Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Heavy Petting: PETA Compares Teen Girls to Unneutered Animals

Posted by Tana Ganeva, AlterNet at 3:31 PM on July 18, 2008.


Is PETA (yet again) exploiting female sexuality to get its point across?
peta3

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Sex and Relationships in your
mailbox!

 

PETA has always caught flak for its publicity campaigns, which often seem to elevate the wellbeing of animals above the wellbeing of women. In the eighties the organization got tons of media attention by flinging blood at women in fur coats; they also earned criticisms from feminist groups for not dishing out the same treatment to men wearing leather. More recently PETA has earned the ire of feminists for using pornographic images of women to push their agenda as well as for their recurrent and ever-tasteful campaigns comparing women to livestock.

The animal rights group is certain to grab headlines with their new ad, which calls attention to the importance of neutering pets by parodying the parental sex talk. The ad opens with a surly teen girl sighing loudly as her parents plant themselves on her bed wearing "We need to talk about sex" expressions.

Mom: Honey, we need to talk ...

Dad: ... about sex. We think you should be having it sweetie.

Mom: A lot of it.

Dad: Get out there and nail everything you can!

[ ... ]

Teen girl: What if I get pregnant?"

Dad: So what? You should pop out all the kids you want! We can leave them in the shelter, dump them out in the street ... it's really not important.

The ad closes with, "Parents shouldn't act this way. Neither should people with dogs and cats."

The ad is really well-made and funny; it also does a great job skewering our weird, schizophrenic discomfort with teen sexuality. Another plus is that at no point is the girl entrapped, naked, in a cage, a la previous PETA efforts to shed light on animal cruelty. All in all it is not as offensive as it could be: way to go PETA, for putting out an ad that doesn't involve the symbolic slaughter of women.

So I don't think the ad is blatantly or egregiously misogynistic.

But in light of PETA's history and the feminist criticisms leveled at the organization, is it really necessary for them to equate teen girls with animals, even though they do it in a tongue-in-cheek way? The joke still works with a boy, so why did they opt to use a girl?

It's also pretty clear that PETA is capitalizing on the recent media frenzy over teen pregnancy (see Jamie Lynn Spears/Gloucester pregnancy "pact"/ etc.) And part of the reason the ad is funny and effective, is because the sexuality of teen girls is the object of societal freak-outs in a way that male sexuality is not. (In the Gloucester teen pregnancy story, there wasn't too much media discussion about all those boys dumb and fucked-up enough to have unprotected sex with girls who weren't on birth control).

The figure of the pregnant teen elicits all sorts of screwed-up reactions (paternalism, derision, moralizing, to name a few) that are rooted in larger messed-up assumptions about female sexuality. And the PETA ad certainly doesn't contribute much to the very difficult and complex topic of teen pregnancy. Here's a small but telling case-in-point: The top result for the ad on YouTube is titled "PETA sex talk -- For girls like Jamie Lynn Spears." What kind of girls? Slutty girls?

What do you think? Is the ad another example of PETA trafficking in sexist assumptions to push their agenda? Or is it a funny, harmless way to get an important point across?

Digg!

Tagged as: sex, teens, peta, teen pregnancy

Tana Ganeva is an editorial assistant at AlterNet.


Take Your Southern Strategy And Shove It
McCain and Palin's scurrilous and inciteful attacks may still play in modern-day Alabama, but they don't play outside the south.
Post by Booman. October 12, 2008.
Desperate Republicans Have No Intention Of Going Down To Defeat With Either Dignity Or Honor
Republican Party leaders are starting to finally realize the trouble they're in
Post by . October 12, 2008.
The Fraud Of Fraud
The process of turning ACORN into a terrorist sleeper cell has begun and I see little hope that they aren't going to be successful.
Post by Digby. October 11, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Perhaps...
Posted by: Xynyx on Jul 18, 2008 5:20 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps we should focus more on how we can change those assumptions. Perhaps, if the problem weren't so bloody serious pretty much everywhere on earth, it wouldn't be so ripe for PETA to use in their ads.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So, following this logic...
Posted by: Taylor on Jul 18, 2008 10:25 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
a good PETA parent should now have both their pets AND children spayed and neutered, right? Just making sure I got the message straight.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So, following this logic... Posted by: ASU_Mountaineer
» No, and that's ridiculous. Posted by: abbadon2007
» RE: So, following this logic... Posted by: john mont
Well, you're right in a way
Posted by: goeswithness on Jul 19, 2008 4:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The ad would be more effective had it been a teenage boy because he can create a lot more babies in a year than a girl can and the ad was about uncontrolled breeding. So...

I don't find the woman in a cage ad to be sexist. It's MEANT for you to be horrified at the treatment of the woman and extend that to animals. The fact that she's pregnant gives it another layer that having a man in the cage couldn't have.

On the other hand, the woman in the slip (hardly pornography) is clearly trading on sexuality, but if men are represented as well, that's not necessarily sexist.

