New controversial PETA ad targets children.

Bird

Bird

Happy Go Lucky
MBTI
-
Enneagram
-
http://news.yahoo.com/video/controversial-peta-billboard-directed-towards-181000786.html
I definitely think that for Peta, it is one of their better ads. I also feel that it is appropriate
considering that it is targeting children. I am sure we are all familiar with the typical Peta
ad. This is a step in the right direction. Albeit, it doesn’t have to be directed specifically
towards children I can understand why Ms. Katz decided to make that decision, or at least
to be the spokesperson for it.
People seem to have a problem with this ad because it is targeting children. However if
you watch television commercials you'll notice that the majority of them actually already
target children. Peta is just now jumping on the bandwagon.
Ads everywhere, especially for technology, are targeting children. Big corporations assume
that if they target the child, then the child will nag until he/she gets his/her way.
Which is exactly how America works nine times out of ten.
A lot of people, adults and children alike do not know how meat is farmed.
Most people don’t know what goes on in slaughter houses. And part of that reason is that they
don’t want to know. They prefer to remain ignorant. I strongly believe that veganism is
not more widespread due to social conditioning.
I believe that a lot of parents find trouble with this ad because it makes them face a
reality that they would rather not. When your child asks you something, you cannot
ignore it. When you do, it encourages the child more to discover the answers to their
questions. This is the reason that I believe Peta targeted children with this ad.
There is a reason why animal killing plants mainly hire ex-cons. No one else in their
right mind would want the job. Ex-cons take it because they generally don’t have a lot
of other job options. Have you ever heard a child say they dream of growing up and
working in a slaughter house? No.
 
I always thought Peta was something you shoved deep fried lamb into before eating it.
 
I think that's spelt pita.
 
boy, am I dumb I thought petas was made from spelt flour.-
 
I don't know, I think eating meat isn't...good...but I always have so it is like second nature.

Eating dead animal flesh is a strange practice when you actually think about it, but I don't think all animals are equal the way they compare cats and turkeys.

It's a matter of time before I stop eating meat. Maybe I will never stop eating steak altogether but it would be about as often as I do other things I consider myself a 'moderate user' of.

:whistle:

Your point about targeting children is pretty much bang on, though. :thumb:

Oh, and a few shifts in a slaughterhouse (and not the nice kind they show on Kill it, Cook it, Eat it) might even put me off steak! I briefly considered it as a way to just take the leap but, well, I haven't eaten enough steak in this lifetime yet. I've not had the money till recently. It sounds bad but it is a little bit true.
 
Whoo boy, that's an appeal to emotion and What Measure Is a Non Cute over there....

I don't think it's wrong, but it's misleading and not to mention, playing with emotional heartstrings.

Cats are not eaten, I think, for a certain reason:
a) they don't have much meat.
b) They have a use, historically. To catch mice. Just as how dogs are used as guard and hunting dogs.
But why aren't they using dogs? Because in parts of the world, dogs -are- a delicacy.
Why aren't they using bunnies, which are common house pets? Because bunnies -are- a delicacy.

Cruelty has little to no part on why certain animals are eaten. It only has a part on how those animals were being prepared to be eaten.

I do think it can be used for a good discussion, even when it may not lead to complete veganism; a.k.a "Look, kids, you want your turkey to be treated as kindly as your cat here."
 
Trifoilum said:
Whoo boy, that's an appeal to emotion and What Measure Is a Non Cute over there....

I don't think it's wrong, but it's misleading and not to mention, playing with emotional heartstrings.

Cats are not eaten, I think, for a certain reason:
a) they don't have much meat.
b) They have a use, historically. To catch mice. Just as how dogs are used as guard and hunting dogs.
But why aren't they using dogs? Because in parts of the world, dogs -are- a delicacy.
Why aren't they using bunnies, which are common house pets? Because bunnies -are- a delicacy.

Cruelty has little to no part on why certain animals are eaten. It only has a part on how those animals were being prepared to be eaten.
Click to expand...

I think a part of the reason they actually chose cats
is due to the internet’s sudden obsession with cats.
In most regions, at least in the US and parts of
Canada cats have become more common as household
pets than dogs. This is definitely the reason that Peta
did not choose something like a parakeet to say the least.
I definitely do think that part of the reason Peta did not
choose rabbits is because in the US and Canada rabbits are
eaten regularly. I don’t think many children know that dogs
are treated as a culinary delicacy in some parts of the world
so I do not think, personally, that that is why Peta did not
choose dogs. Rather that a large part of the world is fixated
on cats. So many companies are using felines as marketing
tools within the last year. When one thing works for one
company, others are sure to use it for their advantage as well.
 
I like how you guys all decided to dive into the issue of eating animals and not the obvious manipulation of the still-plastic and easily-influenced minds of the nation's youth.
 
