Veganacious

Posts Tagged ‘PETA’

As a young teenager, I used to surf the coast of Southern California. My vision was poor, so I learned to feel the currents of water beneath me. When there was a light drawing back, it meant a swell was coming and I needed to get paddling. If I delayed, I would miss the ride, and if I was too fast, I would have the wave crash down on me and would wipe out. Lately, I have been feeling a shift in the currents beneath me once again, only this time I do not plan to miss it.

PETA’s Failed Policies

There have been rumblings on the vegan blogosphere about some of the latest new lows reached by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.  Their pie-in-the-face disrespect to a person in authority seems contraindicated when requesting more respect for other beings.  It is assaultive and inappropriate behavior not becoming adults with serious intentions. Then there is the full frontal nudity of a young woman in their State of the Union Undress (deliberately not linked here) – disrespectful not only to women but also to our elected leaders. Even Ingrid Newkirk’s response (A pragmatic fight for animal rights) to Victor Schonfeld’s article, Five fatal flaws of animal rights activism, in which she defends “silly antics” as being part of animal rights activism misses the mark by a mile.  While Ms. Newkirk may be well-intentioned, her behavior is the same old tired tactics that have been failing to do anything but increase the PETA budget and gain some press for many years.  At every turn, Ms. Newkirk sells out the animals and any chance to show respect for their lives, whether it is by cooperating with fast food enterprises that kill animals for food and profit, or partnering with corporations by buying stock in animal exploitation schemes. Ms. Newkirk never draws a line in the sand, never acts as if she believes what she says that animals are not ours to use; she uses and exploits them freely to draw attention and financial support to her organization while they remain in a living hell. I have noticed lately that when an outrageous behavior occurs in the news, such as the recent intrusion into Senator Mary Landrieus’ office by men dressed as phone company repairmen, the allusion on a recent MSNBC news discussion was to liken them to “PETA protesters.” Meanwhile, only 7 animals were saved in PETA’s “shelter” in 2008, while nearly 2,000 were killed.  With millions of dollars in annual income, it seems impossible that those lives were valued, because with the will to save them, they could have. If PETA wants ethical treatment for animals, they should begin by delivering some themselves.

Read the rest of this entry »

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

When I was younger, and less informed, I used to take pride in identifying with the bizarre tactics of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.  I cringed at every issue of their magazine that I received, though, so filled with photos of tormented animals; I used to wonder why they sent those photos to those of us who already cared about animals–it was distressing. Obviously, it helped keep their coffers filled, because they continue doing so today.  The fist and paw of Animal Liberation Front seemed to exemplify the radical changes that needed to take place. Free the Animals! Then, I did not question their tactics; I thought they were radicals and felt the torment of animals required extreme measures to get the attention of people. They did make the news and did make people think; unfortunately, what most people thought was that animal rights people were not to be taken seriously.

Now you can count me as a Vegan against PETA. They have made so many missteps that I cannot consider them a positive force in the fight for the liberation of animals.  A few months back, I was more concerned with in-fighting, disagreements and lawsuits between animal protection groups; that was before I landed squarely in the middle of one of their squabbles.  I felt then that if anyone was doing anything positive for animals, then good for them; why would I take a stand against a group that was trying to help?  But what I learned changed my perspective and increased my understanding of the problems with the largest groups, such as PETA, who take in millions of dollars yet do not seem to make any progress towards freeing animals from their horrible position on this planet. While they may stop a bad practice here or there, undoubtedly several more, often worse practices crop up to replace them.  At the root, there is no respect for animals.

Here are the reasons I am disappointed in you, PETA:

