beings. Ordinarily, such a statement would be accepted by most of the population—provided that it did not intrude upon the rights of the masses. Whenever peacefulness starts to interfere with our convenience is when the line is drawn between injustice and histrionics. We will not support any campaign of peacefulness if it takes food out of our mouths. We will not support any kind of peace if it denies us the right to hunt and acquire territory.
Because the PETA organization attacks some of America’s most sacred institutions and mainstream America itself, it is often scrutinized very closely for its own moral behavior. Therefore, it’s no surprise that PETA has had its share of hypocritical foot-in-mouth moments—just as any vengeful crusader would. Some of these moments include comparing animal suffering to Nazi Germany or to America’s treatment of black slaves. Naturally, this provoked the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (who of course, love their fried chicken).
It’s true PETA has said some really blonde things at times and will probably continue to give us such jaw-droppers as: “Not until black demonstrators resorted to violence did the national government work seriously for civil rights legislation … In 1850 white abolitionists, having given up on peaceful means, began to encourage and engage in actions that disrupted plantation operations and liberated slaves. Was that all wrong?” –PETA
PETA also upset the Jewish Anti-Defamation League by running Holocaust on your Plate campaign, stating that “”like the Jews murdered in concentration camps, animals are terrorized when they are housed in huge filthy warehouses and rounded up for shipment to slaughter. The leather sofa and handbag are the moral equivalent of the lampshades made from the skins of people killed in the death camps.” PETA predictably apologized after getting busted by Abraham Foxman (didn’t make the name up, I swear) and stated: “It was never our intention [to cause pain] and we are deeply sorry.” Wow, I haven’t seen so many angry Jews since er…that guy.
One particularly controversial event has been PETA’s choice to euthanize an over-population of animals. This is one of the issues that naturally elicits my disagreements with PETA, as they show blatant animal racism, suggesting that all pit bull terriers are deserving of death. Nobody denies that PETA is occasionally full of gelatinous fluff. Like any dumb chick that’s all heart and little head, PETA tends to say and do capricious things in the heat of emotion.
Therefore, vegetarians and vegans must come to terms with at least one fact, one that PETA had grudgingly accepted—that the superior species must be willing to exterminate inferior species if it wishes to retain territorial rights and at least maintain a steady comfort level. Therefore, PETA—like a pouting little teenager who has just realized her idealism can’t change the world—chooses to focus its efforts in stopping premature animal death or discomfort rather than focusing exclusively on animal rights. Though an animal lover can certainly see the parallels of slavery and concentration camps to the meat industry, PETA’s graphic illustrations are a bit deep for most of the world to absorb.
However, I honestly believe PETA’s heart is in the right place. A silly little girl is capable of great wisdom at times and PETA’s anti-wisdom is simply that animals have feelings too. We cannot seem to comprehend that animals have feelings, that animals have fear and for all we know, have some moral obligation in this world. After all, we have know pets can become depressed in our absence. They can become stressed in times of great tension. They can call out to their young if they are prematurely separated. An animal parent can even risk its life and die for the wellbeing of its young.
Richard Sarjeant (The Spectrum of Pain) once wrote this eerie passage: “Every particle of factual evidence supports the contention that the higher mammalian vertebrates experience pain sensations at least as acute as our own. To say that they feel less because they are lower animals is an absurdity; it can easily be shown that many of their senses are far more acute that ours–visual acuity in certain birds, hearing in most wild animals, and touch in others; these animals depend more than we do today on the sharpest possible awareness of a hostile environment. Apart from the complexity of the cerebral cortex (which does not directly perceive pain) their nervous systems are almost identical to ours and their reactions to pain remarkably similar, though lacking (so far as we know) the philosophical and moral overtones. The emotional element is all too evident, mainly in the form of fear and anger.”
Is it possible that the animals we slaughter are simply incapable of learning our language and thus appealing to our sense of mercy? Or perhaps they don’t have the ability to ingratiate themselves into our society the way more domesticated pets have learned? If you ever see a stray pig try and fetch your slippers then you know there’s some serious progress being made in inter-species communication.
As PETA has learned over the years, if one hopes to reach a human audience then he or she has to appeal to the human ego, which dogmatically states that all human beings are superior to the rest of the animal population and deserve their honor, whereas inferior animal life is only pitiable. Of course, one could easily make a comparison of a human being like Paris Hilton and a squirrel monkey and ask hasn’t the average squirrel monkey contributed much more to society? What really makes a human being’s life worthwhile or worth saving? Didn’t my late cockatiel sing better than the ho-punching Chris Brown?
When PETA finds herself unable to convince people of a greater good, she predictably resorts to evil measures. She tells her followers to throw paint on women who wear fur coats. She threatens to boycott actors who wear clothing made with animal products. She harasses fisherman and shamelessly shows off her body in Super Bowl commercials, begging for the world to listen to her plea. To listen to reason—that we are killing off the animal population—not to mention many of earth’s natural resources—for no other reason than our own greed.
MITCHELL WARREN’S INTERVIEW WITH PETA
W: Why do so many meat-eaters hate you? Or is that a dumb question?
PETA: Meat eaters hate us because they’re gross! (Dances around) Booo yeah! Suck on that! WOooo!
MW: You have to admit, some of the actions of PETA have been uncalled for, maybe even over the line.
PETA: (Whimpers) I’m sorry! I’m sorry!!! (Cries and rolls on the floor) I’m sorry…
MW: Why focus on game hunters, zoos, and the average American eating hamburgers when you could be focusing on the real enemy? The meat industry, corporate conglomerates and greedy Americans?
