On PETA and Weekday Vegetarians

Follow Adam on Twitter

Recently, I heard from a Twitter friend about an article on "weekday vegetarians," people who choose to eat non-meat diets only one the weekdays supposedly to combat global warming.

You would think a group which heralds itself as the world's biggest animal rights organization would make a comment about how vegetarianism is insufficient to ending animal use. You would think this group would be the first to point out animals used in the dairy industry are merely the same "meat" animals who endure forced labor and miserable conditions prior to their slaughter.

Those who know the group PETA well might know better. The organization who owns stock in animal product companies like Tyson foods, regularly promotes canadian KFC products, and is openly approving of many slaughtering techniques recently had this to say:

PETA: "Screw the principle"

"Anybody who witnesses the suffering of animals and has a glimmer of hope of reducing that suffering can't take the position that it's all or nothing. We have to be pragmatic. Screw the principle."

Now let's think about this. Anyone who witnesses suffering can't take the position that it's all or nothing? We have to wonder who on earth takes the position that if there can't be "no suffering," we ought to have "all suffering." I don't know of anyone who takes that position, do you?

More likely, Newkirk is slandering the position of the abolitionist movement which states that we should make abolition our goal--that our main position should not be that animal torture should be nicer, but ended. In other words, abolitionists believe what you might believe regarding human slavery. Do you want to fight for better slavery or no slavery? How does Newkirk feel about that position?

"Absolute purists should be living in a cave"

PETA and other animal welfare groups like to put us in one of those scenes from the movie Twister. The pickup truck is running, here comes the tornado. "No Suzy! Don't run back in the house! We have to go! Don't just stand there!" Because if we don't hand out awards and give our approval to humane slaughtering operations or weekday vegetarians, we deny the animals that tiny morsel of "reduced suffering." What kind of monster would do that? Those absolute purists! They're probably behind Obama and his socialist health care too. Pff.

These groups make objections to weekday vegetarians seem like failed opportunities to capture that "glimmer of hope." PETA wants you to believe they're all on that pickup truck fleeing from the tornado at full speed. Then, here's us absolute purists. We didn't send in our monthly check to PETA (to kill thousands of healthy, adoptable animals), we didn't publicly applaud people who exploit animals at a reduced rate. Here comes that Twister. If only we had "screwed" our silly principles.

What is the stigma here, do people like me deny animals that right to stretch their limbs in their cages just a little more? Do we come out of our caves throwing rocks at those brave individuals who choose to take that gradual step of saying "hold the chicken" on their egg and cheese omelettes (sometimes (oh, and to decrease global warming))?

The Activist Rewardz Zone®

I know nowadays people like to think everything runs on a points system. Open your wallet if you don't believe me. As I recall, I have about three more punches on my burrito card until I get a free entree. Oh yeah, and Starbucks is giving me a free coffee after four more stamps. Let's just try to get a few more punches on our activism card, okay?

Hey, here come some people who don't eat red meat. Let's see, there's like four of them, that's equal to like one whole vegan! *punch* And lookee there, a whole reading group is reading The Conscientious Carnivore. *Punch* *punch*

I don't know how many free lattés Ingrid Newkirk has won so far, but I bet it's pretty impressive. But anyway, let's put our cards away for a second and try to remember what we were doing this whole animal rights shindig for in the first place. Because, if you think about it, PETA's position basically just entails giving up, doesn't it?

Imagine you were at a baseball game, there's your coach. That red-faced lady swiping her temples. You turn to your teammates and say "Okay, we're going to practice, we're going to do our best, and we're going to win this thing. We might get some strikes, we might get some outs too, but we are going to win!" Your teammates pass around high fives.

All the sudden, coach Newkirk steps in, slapping down those arrogant high-fives. "Now listen here, you absolute purists! I don't know if you've ever lost a game, but lemme tell you, it's awful. We need to focus on reducing suffering. If we can ease the pain of being beaten, if we can put our effort into bigger dugouts where players can finally stretch their legs, by golly why would you want to fight for all or nothing?"

What the hell is coach Newkirk talking about? Easing the pain of defeat. What is extra strange about this "strategy" is that welfare organizations label these measures as "small victories" and as somehow taking little baby steps forward. I sincerely hope you are not falling for this delusion.

You know better.

While coach Newkirk takes out her activism card and gives herself a few punches, we have to ask ourselves why anyone in their right mind would support a multimillion dollar organization which puts its money into making the public feel better about exploiting animals? Why would anyone who cares about animals agree with the position that society basically never changes.

There are few vegans now, this is how it always will be. Millions of dollars in education to reduce the demand for animal products in the first place is purist, and a stupid principle. We all know education doesn't work right? I mean look at those silly purists in the slavery abolitionist movement with their pamphlets and their speeches. Let's learn from their failure in this era of humanely-raised cagefree human slaves

Or...do the right thing: http://abolitionistapproach.com