1. You use tacky tactics.  Sexism, sizism, celebrity, appearance: all are superficial and do not represent the horror of what you know is happening to animals. Who cares who the sexiest vegetarian over 50 is? Why is it important to disparage a full-bodied female on your billboards?  And nudity?  Is that really necessary, when the reality is so very serious? How does that elevate the dialogue to save other species? What is happening to animals is no joke and it is offensive that you make cartoons while the reality is a nightmare in full living color.
2. You are dishonest.  People trust you to do the right thing for animals. They entrust their companion animals to you, thinking you will find them homes. Then you destroy them before you have even tried to place them and spend thousands of dollars on a freezer to contain all the dead bodies. Ms. Newkirk, you have your photo taken with dogs and cats, yet you are not working to find homes for animals. That is inherently dishonest, using the media to present a false sense of who you are and what you represent.
3. You support some of the most egregious companies by owning stock in them, companies that torment and slaughter millions of animals. How could you?
4. You partner with companies who show no conscience, who cause some of the worst suffering imaginable; yet you partner with them if they make some useless gesture towards animal “welfare.”  If you end up getting slaughtered, there is no welfare involved.
5. You have a scary attitude towards rescue that ends in death.  You have charged other animal organizations of not providing adequately for the animals in their care, but you kill the animals entrusted to your care. How is that better?
6. Your kill ratios are getting higher each year.  What are you doing with all your millions of dollars, if you do not respect the individual lives of animals? Ms. Newkirk, you have said that the kindest thing you can do for a homeless animal is to kill them. That is not kindness, it is psychopathology.  The kindest thing would be to provide them a home.
7. You refuse challenges.  Adam Kochanowicz recently challenged you, Ms. Newkirk, in an open letter to debate with Gary L. Francione.  Mr. Francione, a Rutgers University professor, agreed to the debate.  There is now a petition circulating on Twitter to request the same of you.  Why have you refused to respond?
8. You have become a destructive force.  You support the failed welfarist policies that do nothing to increase respect for animals. Indeed, you show very little respect for them yourself.  Not just the dogs and cats found half frozen and dead in dumpsters, but the fact that you do NOTHING to try to place the animals entrusted to you before you murder them.  They are innocent, loving, feeling beings and you never give them a fighting chance. While you may not be able to save them all, you could at least try. For $32 million a year, you could certainly try.  Your lack of will is fatal.

Your kill statistics from last year, 2008, show only 7 animals placed and nearly 2,000 killed.  That is lower than any neighboring shelter and a higher kill ratio than in any year in your past.  You have an income of over $30 million per year, yet most of us could do better than those odds working with a zero dollar budget and a home computer.  The news that two PETA workers killed dozens of animals within minutes of being surrendered was defended by you, Ms. Newkirk.  You supported the workers (possibly because they were following PETA policy?) stating that they did not cause suffering.  You seem to have a pathological concern that living animals are vulnerable and the safest way to protect them is to kill them.  Your group kills healthy, very young animals – a veterinarian performed an autopsy on one of the dogs found in a dumpster who had been killed and he was only a six month old puppy, a beautiful and perfectly healthy young dog that would have been easier than most to place. Nor did PETA keep these animals in shelter for six months, thirty days, a week, or a day – but only for minutes, before they were killed.

That is why I am a Vegan against PETA.  I am glad you do some good with your money; you should.  But you also cause harm. You give Animal Rights a certain bizarre reputation that is ill-deserved. Gary Francione, Roger Yates, Randy Sandberg, Elizabeth Collins, Adam Kochanowicz, Dan Cudahy and numerous others are Animal Rights people that do not behave in an adolescent fashion. They do not use the media and celebrities for questionable purposes.  The work ahead of us is far too important to have it reduced to a cartoon, to have insulting billboards spread out across our highways that offend a good portion of our citizens, to have nudity used to lower the bar of our cause and make us look vulgar and insignificant, while billions of animals are killed every year, and while PeTA is busy killing thousands themselves.

I know there are earnest hearts who work for PeTA and truly care about animals.  And there are many millions of people who believe in PeTA. But I am no longer one of them.

Related Articles:

