Hartman – Page One

Seth W. Hartman
Dylan Colvin
English 1201
3/28/2020

Why Do People Hate PETA?

Have you ever heard of the organization PETA? Most people know about them
because they claim to rescue animals, but what if they aren't as pure as they make
themselves out to be. Does putting down around 80% of their rescues sound pure? No,
and I am going to expose PETA, and talk about the terrible stuff they have done in their
forty-year life span.
Before explaining why people have a problem with the company, I need to provide
some background. PETA was founded in 1980, to rescue animals and give them better
homes. This was the original basic mission for the company.
There are some positive things about the company. Peta has helped to save
hundreds of animals, and has busted many illegal animal operations. This summarizes
the positive legacy of the organization.
The cons of the company’s history far outweigh the pros. They put down a large
portion of the animals they save - roughly 80%. This article had the exact number of
euthanizations: “In 2014, according to its own records, it took in 3,017 animals, about 1
percent of the total number brought to private Virginia shelters. Of those, PETA
euthanized 2,455, or 81 percent. In some prior years, that rate has risen above 90
percent.”1
 Hartman – Page Two

Above - PETA’s euthanization rates throughout the years.

Have you ever heard of Steve Irwin? PETA criticized Google’s memorial of him:
“#SteveIrwin was killed while harassing a ray; he dangled his baby while feeding a
crocodile & wrestled wild animals who were minding their own business.” 1 Today’s
#GoogleDoodle sends a dangerous, fawning message, “Wild animals are entitled to be
left alone in their natural habitats.”1 They received an extreme amount of backlash for
this, and people were calling them an embarrassment to animal rights.
Many people own some form of pet, whether that be a dog, a cat, or even a snake,
but it turns out that PETA is also against that, and I can’t say that I’m surprised.
 Hartman – Page Three

According to them, owning a pet is bad enough, but calling it a “pet” is terrible: “PETA,
in general, hates the idea of keeping animals as pets, at all.” 1
First of all, they are even against the word "pet" because it's "speciest language."
PETA believes "The cat, like the dog, must disappear. We should cut the domestic cat
free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic
version of the cat ceases to exist."1 I’m starting to think that these people are all insane
because they want to force a whole species of animal to extinction.
PETA claims that shearing sheep is murder. Yes, you read that correctly. They
believe that shearing sheep is somehow killing the sheep. The fact that they think
shearing sheep is harmful is funny to me, because it’s actually the exact opposite: “The
suggestion here is that wool clothing causes lambs and sheep to die, which, as any
farmer will tell you, is far from true. Domestic sheep need to be sheared, or it can cause
severe health problems, including infections and exhaustion.” 1 I can’t believe these
people hold to such bizarre ideas.
Another thing they seem to do frequently is attack video games for animal cruelty,
such as Pokémon and Animal Crossing. The latter happened earlier this week, with
PETA stating that you shouldn’t go fishing or catch bugs. Animal Crossing is one of the
calmest games I’ve ever seen, and catching bugs and fishing is required to progress in
the game. They are advising people to not play the game.
As for Pokémon, PETA spend real money to make a parody of this game.
“PETA isn't just content with taking on dog fighting, which is absolutely a horrible
practice. They also decided to take on Pokémon, which they called a digital dog-fighting
game that encourages kids to abuse and subjugate animals. Never mind that no
animals are actually harmed while making or playing Pokémon, PETA knew this was a
worthwhile cause and place to spend money. In 2012, PETA came out with a game
called Pokémon Black and Blue. In this game, you play as the Pokémon themselves,
who have thrown off their shackles and are now beating the crud out of their former
owners, including Ash! The game, while entertaining, is meant to show how Pokémon is
normalizing the subjugation of animals, and is therefore a bad influence. It's hard to say
how much it cost for them to make this game, or the other parody games they've done,
but it does make folks wonder if those funds couldn't have been spent better elsewhere.
You know, like helping the canine victims of actual, non-digital, dog fighting.”1

Still unconvinced that PETA is one of the worst companies to exist? In Virginia, two
women associated with PETA took a chihuahua from someone’s backyard and
euthanized it. Here is some context: “The women removed an unattended and
unleashed chihuahua named Maya, which was a Christmas present to nine-year-old
Cynthia Zarate. Maya was put down later that day, a violation of a state law that
requires a five-day grace period. PETA was fined $500 for the violation.” 2 The fact that
 Hartman - Page Four

this even happened is extremely messed up, and I hope the family who dealt with this is
doing better now.

