PETA.XXX: Porn To Save The Animals?

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has never abstained from showing human skin in the name of saving the hides and lives of animals, yet the organization's latest publicity scheme takes nudity one big step further. The animal rights group is raising eyebrows with plans to launch a pornography web site in the name of "promoting veganism." PETA spokesperson Lindsay Rajt says the site will have enough adult content to qualify for the .xxx domain URL but also some graphic images of animals that viewers may not expect to see. Peta.xxx will be a hub for sexually explicit content and, gruesomely enough, animal abuse. The organization is essentially taking the advertising aphorism “sex sells” in the most literal way possible by using actual sex to sell their ideology.

According to Rajt, this move will get PETA some attention. "We live in a 24 hour news cycle world and we learn the racy things we do are sometimes the most effective way that we can reach particular individuals," she said. "We really want to grab people's attention, get them talking and to question the status quo and ultimately take action, because the best way we can help the greatest number of animals is simply by not eating them."

Hosting a porn site is merely another step along the morally bankrupt path the group’s leadership chose to follow a long time ago. Of course, PETA has always been proud of how its actions have “pushed the envelope” and garnered attention from media members more interested in sex and raunchiness than substance. For years, PETA’s anti-fur ads have featured nude celebrities — tastefully photographed, so they say, and not at all exploitive of women. Also, PETA has a knack for attracting endorsements from women who are already posing nude and semi-nude every chance they get — women such as Pam Anderson, Khloe Kardashian and porn star Sasha Grey. Is it really all that ground-breaking for people who are famous for stripping off their clothes for the camera to agree to a nude photo shoot?

This latest stunt is yet another tired effort to score some media coverage for all the wrong reasons. But that’s what PETA does — from proclaiming that Jesus was a veggie (just skip the story of the loaves and fishes), to promoting beer drinking among college students as an alternative to milk, to pretending that their obsession with sex is nothing more than a marketing tool. The group specializes in publicity, not progress. They don’t care who gets hurt, who gets embarrassed or who gets offended — just as long as somebody’s paying attention to their warped and whacky agenda.

But funding a porno site, if reports about the planned content are accurate, goes beyond merely distasteful. The issue isn’t just the content — people certainly have different views about nudity and how appropriate it might be for adult viewing. It’s about the moral bankruptcy of “means justify the ends.” By tapping into the porn industry, aren’t they essentially exploiting one species to try to save another? If PETA is exploiting women in fur and flesh campaigns, reinforcing the current societal paradigm which sees women as objects and their bodies as commodities, why should anyone take seriously what such a hypocritical organization has to say about speciesism?

PETA seems to have no problem with spending big bucks on high-profile campaigns exploiting women as sex objects because that’s what they "have" to do. In the end, what condemns PETA to be little more than a freak show is not only a misguided message about humanity’s relationship with the animal kingdom but the basic immorality of using objectionable tactics to try to get other people to change their objectionable ways. Even though PETA’s intention is to improve animal welfare, many adamantly disagree with the move to protect animals at the cost of exploiting women. A Facebook group, Real Women Against PETA, was created after the organization posted a billboard of an obese woman that read, “Save the Whales, Lose the Blubber, Go Vegetarian.” A headline for The Sydney Morning Herald once read, “Pro-vegetarian group treats women like meat.”

“I'm a vegetarian since age nine and I DO NOT approve of using sex to sell a message,” said Grace Howse, 27, a member of the anti-PETA group. “It doesn't matter to me if friends and family eat meat, but I think PETA's objectification of women and plan to start a porn site is deplorable.”

The actual effectiveness and appeal of the supposed site is much harder to fathom, especially because I don't see the project lasting very long and don't get how the combination will attract an actual following. I’m still really stuck as to how this logic went. “Animal rights, save the animals, rights for animals, hey we should do porn!” At what point in the annual PETA meeting did those two things get linked? For all its variations, porn is porn, and if those who seek any particular sort can get it without paying for it, they'll also make a point of getting exactly what they want without a side of pro-vegan conversion — which is a shame, because PETA's marketing campaigns are far worse than its messages.

Apparently nobody informed PETA that most people will go to the site only once to get off to the naked women, but come running back to youporn.com within a few minutes. I doubt it is possible to maintain arousal while being ambushed by images of animal cruelty, unless you are into that. (In which case, the Supreme Court ruled you can have all of that you want.). I don't know what’s more disturbing, that I know this will be nothing more than jerk off material or that PETA is ignorant enough to think using women’s bodies will sell their message about animal rights. Sure, boobs, boobs, boobs, chicken with its beak sawed off. Sounds hot. Definitely sounds like an effective way to get people to go vegan: associate animal cruelty with sexual arousal.

PETA's shock-value ad campaigns and publicity stunts usually overshadow its cause. There was the time its members dressed up in KKK outfits outside the Westminster Dog Show. And, of course, all the half- or fully naked women either licking and fondling vegetables or photographed to look like meat themselves. We get it: Save animals! Then there were the animal rights protests in which half naked women were caged for all of the public to see, including innocent young children. What is the message being sent in this vulgar spectacle? Go vegetarian so you can exploit women? The women are on all fours in public with nothing but panties on, for what reason exactly? It’s a horribly degrading, exploitative form of “protest” against the food chain that excites nothing but attention, confusion and horror.

The good is that they have made someone notice — that’s their first goal. Their second goal is to get people beyond that point. But most will never get beyond the campaign; only a small niche will read further. The third goal is to get people to provide support (money) to carry out their campaigns. The second goal seems to be the most inconsequential for PETA while goals one and three spur the group's agenda.

PETA has a history of relying on shock advertising but there are far more effective methods of communicating messages, and shock advertising provides only short-lived bursts of awareness with little for long-term return on investment. PETA has a reputation as an all or nothing brand; in other words, people view PETA as a bit of a cult, “either you agree with us 100% or you’re out.” PETA is in-your-face, abrasive, controversial and somewhat scary. It does a good job of causing a scene, but those scenes may turn people off to the organization's messages. I think with a more inclusive approach and message, more people would be supportive of PETA and animal rights would become a less trendy cause and more mainstream.

For example, a person might feel strongly against wearing fur, believing it’s senseless, but might not have a problem with eating meat, citing Darwinism and survival of the fittest/the food chain, and so on. With PETA’s current brand image, that person would not be welcome in the club although they could certainly help in specific areas of animal rights activism. I think a less fanatical and more inclusive message would do a lot to further PETA’s overall efforts. Delivering a positive message of hope goes further than an all-or-nothing approach. They state how it is, and how wrong it is, but they don't seem to add the "this is how it could be" solution.

I am hoping to start a web site for vegans in which luscious pictures of juicy vegetable dishes are used to lure in viewers who will then be subjected to information about how porn exploits women.