Fuck PETA: why feminists are critical.

Another day, another *protest*, another dollar for PETA.

When mercenary mansplainers and faux-progressives grouse about being deprived of their eye candy entitlements - it's the 1970s all over again! Shulamith Firestone nailed it when she said: "Radical men may advocate certain freedoms for women when they overlap their own interest..."  When Firestone 'went too far' in denouncing the specific forms of sexual oppression that her male comrades enjoyed as privileges for their own benefit, she was maligned for her scathing honesty.

There is much valid criticism of PETA's spurious monopoly and its claim that it is an *ethical* champion for animal rights.

Here's why many feminist thinkers - vegetarians and vegans, rescuers of abused and abandoned animals, supporters and donors to genuine animal wellbeing organizations, do NOT endorse PETA's tactical shenanigans. 

[...]PETA has more or less dropped their initial pretense that they're simply cashing in on the sex appeal of attractive spokesmodels to draw attention to the cause of animal rights. The old "I'd rather be naked than wear fur" campaigns that I remember from my childhood were cute and harmless.

PETA has since graduated to ads and PR stunts depicting women as corpses, or animal carcasses with the names of cuts of meat written on their bodies as if they're waiting to be butchered. In one charming and frequently recycled campaign, PETA recruited naked pregnant women to pose as pigs in cages.

Using sex appeal to sell social justice is as old as social justice movements, and not something to get upset about, per se. PETA has gotten into the business of selling degradation.

From here.

I’m a supporter of animal rights who eats a mostly vegetarian diet (I occasionally eat fish). I support organizations like the Humane Society and the SPCA, and I would support PETA if they didn’t make a habit of lying, misrepresenting scientific data, and using images of dehumanized scantily clad and nude women to get money and attention[...]

The same was true for objectification. Both sexual ads and non-sexual ads objectified the women in them, but the sexual ads dehumanized the women in a way that resulted in decreased support. Objectified women were also judged as lacking credibility, but that alone didn’t account for a drop in support – only dehumanization did that.

The other interesting characteristic of this paper is that it is the first to show a link between the dehumanization of women and unethical behavior unrelated to gender and sex. Many feminists have made this point in the past, so it’s interesting to see a study that supports the assertion. I hope we see more research in the area, despite the fact that it will probably do little to convince the people at PETA or the men who constantly argue that the continued objectification of women is no cause for concern.

From here. 

The purpose of PETA's odious misogynist publicity tactics is to provide a steady influx of funds for the organization.  

Consider this.  What if the bodies thus exposed and marked up with butcher's markings were those of men resembling Mike Duffy and Rob Ford - in all their gluttonous, bloated, boozy, purple-veined raddled girth? 

Now that would surely repel the RibFest customers and put them off eating meat, at least in proximity to such protest.

Disgusting?  Yes. 

Degrading?  Yes.  

De-humanizing?  Yes.

But unlike the ongoing use of comely, attractive female interns and volunteers as tasty tidbits, exploiting such men would not be conducive to raising more millions$$$ for PETA's well-larded coffers.

One last word: 

More Mansplaining on Superb Owl Day

After yesterday's Twitter brouhaha, Carolyn Bennett commented at the NatPo and reproduced it on her blog.

Today on Twitter Mr. Kay asked :"if you can find an incorrect sentence in my article, identify it. The misleading sentence is "It is perfectly legal in Canada to have or perform an abortion — for any reason, or no reason at all — at 20, 25, 30 or 35 weeks gestation". I am totally fed up with 'lawyered' assertions that totally misrepresent the facts. While in Canada, we do not have a law, we do have very strict professional guidelines. No physician in Canada can terminate a pregnancy over 24 weeks without serious indications: the life of the mother at risk, or the fetus has very serious malformations. I have sat with these women as they received the terrible news and sat with them throughout the terrible long, tear drenched process. Mr. Kay's assertion that late trimester abortions can be performed 'for any reason, or no reason at all' is just not true. I challenge him to find ONE late trimester abortion perfomed in Canada to a healthy mother with a healthy fetus. I am one of many politicians 'willing to tackle' this subject. He needs to be one of many journalists who are prepared to admit when their fine prose may have misled Canadians ...in this case admit that late-trimester abortions are NOT happening in Canada without 'reason'.

Kay takes note and intends to reply.

@carolyn_bennett I appreciate your blog post on the abortion issue, and will respond tonight on @fullcomment.

— Jonathan Kay (@jonkay) February 3, 2013

Oh boy, more mansplaining. On Superb Owl Day to boot.

I will update later or at least link.

Where men are men and women know their rightful place.

Following Robert McClelland's recommendation, I read Jonathan Kay's account of his whirlwind field trip -  well financed, and likely as comfortable as CONvenient - to *collect* examples of First Nations folks who are almost just like NatPo readers.

About 40 paragraphs into Kay's piece, I started wondering why he didn't speak to any Indigenous women in the course of his research.  Then a couple of women make an appearance; the men that Kay has exclusively chosen to interact with, introduce them. Their contribution:

“Family dynamics is a big problem,” she tells me. “There’s lots of separation and switching of partners. The kids in school are basically suffering from PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder]. You’ve got a 16-year-old trying to deal with their parents splitting up when he was three. And a big part of that is addiction — alcohol, drugs and gambling. When you’re high, you fool around with someone else. And the next thing you know, you’re separated. That pattern has become common.”

At this, Eva Lazarus, Ms. Moore’s mother, who’d been listening from the side of the room, jumps in: “I know a woman here with four, five, even six children, all from different fathers. Then everyone sees it, and thinks growing up like that is the norm.”

Can't trash *pagan* beliefs and the *old ways* without highlighting good old boys' - and gals' - christianist slut-shaming, can he?  Jonathan is after all, his mother's son.

Kay applauds all the non-deleterious effects of religious indoctrination and how it has facilitated assimilation instilled a christian work ethic in the objects of his article - in spite of the horrific abuses inflicted at residence schools.  He only alludes to the long-range effects of PTSD suffered by adult survivors in one short poignant exchange with a non-native nurse.

But ... HOCKEY!!!  Yes. Boys playing hockey is seemingly the best hope, the most dynamic potential First Nations communities have of succeeding in Kay's rightful, paternalistic and euro-centric vision of Canada. "Balancing tradition and capitalism" ... indeed.

Kay is not alone in disregarding the dynamic role of women in Indigenous communities; he is following the "norm" established by centuries of patriarchal ideology who diminished, discredited and tried to destroy matrifocal traditions.

This is worth reading, for its insightful deconstruction of gendered contempt - specifically gynophobia - that has contaminated most news items about Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence's use of fasting as a strategy and as well, has disparaged the Idle No More movement. 

Sadly, it isn't only right wing nut jobs and CONs who disrespect First Nations, Metis, Inuit and all activist women of Indigenous ancestry. In the guise of well-intended concern, this blogger is wagging his phallic substitute at the women who originated the name of Idle No More (yet never claimed ownership of the movement) as he attacks them in his churlish screed.

In case we forget, here are some photographs of Indigenous women, from here.

 
 
The next vigil for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women will be held on February 14 on Parliament Hill.  More information here.

Grand merci to Kathryn Ssedoga for the wealth of links and resources on her Twitterstream.