In addition to Maya, the poor chihuahua who was stolen from the Zarate’s home and
promptly euthanized, it turns out, there was another dog who was wrongfully put down
by PETA. “In 2007, a PETA worker was also arrested for kidnapping a sheriff's dog. The
charges were, again, later dismissed, because the PETA worker thought she was
rescuing the hunting dog off the roadside.”1

One of the dumbest examples yet, was when PETA sued a man for helping a
monkey take a picture of itself. I felt like I was losing brain cells reading the article.
Speaking of which, here is a snippet from said article: “In 2015, PETA filed to sue
Slater on behalf of the macaque! What followed was a vicious legal battle with Slater,
which was appealed to multiple courts, and basically bankrupted Slater. PETA claimed
it did this for the benefit of the macaque, named Naruto, and its offspring. Slater has
fired back that he's not even sure PETA is campaigning for the right monkey! Either
way, Slater's life is still in turmoil, just because he helped a monkey take a selfie.”1

Evidently PETA is confused as to whether or not they even operate an animal

shelter: “In 2010, a Virginia resident called PETA to ask if it operated an animal shelter.
PETA said no. Apparently perplexed, she sent PETA’s response to the Virginia
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS), the government agency
responsible for overseeing shelters and animal welfare matters in the state. Responding
to the complaint, Dr. Daniel Kovich, an investigator with the VDACS, conducted an
inspection of PETA’s animal shelter at its Virginia headquarters in July 2010. Dr. Kovich
determined ‘the facility does not contain sufficient animal enclosures to routinely house
the number of animals annually reported as taken into custody.’” 3

In case you are wondering, PETA has also tried to brainwash kids to think that their
mom is a murderer, with a comic: “In 2003, in more than 15 states, the group handed
out a graphic comic titled “Your Mommy Kills Animals” to children accompanying
women wearing fur outside holiday performances of The Nutcracker and other theatrical
shows.”3. “Denver’s Rocky Mountain News classified PETA’s attempt ‘to manipulate
adults by traumatizing their children’ as ‘despicable.’ The Omaha World- Herald
declared, ‘it’s the vulnerable children who will likely suffer for the anxiety-inducing
insensitivity of the attack on what should be a happy, family-oriented outing.”” 3

Another one of PETA’s “amazing” deeds is that they threatened a scientist trying to
study birds: “Yale ornithologist Dr. Christine Lattin said she received threats from PETA
after she published some papers on her work with endangered birds. Lattin - who
studies the effects of climate change and environmental disasters on animals - said
 Hartman – Page Five

PETA and its supporters sent her death threats and claimed she was ‘torturing and
killing’ birds. In addition to this, some people even protested outside her house.’” 1 

Now, all of these statements have been terrible, and completely ridiculous, but you
might be thinking that at least they never said anything about mental illness, right? I
wish that was true, but being PETA, they said that milk, yes, milk of all things, causes
autism: “We've all heard the erroneous claim that vaccines cause autism, but have you
heard the claim that milk can cause it too? PETA certainly has. In 2008, they put up a
billboard saying that dairy, specifically milk, can cause autism. They even used a
version of milk's catchy slogan ‘Got Milk?’ except this time, the words said ‘got autism?’
Upon seeing this, the Autism Self Advocacy Network fought to have the billboard taken
down, and eventually won. Even then, PETA did not back down on its stance that milk
and dairy makes autism worse or may even cause it. The studies it cited, however, are
hardly new, and are not entirely reputable.”1

