f*cking PETA is at it again.

A General discussion about everything other than South Park

Moderator: Big-Will

Just_Jackie
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:38 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby Just_Jackie » Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:14 pm

Nice! I agree 100%!
Kelly MacCornmac
Posts: 6142
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 3:05 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby Kelly MacCornmac » Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:38 pm

I think it's better for them to have free speach in what they say, that way when they say something that can be considered bad as this, people will be upset. I don't think that ideas should be censored because if they were, then it won't help show how bigotted/crazy something is.





Really, most stuff that we sell in this society plays on our insecurities, like bras, clothes, shaving stuff, makeup, and all that sh*t to look/smell better. It's not peta you should be attacking, it should be the society. For it encourages these insecurities, and allow many companies to play off of them.
Causing havoc on the BBS one post at a time

Officially supports the de-perma of GTA, Mike, Cartman, and possibly others


SPU! Join it!
Just_Jackie
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:38 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby Just_Jackie » Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:57 pm

I hear you on society, but bras, I will have to disagree on. That's necessary.

For women who wear a larger size bra, not wearing one can cause SEVERE back pain.

I would never say or do anything to impede anyone's freedom of speech, even PETA's. You're right they should be allowed to say whatever they want. I do, however, believe in being a grown up about things and taking responsibility for my/our own actions. If you are gonna be a dick like that and start picking on one group of people, be a man about it. Don't hide behind "good health". I mean, PETA has a long history of using adverts where women are in cages, chained up and naked in their adverts. At least there, they admit it's because sex sells and it uses shock value to get their point across. This time, they are using less of a pretty picture to bring their point across, but it's not about shock value, it's about health this time? uh huh.... When it's negative publicity it's about health....

Anyway, BBL y'all. Going to get The Sims 3. YaY!
M00ndragon69
Posts: 9593
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2003 4:32 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby M00ndragon69 » Mon Aug 24, 2009 4:58 am

I am not saying take away their freedom of speech either..But people are allowed to comment on their sign. And like Jackie said, they aren't using the best ways to get their points across. Like implying that fat people are "whales", well that is the kind of immature name calling you see in middle school..Infact I remember a girl getting made fun of back then, the mean popular kids called her a beached whale. They called me a cow.That was in 7th grade. I bet many people have been refered to as whales, so PETA isn't going to get a positive response for a sign like that. And if they are smart, they really need to change their tatics, because look at what many people think of PETA. Most people think they go way too far, and they are insane. I mean, I heard on the local news that recently, PETA was freaking out that in our area, at the Pike Place Market in Seattle, the men who sell fish at the market, kind of throw the fish around juggle them and such..Like they have done for a long time. I can remember seeing the guys who sell fish tossing the fish around, the first time I was at the Pike Place market, when I was probably 7. Well, Peta is pissed about, they think the people at the Pike Place market are disrespecting the bodies of the dead fish. That is going too far. That is why people think their organization is crazy, and maybe because of that reputation, when they are talking about serious sh*t like dog fighting and such, people are not going to listen. Because what they are hearing is coming from an organization that has the reputation for being fanatics.

And I already do talk sh*t about the fashion magazines that make people insecure about their appearances. And the only reason why I do wear bras, is because at my job I have to move around alot. With my boobs, I wouldn't be very comfortable without a bra.
Image
2+2=5
Posts: 317
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:32 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby 2+2=5 » Mon Aug 24, 2009 6:54 am

but do you see them, or really anyone attacking things like anorexia

Tell me that again when there's an epidemic of anorexia in the general population.

I'm not 'white knighting' PETA, I don't believe their intent was health awareness or to discourage people from adopting a disgusting appearance; it was to stop them from eating meat. If someone sincerely believes that the meat industry is a holocaust and their action will damage it, almost any strategy is not only legitimate but necessary if they are to retain any respect from me; while I vehemently disagree with fetuses and people being on the same moral level, I respect the man who shot the abortionist he sincerely believed would kill thousands of people without a bullet in the brain more than someone who didn't want to dirty their hands or was afraid of punishment and didn't do what to them would be the equivalent of stopping Hitler. If PETA believes this poster will stop meat eating and that meat is murder, I respect them for making it weather those beliefs are founded or not. If this poster was a bullet through someone they thought was as bad as Hitler’s head, I’d respect PETA more for pulling the trigger than for not.

