The Big Picture: Skin Game

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6
 

Thanks Bob for bringing such a (personally annoying) issue to everyones attention,
and for dealing with siad Issue so well

PETA are one of the most frustrating groups out there, they give a bad name to their own kind, and lump together, genuinly non-crazy people, with them!!

I'm a believer in Animal rights & welfare, I'm a Vegan, I've organised veggie groups, been in animal rights groups (the non-crazy kind), and have been working for years in dog shelters & homes,
Yet again and again, people still think We're all one be group of crazy, attention grabbing egotists!

Thank you for very clearly differentiating me & those who agree with me, from the lunatics in PETA

you just proven to be the pussy I had you for. wtf use are redundant animals, theyre just waste of resources, peta undestands at least that.

Fuck PETA

I am so f**king annoyed now! Ive stood up for PETA in the past thinking that they must at least do some good for animal kind but if whats presented in this video is true it has become clear to me that they are, at their core, a bunch of fanatics!!!

Wow, I knew PETA was crazy and that its best to ignore them, but I didn't realize that outside of being lunatics that they were actively evil as well.

Well done Bob, well done.

There are quite a few "Extreamist" animal rights groups out there that act sometimes even worse than PETA. Take for example to anti-vivistectionists (anti animal testing) groups.

There was and is a legitimate issue with the conditions of some test animals or fivoulous testing on cosmetics or the like BUT these groups oppose all kinds of animal testing and the main bulk of testing is still for very vital medical reasons.

But what does this mean? Well anti-testing campaigners have tried to close labs, broken into peoples houses and threatened scientists families. They have even gone after the breeders, when big labs became to hard a target, that provide the animals for testing. Calling them "Inderectly responsible". Lives have been ruined and actions taken that some goverments have even regarded as "Ammounting to domestic terrorism.

What is the consequence of this? Well testing still NEEDs to be done. So many laboritories have moved to the far east or india where testing is not as regulated or not regulated at all increasiong the chances of cruelty by a massive amount.

Animal Rights proponants all over the world have the messages utterly DESTROYED by PETA and groups out of touch with reality. The issue of animal rights is never discussed properly in most countires because the issue is so marred by the actions of people that makes they opponants look saintly and the rights of animals has really suffered as a consequence.

As an animal lover, I would like to say. Bob is the fucking man! You rock and it's good that you're willing to outright expose this vile company.

I have had both dogs and cats my entire life and have kept budgies, rabbits, snakes, giant snails, tropical fish and even domestic insects. I consider animals to be a beautiful part of nature that I enjoy learning more about and sharing my life with.

I however am not even slightly active in animal rights. I don't actively oppose fur (although I don't wear it either) but I do wear leather and purposely seek out real leather. I am practically vegetarian with the exception of chicken due to dietary issues, but I have no issues with the meat industry and worked in an abattoir. I do not oppose the use of animals for medical testing or as a personal resource. I feel I can justify my position and will do so if people want to have a reasonable, intelligent, non-flame filled debate. I do however oppose animal cruelty and consider PETA one of the most vile and disgusting terrorist organisations (and yes, they are bloody terrorists, they have convicted arsonists as prominent members who have fire-bombed medical testing labs for testing on animals).

This video was something that needed to be said and Bob gets much respect from me for it. While Bob had done said some stupid things, whining about the Scream movies and giving such a heavily biased review of Scream 4 it was painful, or doing the cringe worthy anti-thinker storyline, to give a few examples... generally speaking on things that actually matter Bob is a very decent guy with a strong moral centre and I'm glad he's here offsetting the bad image gamers have. Bob, you're a stand-up bloke...

I do agree with you Bob, but there's a little issue with the wording.

Animals Rights, also known as Animal Liberation, is the diea that other animals should have the same rights as humans.
Animal Welfare is the idea that we should try to care for the well being of other creatures.

I support animals welfare but not animals rights, since the idea is against pets and rights also entails an understanding of right and wrong, as well as their rights. I love my dog and such but I doubt he understands this stuff, it doesn't mean he shouldn't be care for but there are lines to draw.

This is... really, really messed up. Very disturbing. 90% of animals euthanized? Eugh... it's like they think death not being painful suddenly makes death okay.