This next one is really bad, so get ready. I’m assuming most of the people reading
this know about KFC and Col. Sanders, the chain’s iconic founder whose likeness is still
used in advertising. PETA mocked his death. “Whether or not you like KFC, it's worth
knowing that Colonel Sanders was a real person, with family and friends. When he died
in 1980, it saddened a great many more people than just fried chicken enthusiasts.
PETA, however, were not exactly upset to learn of his passing. In 2008, they went to his
grave site and bought an adjoining plot to his. Then, they made a headstone with one
of their members' names on it, even though that person is still alive. On the headstone,
beside the guy's name, is a poem that reads as follow:

Kind 
Friend of
Chickens
Today we honor your memory
Our love for you continues
Rest in peace
Those suffering and
Unable to move 
Remember you
Each one striving for
Salvation
Brother 
In us as in you
Remain 
Dreams for the
Souls of the voiceless
 Hartman – Page Six

The ‘hidden’ message here is less than subtle. Not only is this move disrespectful to
the dead, it is also a slight against a man who is not even here to defend himself, and
will be visible to any of his visiting family members. When asked about the
gravestone, Matt Prescott, whose name is on the stone, had this to say to PETA:
‘This headstone will remind visitors that KFC stands for cruelty and death. We’ll
continue to pressure KFC executives to stop these grotesque abuses of billions of
chickens—no matter how long it takes.’”1

This catalogue of infamous behavior is beyond terrible. Companies that mess up this
badly often go bankrupt, but PETA just keeps making it worse and worse. Most people
are familiar with the KKK, (Ku Klux Klan), a white supremacist group. PETA decided
that he needed to link that organization to pet owners:” When a person sees the letters
KKK alongside people in white hooded robes, they don't tend to think about animal
rights. PETA sought to change that. In 2009, the group sent two representatives to
protest the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show in New York. There they dressed up in
KKK uniforms in order to attempt to draw a parallel between the American Kennel Club
and the Ku Klux Klan. Their logic for this? They claimed that the AKC was trying to
create a canine master race through doggy eugenics, like animal Nazis, and were
creating an obsession with pure breed dogs. Not only were dog owners offended at
being compared to the Klan, but black rights groups were horrified at the use of the KKK
uniforms for PETA's campaign.”1

This organization approaches every topic associated with animals as if they are the
“experts”, whose ideas and knowledge is beyond question. Therefore, it should not be
surprise to find that they have strong opinions on what domesticated animals should
eat. ”As you might guess, PETA is against the use of animal-based pet food, and
instead encourages pet owners to make their companions go vegan as well. Whether
dogs can live by vegan diets has been hotly debated, and the jury is still mostly out on
that one. However, PETA has also encouraged a vegan lifestyle for cats, and that's
where things can get nasty. According to experts, cats absolutely cannot go vegan, and
for the most part, a vegetarian diet is extremely harmful for a cat. This is because cats
need amino acids in order to live, particularly those only found in meat,
especially taurine. While PETA has claimed that dietary supplements will work fine,
veterinarians have warned that vegan diets for cats, and sometimes for certain
dogs, may cause them to get sick, and can lead to serious health problems. But PETA
has dismissed this. What do they know, after all, they're only veterinarians.“ 1

PETA has a well-documented organizational history of promoting controversial

positions and even encouraging violence at times. It supports another “animal rights”
group called ALF. “It's not only PETA's ads that promote violence and make
unreasonable claims but they have publicly voiced support for an ecoterrorism group
known as the Animal Liberation Front, the organization has who have a history of
 Hartman – Page Seven

burning down buildings and businesses that use animal products, destroying property,
stealing animals to "save" them and even assaulting people. Formally, PETA says it
doesn't physically work with the ALF, but that doesn't stop them from verbally assaulting
people online. Supporters of PETA have long been known for flocking to social media to
bombard a celebrity or public persona with hateful messages and even threats of
violence.”4 The actions of both these organizations can be categorized as terrorist
behavior, and they need to be closely monitored by the appropriate authorities.
 