The Classical Circular Farce of Welfarism

Vegans Against PeTA

Sexism and Misogyny in the Movement

You Tube video regarding PeTA’s killing of animals

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

After contacting two animal rights organizations (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and Friends of Animals) that were embroiled in a lawsuit over a primate sanctuary, I was confused by the conflicting information I received from both organizations.  I had been seeking a group that supported veganism rather than vegetarianism; that supported an abolitionist approach rather than pursuing the long-failed single-issue welfare track; and that was using their funding to help actual living animals rather than just espousing theories, controlling them, or worse yet, killing them.  After several headlines in the animal newsfeed I read, I became interested in the plight of sanctuaries and decided to make it my mission to visit as many as I could in the Texas region where I live. When I was invited to visit Primarily Primates, I could hardly refuse. The timing was a bit intense, coming exactly one week after my visit to Serenity Springs farm animal sanctuary in Forestburg, Texas.  Despite some misgivings about spending the time and energy to travel to this second sanctuary, I made my travel plans anyway. It meant getting up in the wee hours of the morning to arrive on time, but I am very glad I did. The day before I arrived, the lawsuit between the two animal rights organizations had been settled and the sanctuary was secure. Friends of Animals is the parent organization for the sanctuary, Primarily Primates; I would have a chance to see for myself what kind of condition it was in.

There was a nice straight road leading out of San Antonio into the hill country towards the sanctuary.  I had imagined it far from any signs of life and was prepared to be on a deserted road, but that turned out to be erroneous thinking on my part.  Sadly, the press of human population growth has moved ever closer to the sanctuary.  While it is still in the hills far from the city, I could see the housing tracts moving slowly closer to the hill country.  When I was leaving, I saw a doe walking about in the yard of a home as I descended the hills, looking so out of place as she foraged for an existence here among the homeowners.  We take their habitat and then consider them pests – hardly fair.

When I pulled into the sanctuary, I was surprised at all the cars parked along the dirt road.  I had not realized how many animals lived at PPI (about 450), nor how many caretakers, and even a veterinarian would be onsite working.  The day I arrived, a group of Boy Scouts was busy building some climbing and shelter structures, replacing the basic existing ones for a luxury model. These Scouts were very much appreciated by the staff; the sense of community was wonderful to witness as the boys and their leader invested in this beautiful place. The sanctuary is private, which affords the animals some serenity, so my visit was a bit disruptive for them.  To soften the intrusion, I was allowed to bring a large bunch of grapes to share.  A small group of us wandered through the acreage, Stephen Tello, the Executive Director of PPI; Priscilla Feral, President of Friends of Animals; Kaz Sephton (President) and Jack Olmer of the San Antonio Vegetarian Society. I was fortunate to also meet the sanctuary veterinarian and primate specialist, Dr. Valerie Kirk, before we started off from the sanctuary office. The grounds are very green and forested, with most of the large housing structures grass-bottomed, keeping as close to natural habitat as possible. Here were over four hundred animals that one organization was helping to save from death or worse.  The enormity of the task of feeding and caring for so many animals suddenly struck me; no wonder there were more than a dozen cars parked out front, permanent staff to maintain the grounds, care for the animals, and support the sanctuary. It is a seven-days-per-week activity.

The sanctuary is 78 acres of rolling green with mostly shady areas. The housing areas are not  simple cubes, but structures several stories high which allow for climbing and swinging.  Some have large cargo nets, swings, and tubular climbing devices. Most have connecting upper-story tunnels that go from one housing structure to the other, giving the primates more territory to explore. Some even have rooms with air conditioning where they can crawl out of the hot Texas sun.  Although it was a warm August day,  I was surprised at the temperature – with all the trees, it was much more comfortable than I had expected. Despite the comfort, I did feel a bit guilty to be able to walk about freely when they were confined, but I knew their confinement was for their own protection. They appeared active and healthy and seemed to enjoy the small group of people walking through their home. We were both diversion and entertainment.

The first primates I met were a couple of gibbons.  I was standing back several feet from the edge of the housing, but one recognized a rookie when he saw one and grabbed me by the hair – hard! I was surprised by the telescopic abilities of those arms, but the strength of their tails surpasses it, I was told. Once he let go of my hair, he grabbed me by the arm.  While I appreciate direct communication, I couldn’t tarry, because there were 78 acres to see and I had to move on.  I wanted to get to know them as much as they wanted to check me out; those two did grab my attention — literally. I left some grapes in a feeding tray before I moved on.

