Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor,
    The article "Vegetarians do it with unclogged arteries," printed on March 6, was missing an important perspective: that of the animal liberation movement. PETA's recent advertising, much of which is centered on the idea that vegetarians have better sex, has generated much criticism from feminists. Because these ads depict scantily clad, sexualized women, the critics argue that the ads contribute to our culture's dehumanization of women. This may be true; however, PETA's advertising strategies deserve critique for a more clearly defined reason: They have nothing to do with vegetarianism.
    PETA's banned Super Bowl commercials, "Veggie Love" and "Milk Gone Wild," both feature pretty women and a complete lack of information about animal issues. Even the literature on PETA's Web site is missing a complete rationale for animal liberation. Its argument: "Animals are not ours to exploit." While this makes a nice sound bite, any omnivore with critical thinking skills could simply respond: "Why not?" Arguments for animal liberation are varied, but perhaps the most convincing one is that our current practices of animal agriculture cause more harm (to farmed animals and to the environment) than they do us good. This or any rationale is missing from much of PETA's advertising. Going vegan or vegetarian is a major decision, and in order for people to make it, they will need more reasons than a pretty model rubbing broccoli on her breasts.
    PETA is primarily — if not solely — an attention-seeking organization. PETA's volunteers do outrageous things — like dressing up as the Ku Klux Klan to protest the American Kennel Club — in order to draw media attention and therefore expose more people to the concepts of the animal movement. Whether or not the crazy stunts actually help to inform people about the reasons for opposing animal exploitation is a secondary concern. This strategy is nonsensical.
    In this country and at this time, a PETA member would be hard-pressed to find a consumer who hasn't heard of vegetarianism, so the idea that media attention is needed because most people just haven't heard that it's possible to live without meat is incorrect. In fact, these strategies often have an unfortunate effect: People uninformed about animal issues see these strategies as evidence that vegans and vegetarians are living in a radically different world from their own. If animal activists don't take their own movement seriously, how can they expect anyone else to? There are many good reasons for becoming vegan or vegetarian, and PETA would do well to focus on them in their advertising.

Sincerely,
Lorraine Eastham
Class of 2011