PETA often looks to gain notoriety through the use of ‘shocking’ ads. “PETA is very
much against objectifying animals, but it doesn't seem to have much of a problem when
it comes to objectifying women. Throughout their existence, PETA has created ads and
demonstrations that use naked, abused, or sexually objectified women to make a point.
From showing sexualized women in chains, to parodying public service announcements
about abuse in reference to the way animals are treated, women are generally used by
PETA to get attention. Even when they're not showing women in peril, posed in sexy
ways, to make points about death and abuse, they still use the nudity of celebrities, like
Alicia Silverstone, to get attention. They've even resorted to fat-shaming and body-
shaming women on occasion to try to get them to go vegetarian.” 1

The leader of PETA has stated that she wants to be turned into leather when she
dies. Does this sound normal, or even sane? “PETA's founder is named Ingrid Newkirk,
and she is absolutely rabid when it comes to animal cruelty. Unfortunately, she also has
a flair for the dramatic, the extreme, and is quick to thrust herself into the spotlight in the
name of PETA. Even when talking about her own will and testament, she took the
opportunity to take shots at people who eat meat, and the meat industry as a
whole. She posted the whole thing on the PETA website, and in it she asks that her
body be used for food, be skinned, and be used to protest animal cruelty.”1

Prior to performing research for this article, I had no idea who Jeffery Dahmer was,
as he lived and died before I was born. However, after learning that he was an
American serial killer and cannibal who killed and dismembered seventeen boys and
men, I am appalled to learn that PETA used his case as an opportunity to promote
veganism. “When Jeffrey Dahmer's trial was going on, the country was pretty well
horrified, even if they were a little fascinated as well. The sheer depravity of his actions,
and how his victims had died, was distressing, and PETA saw that national distress as
an opportunity. In 1991, the organization got a newspaper ad that described what
sounded like a grisly murder, just as the same paper was covering Dahmer's killings. It
went as follows: ‘Milwaukee. . . July 1991. They were drugged and dragged across the
room . . . Their legs and feet were bound together. . . Their struggles and cries went
unanswered. . . Then they were slaughtered and their heads sawn off. . . Their body
parts were refrigerated to be eaten later. . . It's still going on. If this leaves a bad taste in
your mouth, become a vegetarian.’ Not only did this come across as distasteful, but it
was also offensive to anyone who worked in meat, considering they were being
 Hartman – Page Eight

compared to Jeffrey Dahmer. Disgusted by PETA's attempt to capitalize on what many

considered a terrible tragedy, some papers refused to run the ad. It's worth noting that
PETA has since moved to buy and to turn Dahmer's house into a vegan restaurant.
Because that's appetizing. Luckily, their request to do so has been denied.” 1

This organization has continued to survive over the past forty years by purposely
dealing with sensitive topics in their print ads, commercials, and corporate press
releases. They have drawn associations with the KKK and Jeffery Dahmer, they have,
and continue to, objectify women, but they used one of the most horrific acts in human
history as another attempt for people to turn vegan. “The Holocaust is such a sensitive
topic that, to use it in the media, it requires care, tact, and compassion. PETA
apparently did not get the message when it ran its ad campaign commonly known as
‘Holocaust On Your Plate.’ In this poster campaign, PETA used photos from
concentration camps and photos of Holocaust survivors alongside caged animals,
comparing the living circumstances. As you might guess, this comparison, and use of
graphic human suffering photos for animal activism was enough to make many groups
very angry. None of these groups seemed to be for helping the animals, however, and
were all angry with PETA instead. In particular, it pissed off Germany, and the ad
campaign was banned in the country, with the high court saying that it would
make ‘...the fate of the victims of the Holocaust appear banal and trivial.’” 1