PETA: Well uh! (Hands on hip stance) That was rude. But just to answer your gay question, we at PETA don’t tolerate animal cruelty of any kind. We know we can’t stop America from eating beef, but we sure as hell can harass those fishermen and those damn zoo keepers…oh and those assholes who train monkeys to cry on cue! You know Sexy Mitch, the world is just not fair. The world used to like, laugh at black slaves who wanted liberation. The world once executed all these Jews in the holocaust. And somehow we all learned from that. But thousands of years later and the world still hasn’t learned how to be nice to animals!!!!!! And like, that’s so NOT COOL. The world sucks. And yeah, if the world is going to be a bitch about it, then so help, I’ll be an even bigger bitch than she is. If it makes people listen then it’s worth doing. At least that’s what my slutty mom once told me.
MW: Wow. That’s deep.
PETA: In fact, I am so totally going to hold my breath and turn blue until we stop mistreating animals! (Holds breath and gags) I can’t do it!! I’m sorry!! (Cries)
MW: Okay, okay. I guess I understand your point. Calm down, honey. Don’t get yourself all worked up.
PETA: You are sooooo cute, Mitch. Can I have your phone number?
MW: PETA, are you hitting on me?
PETA: Like, sure! We love all animals and you Mitch are sexier than a
MW: Oh my God! PETA’s getting naked again! This interview is over!
No one is excusing PETA’s temper tantrums, or endorsing terrorism as the solution to worldwide peace. However, I cannot openly censure PETA for its behavior which has evolved as a direct result of human aggression demonstrated to other animals. It was because of human cruelty that PETA was first founded and now the organization reflects the same violence in its willingness to defend animal injustices. It’s hard to imagine a PETA organization that did not resort to aggressive and even mean-spirited campaigns to get its point across. Otherwise, all of the campaigning would be ignored by a hostile and bloodthirsty world that insists on being threatened before it acts. To suggest that PETA change its way or the tone of its message is fallible logic—PETA would not exist if not for the indignities already perpetrated by man.
My biggest problem with anti-PETA people is that they insist upon us vegetarians allowing them their meat-eating “rights”, though their lifestyle blatantly contradicts our moral viewpoints. Instead of focusing on PETA as the problem why aren’t these PETA-haters out there trying to stop animal harvesting? (If for no other reason than for the industry’s slow poisoning of the human species?) PETA-haters seek to censor PETA by scolding them into submission, hoping they will conform to an “acceptable” means of protesting—namely that we politely chide meat eaters while they smile and fatten up. That’s a pussified protest if I’ve ever heard it.
I admire PETA’s mission even if I do not wholeheartedly endorse their organization. There are consequences to all negative human behavior, and if you honestly believe you will never suffer some repercussions for the choices you make in life, you need a reality check. If you choose to eat fast food chicken or hamburgers then you should be willing to listen to or view the ugly details of animal harvesting. If you hunt wild game or fish you should watch the animal writhe in pain and slowly die in front of you. And quite frankly, if PETA people want to tell you that you are a heartless killer for your actions, then I wouldn’t defend you. Deep down you know it’s true. You are ingesting a formerly living thing and its brutalized carcass is becoming a part of your soul. How will all of those crazy hormones and death-adrenaline that stay in animal carcasses affect your personality over time? I dunno, are you feeling suddenly very paranoid? That’s the turkey talking.
I know some people would probably take an indigenous or even biblical view of meat-eating at this point, rationalizing their sins away, claiming that being carnivorous is an evolutionary need or even a godly choice. It is true that being a carnivorous animal is, to some, is a genetic deviation, not a choice. Thus the whole world now hides behind their “genetic rights” to kill, to fuck indiscriminately, to be gay and to molest children. So I can accept the whole “I’ve always eaten meat, and I can’t change” argument, if that’s what you insist.
That said, the only way human beings could truly excuse themselves and resolve all moral culpability would be if they actually treated their animal prey with dignity, just as they would kill their own species. We bury our dead with honor but we somehow feel that inferior species are also deserving of contemptible treatment. We deny an animal its right to fight for its life by shooting it with a rifle from behind, in stealth, never face to face or limb to limb. We deny the animal a respectable burial. If human beings truly respected animal life they would honor the dead, just as they would honor a homeless vagrant who donated his organs to the hospital. They would pray for forgiveness rather than give God thanks for the bloody piece of ass they devour. It bothers me that mankind has no true sense of guilt for slaughtering animals when there are so many peaceful vegetarian alternatives for meat in this day and age. It bothers PETA also, and only PETA has the resources, time and anger to become the Bitch Goddess that the meat industry and hunting industry deserve—and that the world needs in order to keep itself in check.
But isn’t mankind is a creature of war and dominance and doesn’t he deserve a hearty steak sometimes? Perhaps, and if the man stays true to the justice of nature, then he should be willing to surrender himself to ritual cannibalism where hopefully friends and family will feast on bits and pieces of his body and soul until he is raptured away to heaven. Now let’s see PETA create a pro-cannibalism campaign…that would be a showstopper for sure.
While my enthusiasm for PETA is occasionally muted, I still consider them my psychopathic soul mates of afar. Every time I think of mankind’s detestable treatment of animals and their complete lack of apology, I cannot help but lose a little empathy for my own species every time one of them is murdered in Iraq, starves to death in Africa, blows an Israeli school bus up in the name of Allah, or dies from heart disease inevitably caused by the over-consumption of juiced up mad cows.
Hell, you human beings are supposed to be the superior species. So you get yourself out of this fucking mess. And don’t expect us cows to help you. Moo.
The Late Mitchell Warren doesn’t support PETA entirely, as he is far too busy causing riots and promoting civil unrest to keep up with chick parties. However, he gives a big thumbs up (or three and a half stars) to any organization that harasses human beings as much as human beings manage to harass the animal kingdom around them. And just so you know, Mitchell was not implying that he is a cow by that last statement.