Never thought about the leather thing though..interesting point.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Well, you're right in a way Posted by: momilitia
» Leather is (mostly) ... Posted by: Bbear41
» Leather is (mostly) ... Posted by: Bbear41
Humanity is not the pinacle
Posted by: Timberbee on Jul 19, 2008 4:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are making tenuous, at best, assertions regarding this treatment of women. Leather is a generally a by product, where as fur is often the only "crop", yes, the meat is feed back to the other animals, but only for the purpose of harvesting more fur.

Should this ad have focused, instead, on telling a male offspring to go out and "nail" everything he could? Would that have even made a point? How many men, boys, out there, already do just that? Nail everything they can, and walk away from the results of their actions? Talk to your parents, to your grandparents and you will likely find many examples, within your own history, of men doing just that.

Like it or not, sex generally has deeper consequences for women. This whole "anti abortion" issue, is, in fact, more anti birth control than it is anti abortion. Link this with non equal pay, and this whole "protect Marriage" act, crap, which makes unwed mothers the prime target, rather than homosexuals, denying them benefits unless they are married. making things all that much more difficult for the single mother, or the unwed family.

Be honest here; that ad wouldn't be shocking, even in the least, if the child sitting in front of them were male, rather than female, yes? Instead, I think, a young woman, laden with children, has a far, far different life than a young woman who is protected, by her parents, and doesnt' have to become a parent, herself, while she is still growing up.

Yes, you are damn straight, if you see me as feeling that young women need to be protected from men. You would also be correct if you assumed that I felt that abortion was, not only ok, but neccesary at times. That women should damn well make as much as men, and, that it is also fine to be an unwed mother, or a single father rasising children.

Children should be raised by loving people, and, loving people should protect their children, and do their utmost for them. No, it is not ok to simply spew children out into the World, and, Yes, this World is in need of humanity to get its head out of its ass. Humans are not the be all, end all, though, we do seem to be doing our best in trying to spoil this Beautiful creation. We have the ability to be God's stewards, of this Earth, instead... instead of being the servants, instead of really, really relishing that role...

We are destroying our Master's house, and laying waste to the World, claiming something for ourselves that we do not deserve.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Birth Control is not just for women.
Posted by: Lurlie on Jul 19, 2008 5:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I found it interesting that you take a pro-woman point of view but say "(In the Gloucester teen pregnancy story, there wasn't too much media discussion about all those boys dumb and fucked-up enough to have unprotected sex with girls who weren't on birth control)." Birth control isn't just a woman's responsibility. It's a couple's responsibility or an individual's responsibility. No young man is psychic enough to know if his partner took her birth control pill that morning or last tuesday or whenever. The only way he can be sure he is protected is with a condom. Likewise for a young woman. What happened to the push to make condoms the normal mode of birth control?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The sad thing is that the story isn't that funny ....
Posted by: stellabloo on Jul 19, 2008 9:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... cuz there are really moms like that too. There really are crackhead hos popping out FAS babies and abandoning them. Babies are really being left alone in a room with a mattress while mom goes out to score :(

Yes, we treat animals horribly, but we are not much nicer to other humans either :(

While I applaud the notion of responsible pet ownership (and we have some 'rescue animals' ourselves) it is the BILLIONS of dollars generated by the pet 'industry' that really yanks my chain. If more well-heeled and overfed North Americans spent as much on child sponsorship as they did on their pampered pets, we wouldn't be having this discussion!!! :(

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Compassion
Posted by: JimMayor on Jul 19, 2008 9:42 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a male I can see PETA's perspective (even though it is primarily a female one). Males have little compassion, in fact, many consider it unmanly to even sympathize with the down-trodden. Women are "vulnerable" (and I don't use this term in a negative fashion) to this type of suggestion.

Peace.

A compassionate, ethical vegan male

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Compassion Posted by: DaBear
animal welfare versus animal rights
Posted by: vasumurti on Jul 19, 2008 10:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Domestication of animals is artificial, and some animal activists do oppose pet ownership in theory. Columnist Colman McCarthy writes against pet ownership. In The Animals’ Voice Magazine (Vol. 7, #1), Maureen D. Koplow of Deptford, New Jersey, writes:

"Wild canines and felines are nature’s creation...They live, reproduce and even die without human assistance. Domestic dogs and cats are a product of human intervention, created to satisfy human desires. They have no natural niche. They breed prolifically and create a surplus. Most could not survive without human intervention.

"Our ancestors bred dogs to herd cattle and sheep, chase wolves and bears, tree raccoons and dig out badgers, outrun foxes and deer, fight bulls and each other, retrieve ducks and point out pheasants—activities antithetical to the animal rights position. Cats were worshipped as deities, burned as witches, used as rodent control; kept as pampered toys on satin cushions. Rarely have they been recognized as independent beings with needs and desires of their own."