If PETA is using adverts with women chained up in cages that is NOT to demean women, it’s to do anything it can to save animals. It doesn’t create the society that sees a woman’s life and happiness as more important than a man’s (which is all that choice represents), it simply plays with it.

If you let attacks on your appearance get to you, you’re probably pretty shallow yourself, unless they’re attacks from an employer or educator and who wants to work for a company that leaves employment decisions to people ignorant enough to be swayed by looks, or to date someone similarly shallow? Ugliness is more a searchlight to highlight who is shallow and who isn’t in life so you can see who you don’t want to be anywhere near.

f*ck your 'personal responsibility' bullsh*t right in the ear. Every person is the product of their society, which itself results from the work of thousands of generations; it invests in their education, health-care and upbringing and has every right to prescribe for them, especially since it usually knows what's better for us than we do ourselves as the subjective biases of we slightly evolved monkeys cancel out on the social scale. It's prudent to consider our personal status (are we on medication that would make us ill if we don't eat animal protein?) but individuals should not be entrusted with something as important as their health. Few of us could survive bodily without society providing us with houses, food, medicine, transport, clean water, etc, which are the products of thousands of generations; we have almost a duty to give something back.

I know I’d rather someone be mean to me now if it has some chance of saving me from some health complication later in life, than them not be mean. It might not be intended to help people’s health but if it has that effect on more than it has the reverse effect, which it may, I do not see how it can be bad.

While I don't consider myself obese, I am bitched at by family members for my weight all the time; It's an annoying, but if you can't take someone telling you to change a habit you *know* is self destructive, weather or not their nagging gets you to change (it hasn't in my case) you have to be a weak person indeed.

M00n is right that intelligence and tallent do not make you a better person, but someone who produces more than they take is less expendable; unleahtly people take a lot from society, be it a small cut on wider society when the state pays health costs or a large chunk from the imidiate society when the family pays, not to mention the acid burn to wider society of loosing an educated or experienced worker who it invested in training, and leaving it's family without it for support. I never said they are worse people for being unhealthy but (Weather they chose it or not) we really are expendable parasites on the whole.

I hear m00n, PETA is not the most mature, and anything they say is likely to hurt their cause because of their well deserved reputation as fanatics. But I saw ‘whales’ as more a non-offensive way of bringing colour to the piece, if they wanted to attack fat people I’m sure even they could’ve come up with better than whales or cows.

Like KMAC implies, it’s (product) advertisement that’s to blame for creating (or widening natural) insecurities, and even then if the insecurities are played on in a way that incidentally ends up helping the person I don’t see what’s so wrong with that.
SuperMaids/superiorsavior/PIPaul strikes again...because he forgot his Passover. Again.
ssouthparkk4602
Posts: 906
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:49 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby ssouthparkk4602 » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:25 am

I would just like to quote Kmac and agree 95%:

Really, most stuff that we sell in this society plays on our insecurities, like bras, clothes, shaving stuff, makeup, and all that sh*t to look/smell better. It's not peta you should be attacking, it should be the society. For it encourages these insecurities, and allow many companies to play off of them.


The 5% I disagree with is the bra. It does a function other than lifting and making boobs look better, as Jackie put it:

I hear you on society, but bras, I will have to disagree on. That's necessary.

For women who wear a larger size bra, not wearing one can cause SEVERE back pain.
"If the President has a BLT tomorrow, the Republicans will try to ban bacon."
-Alan Grayson

"Tolerance of intolerance is just as good as intolerance."
-TheAmazingAtheist

Formerly: gtaca2005 Member since: Thu Jan 06, 2005
BlueEyes4u2nv
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 1:32 pm

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby BlueEyes4u2nv » Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:41 am

So whatcha get banned for GTCA,?
pussycat
ssouthparkk4602
Posts: 906
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:49 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby ssouthparkk4602 » Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:43 am

Long story...

You'd have to read back some pages in the WIN thread.

Click on my profile link in my signature, and view my lasts posts.
"If the President has a BLT tomorrow, the Republicans will try to ban bacon."
-Alan Grayson

"Tolerance of intolerance is just as good as intolerance."
-TheAmazingAtheist

Formerly: gtaca2005 Member since: Thu Jan 06, 2005
Just_Jackie
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:38 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby Just_Jackie » Mon Aug 24, 2009 12:44 pm

ssouthparkk4602 wrote:Long story...