You know what pisses me off? The fact that PETA thinks domesticated pets should never have existed. I don't know the official numbers here, but I'm willing to be there are easily more individuals of any given species typically kept as pets being owned by humans than being in the wild. Especially given that wild animals tend not to be in the good graces of humans, and their natural environments being progressively taken over by man.

What am I getting at here? Well, animals in the wild tend to be at the mercy of environmental factors to survival, while humans tend to not allow their pets to die needlessly. In fact, they're very protective of them, and consider them family. Sure, they might choose their own lives or those of their human family over a pet, but if all goes well a pet lives a much better life than a stray.

And that's my point. I believe that humans taking animals in as pets was the best thing to happen to them. Sure, they may live in subserviance to humans, but they'd be living in subserviance to their instincts in the wild, so we might as well give them a great place to live.

Best episode of TBP in a while. Bob seems to be listening to some of his crticism. I like how he added PETA's contact info at the end of the episode, actually backing up his argument and not expecting us to take it verbatim.

Abandon4093:
The hilarity of this video is that PeTA openly stated the Mario thing was an attention grabbing joke. Guessed you missed that one ay Bob?

Yes, it's been mentioned before in this thread (three times prior in fact) and yes, Bob even mentions that this was nothing more than a grab for attention several times in the video.

LordLundar:

Abandon4093:
The hilarity of this video is that PeTA openly stated the Mario thing was an attention grabbing joke. Guessed you missed that one ay Bob?

Yes, it's been mentioned before in this thread (three times prior in fact) and yes, Bob even mentions that this was nothing more than a grab for attention several times in the video.

He didn't say anything about PeTA admitting that. Which was my point.... Read things properly.

Riiight... and how are we supposed to eat meat if PeTA got their way. You can't be against killing animals for their skin, while at the same time be okay with breeding, killing and eating other type of animals.

Skinning and animal for its hide and killing another for the meat is the same damn thing as they served the same purpose... human interest.

I agree that we should treat all animals as best we can... but you're kidding yourselves if you think that it's more cruel to kill a fox than it is to kill a pig or a cow.

I would like to add a further point. Contrary to popular belief, the guys who make the "no animals were harmed in the making of this whatever" thingies are the American Humane Association, not PETA.

thanks bob. I think i will send Peta an email asking about several of the rather shady dealings.
Did you know pet owners tend to live longer?
I wonder what Peta has to say about that?

Thank you Bob, I'll be refering people to this video for years to come.

In a (very specific) sense, I don't wholly disagree with their stance about the domestication of animals, although I in no way agree with their approach to 'solving' the problem (or the fact that they're ignoring the many people who do take good care of their pets, or the contribution domestication of farm animals has had to human society). Many purebred species of cats and dogs have genetic defects that without human intervention would make it impossible for them to survive in the wild, and otherwise make life difficult for them. Large species of dog like the Newfoundland, for example, have heart trouble as a result of being bred so big, while smaller breeds like the Pug often have birth difficulties as a result of their hips being too small. PETA, as usual, is focused on entirely the wrong issue.

I'm unsure why the wearing of fur is at all considered ethically non negotiable, especially when leather is so widely embraced. As long as it's sustainable, the animals are either wild and killed humanely or farmed ethically, with minimal waste (if their meat can be used and / or they have other useful tissues / etc), and it is well regulated (in so much as numbers farmed / hunted only meet demand, and limits on this be enforced) then it seems as ethically grey as eating meat, in so much as, it's technically amoral since we can live without it, but we still do it because it's a valuable resource that we are willing to support for it's benefits.

I'm not speaking of PETA here, but of western sociological consensuses, wherein it is largely met with disgust that you would wear fur.

As for PETA, ignore them. We can't really win by assaulting them with rationality, so try to divert attention away from their campaigns by just educating people about what they're really doing, like Bob has done. If they don't receive any support, and these campaigns fall flat, then they'll lose their influence and become just a bunch of extremists who can be ignored, until they do something violent or otherwise illegal.

Sorry if someone else mentioned it... But something else about the founder is that when confronted with the fact that her insulin (she is diabetic) comes from pigs who are bred specifically for that purpose, she replied that her survival (hers, specifically) was for the greater good.
Which sounds just.... what the hell?

I mean I personally do place the line at health-related stuff too. Like, I don't meddle with what choices other people make, but I personally avoid things that I feel are unnecessary. So I don't eat meat (although it's at least as much due to how much the industry pollutes than how animals are mistreated when it's done on a large scale) or wear fur, but insulin or meds in general aren't something I see a huge problem with. I'd look at another option, but if I can't find one, yeah, when it's about survival you keep your own, that makes perfect sense to me.

But it's so contradictory to everything else she says...

As for pets, even if one wanted their eradication (and I say, now that we have created them, literally in the case of dogs, let them be) it seems to me like the obvious way to do it would be sterilize them and take the best care possible of the existing one. Not hurt a single of those who are already there. I mean come on, it's not like any of PeTA's objectives is realistically attainable in the first generation of any pet anyways.

I'd be all for stopping professional breeding of them, letting them breed naturally and adopting them (I've never gone to a pet store for any of my cats) if there was a viable, realistic plan for it that wouldn't lead to more abuse (and I am in no way qualified to know if it's possible or not) but even that doesn't require a single death of perfectly happy, healthy, adoptable pets.

Now I understand the sad thing that means some pets are killed to make room for those who will get adopted. It's sad, but shelters have a limited amount of room and money, and if they keep the pet who is too sick, too old or sadly in the case of cats too black to be adopted, and reject the one which is young and healthy and of "proper" appearance, well in the end both die. So I get that.
But that doesn't excuse their practices in the slightest, and it would never reach 90% of kills.

Anyways. Yeah, PeTA is pretty horrible. They're like the vegetarians who go yelling that meat is murder and throw your steak onto the ground. Congratulations, now they'll just get another steak, so you made things worse even from your point of view, plus they think vegetarians are psychos now.

EDIT:

NezumiiroKitsune:
I'm unsure why the wearing of fur is at all considered ethically non negotiable, especially when leather is so widely embraced. As long as it's sustainable, the animals are either wild and killed humanely or farmed ethically, with minimal waste (if their meat can be used and / or they have other useful tissues / etc), and it is well regulated (in so much as numbers farmed / hunted only meet demand, and limits on this be enforced) then it seems as ethically grey as eating meat, in so much as, it's technically amoral since we can live without it, but we still do it because it's a valuable resource that we are willing to support for it's benefits.

I think it's considered worse than leather because leather typically comes from animals that are also eaten while fur doesn't (I avoid leather because since I don't eat beef I feel it would be totally inconsistent to wear leather. However I don't get why anyone who eats beef would avoid leather. It's the same animal that already died, guys.)

And leather/fur are typically put on a different level as eating meat because eating is a more basic survival thing than wearing pretty things. Fur is also warm but I don't see many people complaining about people wearing fur when they, say, live in a super cold place, hunt the animals and then wear their furs, for instance. It's the coats for the rich people that people are against.
Anyways, it is still widely debated that animal protein is a need rather than a want. I personally think meat producers have a lot to do with it. Even moreso with milk, I mean why would you even drink milk from another species in the first place, let alone say we "need" it several times a day? I'm allergic to casein and believe me I don't lack calcium in any way.

Anyways. My point is that in many people's minds, meat is a need, fur is a luxury, and therefore meat is okay but fur is bad. Also meat tastes good and a lot of people are much less willing to go without something they like eating than go without something they find looks good or feels warm. There are also way less replacements for meat than for fur (if you're trying to reproduce the texture or taste of meat, that is. As far as alternatives go, you've got eggs if you still eat them, or quinoa, both delivering full protein, and if you only want to make up for the amino acids provided by meat, you have most types of beans (the small ones but not the long ones, basically), all types of lentils, and many types of peas)
On top of that it's much less practical to be vegetarian than to avoid fur. And convenience is important. You can go to stores anywhere and find clothes that don't contain animals. But a lot of the time there aren't vegetarian options in stores or restaurants, or they cost more, which is ridiculous when you know they're much cheaper to produce.

Personally, I think it would be much more productive to encourage people to have vegetarian meals every so often. Have some falafels, or some beans in your mexican dish instead of the beef you usually get, that kind of thing. I think there is too much of an idea that there needs to be a huge divide (either you never eat animals or you eat them for every meal). Hell, in France where I grew up nobody has meat for breakfast, it's just not in the culture. Everyone is vegetarian for that one meal. A lot of them would get so offended if you told them that though.

Bluecho:
-snip-

You'd lose that bet unfortunately, there are definitely less domesticated species than their are wild across the animal kingdom, by a very hefty margin. Breeds of dog aren't distinct species, for example. So when we say dog (domesticated) we mean at most two species, off the top of my head, and most people only meet the one.