The chimps have so many stories – some were “pets” whose owners grew tired of them, some were used in labs, some were removed from unusual circumstances, like the one removed from a drug dealer. Like humans, these primates also show signs of neurotic, repetitive behavior when their formative years are traumatic.  The sensitive methods for rehabilitating the animals when they are new to the sanctuary provides a segue to their new life and aids in their adjustment.  Stephen, the man in charge of their care, knew all of their stories and habits.  Like the father of a large and somewhat dysfunctional family, he was aware of the troubled primates and seemed empathic towards them all. The teen chimps made a lot of noise, banging against the bars and demonstrating their importance – like teens everywhere, trying to establish a sense of themselves during their identity-formation stage of development. All male animals that can reproduce are given vasectomies so that reproduction is not possible; the goal is to provide sanctuary, not to increase the number of confined animals.  There is a huge aviary, so large that birds can fly within it – it requires daily checks to keep out racoons and snakes.  There are macacques, lemurs, lions, wild cats and a couple of animals that looked like members of the macropod family. I was able to feed a macacque, something I was told was unusual. My knowledge of these beautiful animals is minimal, so I paid attention to all admonitions — especially after the hair-pulling incident. (One group of chimps had a couple of know feces-flingers – I stood way back. I didn’t want to provide too much entertainment!)

The lemurs are sociable and so gentle. When feeding them grapes, many would gingerly take a grape out of my hand with their soft, dark little fingers.  Others wanted me to put the grape directly into their mouth. They looked right at me with those big, beautiful golden eyes and oh so tenderly would hold out their hands.  Their noises were reminiscent of a small kitten, correspondingly  soft, pleasant noises. But watch them climb – what strength and speed! In some housing areas, it was important to feed the dominant animal first, so the others would get a chance for  their own grapes.  Heirarchy, just like at work! I felt right at home.  The beautiful spider monkeys will grab your heart – Their ability to transport through branches, swing, and climb is inspiring.  So much spirit!

Not only has PPI rescued dozens of animals, they have also saved many humans from the consequences of their own poor choices. Whatever leads people to be enchanted with the idea of exotic pets, the end result is almost always disastrous for all concerned. (A recent news article highlighted how one family pet became an attacker, something that can happen when the animals are not understood). One of the chimps was self-mutilating before being brought to the sanctuary, when his human started leaving him home alone for long periods of time. The damage resulted in circles of red, raw flesh. Some have been raised solely with fast food and would not even eat bananas or other healthy food; it took a good deal of patience to introduce them to sanctuary life. All animals are originally rehabilitated and monitored before being put into habitats.  Compatible groups live in some of the larger enclosures, mimicking what takes place in the wild.  Of course, all of the animals are non-native and due to the diverse backgrounds from which they come, it is challenging to help them adapt to their new home and fellow primates.  Phoebe, I was told,  was getting ready to move into a habitat with Logan and Harley, so they could all adjust together. Imagine knowing over 400 names, stories, and personalities! The serene appearance belies the thoughtful and somewhat complex methods behind each animal’s adjustment period, allowing them to be on equal footing, to keep the sanctuary a haven rather than a horror.

Jordan was the last lemur I met before I headed back to the airport; he let me scratch his back and put grapes right in his mouth. It is amazing that these animals would ever trust a human being after what so many have been through. I began thinking about the tremendous financial commitment to these animals. With chimps living into their fifties and some of the other primates into their thirties, this a a long-term commitment to hundreds of animals, many of whom are traumatized and have suffered physical and psychological damage. They are dependent on humans because we have used them in sad and sadistic ways, and neglected them as individual feeling beings. This sanctuary, like most of the sanctuaries I am learning about, have to fight for their very existence by remaining ever vigilant, fiscally responsible, and watchful against all threats to the preservation of a peaceful place for these animals. What a shame that hundreds of thousands of dollars had to be diverted into a legal defense rather than towards improving the sanctuary. Whatever shape the sanctuary was in over the past several years, it is a beautiful place now.  Of course, ideally the animals would be living in their native land in natural habitat; sanctuaries would be unnecessary.  Meanwhile, with all the billions of animals that suffer and are slaughtered, vivisected, used for entertainment, neglected and abused, it is helpful to know that dozens of compassionate people are working to maintain a place for these few hundred animals to survive and flourish.  I am all for that.

To see what is going on at PPI these days, check out the stories and many videos below:

Primarily Primates website

Primarily Primates videos

Bookmark It

Hide Sites