Earlier, I referenced a comic book that PETA circulated stating that kid’s moms’ were
murderers by eating meat. Emboldened by that effort, they released the sequel no-
body asked for: “…one was made about fathers as well, about the evils of fishing, and
was handed out at fishing competitions to children being taught by their dads to fish.
These books contain graphic imagery, explaining how the animals are killed to make
clothes or dinner, and encourages children to ask their parents about their murderous
ways. To quote from the actual pro-fish pamphlet: ‘Imagine that a man dangles a piece
of candy in front of you. As you grab the candy, a huge metal hook stabs through your
hand and you’re ripped off the ground. You fight to get away, but it doesn't do any good.
That would be an awful trick to play on someone, wouldn't it?’”1

Is it too much to ask that a service organization remain true to the purpose for which
it was founded? “In 2007, two PETA employees were tried for animal cruelty and
littering in North Carolina after they were caught in a late night stakeout dumping the
bodies of dead dogs and cats in a dumpster. Evidence presented during the trial
showed that PETA employees killed animals they considered “adorable” and “perfect.”
Likewise, witnesses at the trial testified that PETA told them they “shouldn’t have a
problem at all finding homes” for dogs left in their care. Other North Carolina shelter
personnel testified that they were under the impression PETA would find homes for the
animals they handed over to PETA. These impressions were incorrect. PETA picked up
dogs and cats from animal shelters in North Carolina and killed them before they even
left the state. Beyond the evidence presented at the trial, PETA has never backed up its
 Hartman – Page Nine

claim with any evidence to suggest that it only takes in injured or otherwise unadoptable
dogs and cats.”3

If you aren’t already convinced that PETA is a horrible organization, consider the
following: “Ridiculously, PETA has argued that outdoor cats should be summarily killed
instead of allowed to live. In a 2014 interview with the Washington Post, Newkirk argued
that outdoor cats would be better off dead because they might contract a future illness
or be hit by a car in the future. In PETA’s twisted mind, it’s more humane to just
euthanize the animals than for a hypothetical harm to befall them in the future. Similarly,
PETA has also argued in court that elephants are better off being killed than living in
American zoos where they are well cared for.” 3

Personally, I am extremely surprised, and angered, over the fact that this “animal
rescue service” is still around, and they haven’t been shut down by the U.S government.
All of the evidence that has been presented, as well as countless more examples,
clearly demonstrate that PETA has participated in activities that not only significantly
deviate from the original purpose of the organization, but are in direct opposition to the
mission for which they were reportedly founded to accomplish. Hopefully, this company
gets sued out of existence, and soon, because this pattern of behavior is beyond belief.

The state of Virginia should review the original filing from this organization. Is the
original purpose for its existence still clearly being carried out? If not, it should be
served notice that it needs to return to its roots or risk being sued. The overwhelming
references to PETA’s conduct over the past forty years suggests that it purposely
sought to hide its aggressive, radical ideas and actions by outlining a scope of activity
that be helpful, not hurtful, to dogs and cats.

All animals deserve to be treated with respect, whether wild, or domesticated, but
PETA has no legal, or moral, authority to overstep its bounds and force its beliefs on
others who do not share such extremist views. This firm serves as a case study of a
company that was founded for a simple, reasonable purpose, but lost its way (or more
likely its mind) as it continues to stray from its basic mission. This change in direction
has created fierce opposition to its practices and compromised its integrity in the eyes of
many who previously may have supported its cause. The only ethical aspect of this
organization remaining is in its name – People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals –
because its pattern of behavior certainly is not.
 Hartman – Page Ten

Cite 1: https://www.ranker.com/list/messed-up-peta-facts/laura-allan

Cite 2: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/17/peta-sorry-for-taking-girls-
dog-putting-it-down

Cite 3: https://petakillsanimals.com/proof-peta-kills/

Cite 4: https://www.theodysseyonline.com/peta-worst-animal-rights

Cite 5: https://twitter.com/peta?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
For General Information