Bird said:
I think a part of the reason they actually chose cats
is due to the internet’s sudden obsession with cats.
In most regions, at least in the US and parts of
Canada cats have become more common as household
pets than dogs. This is definitely the reason that Peta
did not choose something like a parakeet to say the least.
Click to expand...
I agreed. It also has an effect of why cats are chosen. Other aspects I mentioned described how others are not chosen...

But aside from that, cats-as-pets is actually a cultural relic; a habit that has a reason behind and not...exactly...you know, something that happens without reason.
 
SealHammer said:
I like how you guys all decided to dive into the issue of eating animals and not the obvious manipulation of the still-plastic and easily-influenced minds of the nation's youth.
Click to expand...
Bitch about it cell phone companies.
 
Trifoilum said:
I agreed. It also has an effect of why cats are chosen. Other aspects I mentioned described how others are not chosen...

But aside from that, cats-as-pets is actually a cultural relic; a habit that has a reason behind and not...exactly...you know, something that happens without reason.
Click to expand...
I agree with that as well :P
 
SealHammer said:
I like how you guys all decided to dive into the issue of eating animals and not the obvious manipulation of the still-plastic and easily-influenced minds of the nation's youth.
Click to expand...

Truthfully I tend to find Peta to be absurd, this however not so much. Kids have been advertised to since advertising became a thing, 80's-90's cartoons where nothing but 30min commercials for toys and nobody complains about that.

The add doesn't hurt anyone and it really shouldn't starting arguments
 
Barnabas said:
Truthfully I tend to find Peta to be absurd, this however not so much. Kids have been advertised to since advertising became a thing, 80's-90's cartoons where nothing but 30min commercials for toys and nobody complains about that.

The add doesn't hurt anyone and it really shouldn't starting arguments
Click to expand...

Toys don't alter the fundamentals of a person's worldview for years or decades at a time.
Ideas do.
This is an advertisement for an idea.

PETA is a political interest. As such, it has no business trying to get into the minds of children (you know, the ones who can't vote).
 
SealHammer said:
Toys don't alter the fundamentals of a person's worldview for years or decades at a time.
Ideas do.
This is an advertisement for an idea.

PETA is a political interest. As such, it has no business trying to get into the minds of children (you know, the ones who can't vote).
Click to expand...

Going to offer a counter argument for that, comics, tv shows, books and cartoons all have powerful impact on children. These are the mediums the give kids heroes and models for them to live their lives by. Which are the kids going to be more affected by? Atticus, Optimus and Harry or the one cat add on the interstate.
 
Toys don't alter the fundamentals of a person's worldview for years or decades at a time.
Click to expand...

Barbie and Ken would like to have a word with you.

Anyway, I wouldn't eat my cat, but my cat would certainly eat turkey. And she'd think it was delicious.
 
Children aren't entitled to ideas, yo. You gotta think for them, so that when they become adults then they will think as you do.
 
It probably made me a horrible child, considering that I saw an aftermath in my granny's village of what would become a dinner... However, I can't say the same for a pig. I haven't eaten pork for years until very recently because I knew how things got done. But poultry has never bothered me for some reason and I can't even explain why. Are we the only species that think about it? I guess we are. What are we going to eat in the apocalyptic world? Will you stay true to your vegetarian views? I think it's the question. But I think there's no correct/wrong answer to it.
Kids get targeted in the ads all the time. Cartoons, toys, whatever. Just one more thing now. But it is the parents who have to explain a kid why a cat has a body of a turkey. I'd love to hear those stories.
 
I have no problem with this advertisement but PETA as an organization is ridiculous and the more you look into them the more ridiculous you find out they are.
 
SealHammer;666703[B said:
]Toys don't alter the fundamentals of a person's worldview for years or decades at a time.
Ideas do.
This is an advertisement for an idea.[/B]

PETA is a political interest. As such, it has no business trying to get into the minds of children (you know, the ones who can't vote).
Click to expand...

View attachment 16717 I read the comics and watched the cartoon for years in the 80's, when I was 10 years old or younger. I had a fake sheriff's badge and cap guns to match. I had a toy M16 that shot out sparks when you pulled the trigger. Is it any wonder why I spent a few years of my life contemplating joining the military?

So you're saying ads promoting kids to grow up and do this:

View attachment 16718

Are better than ads that promote kids to grow up and do this?

View attachment 16720


Plus....

How is PETA any more of a political interest than any other political interest that surrounds us all the time anyhow? If you like clean drinking water, than you're an Environmentalist. If you like to hunt, then you're an NRA supporter. If you believe in buying and selling goods for money, then you're a Capitalist. Everything we do is a political interest, how does PETA differ from any of the others?

I think what you mean to say is that PETA is a political interest you don't agree with and you're hiding it behind the thinly veiled excuse of targeting it at kids as a way to provide an even-handed argument to hide your prejudice against them.
 
Last edited:
I like eating meat, it tastes good. PETA really needs to sort itself out. For a company that claims to want to protect animals they sure KILL an awful lot of them. Look it up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top