Noting the philosophical distinction between animal welfare (the belief that humans may own other animals as property and use them for human ends such as labor, milk, nonfertile eggs, wool, or companionship, as long as they are accorded respect and ethical treatment) versus animal rights (the secular moral philosophy that animals exist for their own reasons and were not made for humans any more than blacks were made for whites or women for men), and the real-world politics of compromise, Ms. Koplow observes:

"Let’s really admit the truth about spaying and neutering dogs and cats. Pragmatically, it’s the only possible way to control companion animal overpopulation. But it is an animal welfare solution. No true believer in animal rights can condone this gross interference in one of the most primal aspects of any animal’s essence.

"Are we humans arrogant enough to believe that our sexuality is the only kind that matters? Would we accept for ourselves a life of safety from venereal disease, unwanted pregnancy or even a broken heart? We could achieve all that simply by having our reproductive systems removed before puberty. Any volunteers?

"The human condition is completely intertwined with our sexuality, from paintings to sculpture, love songs, to romance novels, religious rites to recreational pursuits. Other animals share our passions, if not our culture. Anyone who has seen dogs cluster around a female in heat or heard cats sing their mating songs knows the intensity of their desires. Anyone who has watched a cat nurture her kittens or a dog nuzzle her pups must acknowledge their devotion.

"And yet we blithely insist that surgical intervention to prevent surplus puppies and kittens is benign. This form of prevention may not be as unacceptable as killing unwanted offspring, but maybe we advocates of castration and ovario-hysterectomy should admit that we are acting expediently, not honorably.

As an animal rightster, I say it is time for dogs and cats to become extinct. Humans must give up the concept of ‘pets.’ Require permits to house animals, with training to ensure the knowledge necessary to keep them happy and healthy...Forbid buying or selling of animals..."

Until the middle of the 20th century, it was not uncommon for parents or guardians to sterilize any mentally handicapped humans in their custody to prevent them from reproducing. Ms. Koplow’s logic is sound.

The editors of The Animals’ Voice Magazine responded: "Although we agree with the ideology...we believe that to actively fight for the extinction of domesticated animals is a position long before its time...actively carrying the ‘render dogs and cats extinct' banner is detrimental to the positions and goals of the animal rights movement in this lifetime—our lifetimes."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How 'bout this?
Posted by: jimidee on Jul 19, 2008 10:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's get our dog and cat pets and our sons and daughters vasectomies and tubals. Let's face it, we have way too many dogs and cats running around here, AND wayyy too many people too. The global impact of too many humans is wayyy more than too many pets, any day.

We can't stop either from having sex, and morally we probably shouldn't even try. It is the only way to be sure.

Getting spayed and neutered (full hysterectomies and castrations) are a bit extreme when all we really want to do is stop them from making more copies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PETA
Posted by: 60sretread on Jul 19, 2008 7:21 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I believe PETA'a advertisements are thought provoking and effective. GO PETA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Spay or Neuter Your KIDS!
Posted by: everyonesxwife on Jul 20, 2008 1:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm okay with this if it gets the point across. Sometimes you have to piss people off to get their attention!
I also Spay & Neuter my Pets!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

missing the point?
Posted by: luzmejor on Jul 21, 2008 7:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
PETA is calling attention to the problem of overpopulation in a very clumsy way, by using shock therapy.

Unfortunately, most of the people they could be reaching with their message will be so shocked they will never get further than that. They'll miss the point that we humans are devoted to excesses that are killing everything else on the planet.

The item will definitely grab people who believe only Human life is sacred though. Too bad it will only make those neurotics more fixated on their own preciousness!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not my bag
Posted by: zorba1 on Jul 22, 2008 1:15 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am against so-called animal rights idiots 100%.
I was a farmer, butcher, sticker and am a hunter. I will never change, i have only other hunters as friends and even though i can no longer hunt do to disabilities i support the NRA and anti-hunting oganizations.
Animals are for human use period.
I worked as a sticker when young, killing two thousand hogs a day by shoving a knife into their carotid and pulling it out with a quick twist.
I was good at it. The blood would be knee deep at times.
I enjoyed that job. I killed chickens and cattle also after they were smacked in the head with a sledge hammer.
When a rabbi came we had to bleed the cattle, they called me.
I also worked as a bounty hunter mostly killing dogs the city folk dropped off.
Half of them starved the others joined packs and killed farm animals, the killings were blamed on wolves or coyotes.
99.9% were killed by feral dogs which i shot with a 22-250.
And yah! i was one of those guys who nailed every female i could, from 13 to 35 somewhere between 600 to 1,000 girls and women.
I was every parents nightmare from 13 to 18.
I snuck into scores of homes with their teenage daughters help.I was never caught.
I had no trouble talking about sex with my 25 daughters and 6 sons. You have to start early, twelve is to late.
Their peers in school will beat you to the punch by then.
I finally mellowed out at 36 and married at 37.
My eldest daughter is 47, my youngest 16, i am 62.
I stopped reading halfway through, normally i do not read anything by animal rights scum.
We will never see things the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]