I've always had a bad feeling about PETA from my chum, Frances. (Paranoid Schizophrenic and mad as a hatter...) She once joined PETA and soon quit because she thought they were "fucking insane."

All because she found out that they kill almost as much animals as the abusers. As well as being against pet ownership in general. (She owns two cats.)

I really does say something about PETA when they are seen as insane by the insane themselves. But I didn't know the origin story about it's founder, so I have to thank Bob for that. Talk about putting Dracula in charge of the bloodbank.

Avistew:
Sorry if someone else mentioned it... But something else about the founder is that when confronted with the fact that her insulin (she is diabetic) comes from pigs who are bred specifically for that purpose, she replied that her survival (hers, specifically) was for the greater good.
Which sounds just.... what the hell?

Actually, synthetic insulin's been produced since the 1980s (derived from bacteria). I think it would be pretty hard to find insulin harvested from pigs nowadays.

nice one bob. i dont usually post on your comments section, but i gotta take my hat off to ya. that was sub-lime.

Abandon4093:

LordLundar:

Abandon4093:
The hilarity of this video is that PeTA openly stated the Mario thing was an attention grabbing joke. Guessed you missed that one ay Bob?

Yes, it's been mentioned before in this thread (three times prior in fact) and yes, Bob even mentions that this was nothing more than a grab for attention several times in the video.

He didn't say anything about PeTA admitting that. Which was my point.... Read things properly.

And you're assuming he wrote that 5 minutes before he recorded it, so your point is a waste of time anyways.

LordLundar:

Abandon4093:

LordLundar:

Yes, it's been mentioned before in this thread (three times prior in fact) and yes, Bob even mentions that this was nothing more than a grab for attention several times in the video.

He didn't say anything about PeTA admitting that. Which was my point.... Read things properly.

And you're assuming he wrote that 5 minutes before he recorded it, so your point is a waste of time anyways.

That doesn't make any sense.

It doesn't matter when he wrote it, the video came out near enough 2 weeks after PeTA admitted to it being a joke. I couldn't care less whether Bon recorded his show before he knew that. He still posted something suggesting they hadn't admitted to it.

Now, you're being a Pedantic little so-an-so. So I doubt I'll reply again.

ThrobbingEgo:
Actually, synthetic insulin's been produced since the 1980s (derived from bacteria). I think it would be pretty hard to find insulin harvested from pigs nowadays.

Oh? That's cool. I'll have to find the place where I read about what she said then and ask them about it, because otherwise why wouldn't she have just said that?

Well as much as I don't like Movie Bob (I denounced him as full of himself, as well as shit, after the first episode of the Big Picture) but I must say, I decided to watch this for some reason and I must say, he is right in this regard.

I once spent upwards of twenty minutes explaining to an airheaded girl why our high school's newspaper cannot and will never run a story on how amazing and noble PETA is. Funny thing is, even after I told her about the sea kittens, the comparison of slaughterhouses to the Holocaust, and the whole Cooking Mama...thing, she kind of nodded and went back to looking at the website. That's what drives me crazy about PETA. Their claims of ethics sucker in all those people with good hearts but lacking brains.

Usually, I don't like it when people draw attention to things like this, but Bob actually said something about the issue. Also, though I'm a strong supporter of animal rights myself, he brought up some issues with PETA that I was previously unaware of. So thank you Bob, for giving those people the verbal beating they deserve. (I suppose the physical beating will have to wait.)

Really well done. I keep on re-watching this XD.

You the man Bob! At least we might be able to take this attention and use it to rub them the wrong way. I never liked Peta but I had no idea they were evil, or that they ran such ludicrous ad campaigns! I always regarded them as a fat joke. I'm glad you're setting people straight on how horrible their policies are.

A friend of mine linked http://www.peta.org/living/vegetarian-living/14-steps-that-will-evolve-your-views-on-eating-animals.aspx on Facebook and supported it.
I tried to be reserve in criticising it, as it was a social network, but I felt like it could be damaging if I couldn't back-up my opinions. Feeling like I had nothing to lose as in she never actually spoke to me in Uni, I decided to link her this video and Penn and Teller's BS episode to, so she can get both sides of the argument. Lets see what she does.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here