You'd have to read back some pages in the WIN thread.

Click on my profile link in my signature, and view my lasts posts.


Aren't you worried he will just reban you?
MaChrona
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 4:52 pm

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby MaChrona » Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:50 pm

Does this mean I'll get banned for only talking on here? :S
triplemultiplex
Posts: 6124
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:24 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby triplemultiplex » Mon Aug 24, 2009 9:37 pm

2+2=5 wrote:I'm not 'white knighting' PETA, I don't believe their intent was health awareness or to discourage people from adopting a disgusting appearance; it was to stop them from eating meat. If someone sincerely believes that the meat industry is a holocaust and their action will damage it, almost any strategy is not only legitimate but necessary if they are to retain any respect from me; while I vehemently disagree with fetuses and people being on the same moral level, I respect the man who shot the abortionist he sincerely believed would kill thousands of people without a bullet in the brain more than someone who didn't want to dirty their hands or was afraid of punishment and didn't do what to them would be the equivalent of stopping Hitler. If PETA believes this poster will stop meat eating and that meat is murder, I respect them for making it weather those beliefs are founded or not. If this poster was a bullet through someone they thought was as bad as Hitler’s head, I’d respect PETA more for pulling the trigger than for not.


Hmm, I don't think I'm comfortable with the idea of "respecting" someone who holds an extremist opinion and actually acts on it. That basically excuses anyone who does something really sh*tty simply because their heart was truly in it. I get what you're saying, but I feel the use of the world "respect" confuses one's argument.

It's more like, "Given what that person believes, I can understand why they think they had to do something so batshit crazy."
__________________________________________________

You read it! You can't unread it!
ssouthparkk4602
Posts: 906
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:49 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby ssouthparkk4602 » Mon Aug 24, 2009 11:50 pm

Just_Jackie wrote:
ssouthparkk4602 wrote:Long story...

You'd have to read back some pages in the WIN thread.

Click on my profile link in my signature, and view my lasts posts.


Aren't you worried he will just reban you?

Nah.

It was over the BC thing, ans I think that banning my old name that I had from 2005 was the punishment. Because he would have already banned me again, and Michaeloptv, because he made a new name already.

The board is split on whether the ban was justified, and I just want to drop it now. So we can all make fun of PETA! :D
Image
"If the President has a BLT tomorrow, the Republicans will try to ban bacon."
-Alan Grayson

"Tolerance of intolerance is just as good as intolerance."
-TheAmazingAtheist

Formerly: gtaca2005 Member since: Thu Jan 06, 2005
BlueEyes4u2nv
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 1:32 pm

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby BlueEyes4u2nv » Tue Aug 25, 2009 7:56 am

I saw nothing wrong in your last posts.

And if it is because of the BC dilemma, I think that's absolute bullsh*t, But hey you know you want to drop it that's cool. But even if this does result in me getting into trouble i'm saying it anyway.

Will, What as done was done, After BC I see no more point in permabanning other people, It isn't going to help the situation in anyway, it's just going to frustrate another person. After banning BC the problem is gone...

Ps: I've got something in my front pocket for you.
pussycat
ssouthparkk4602
Posts: 906
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:49 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby ssouthparkk4602 » Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:17 am

I just killed a HUGE tarantula in my room! :o

I do not think PETA would approve, but I am a pussy. No way was I catching it, I smashed it with a vacuum and a board. He/she got PWNED.

Human 1, spider 0.
"If the President has a BLT tomorrow, the Republicans will try to ban bacon."
-Alan Grayson

"Tolerance of intolerance is just as good as intolerance."
-TheAmazingAtheist

Formerly: gtaca2005 Member since: Thu Jan 06, 2005
BRMBug
Posts: 18534
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 5:43 am

Re: f*cking PETA is at it again.

Postby BRMBug » Tue Aug 25, 2009 3:58 pm

That's sort of what I do with roaches. I'll suck them up in the shop vac. I used to use the Electrolux, but roaches stink when they start to decompose. Oh well, at least I never drop-kicked any puppies or anything.

Return to “Off Topic Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests