The Big Picture: Skin Game

Recommended Videos

RatRace123

Elite Member
Dec 1, 2009
6,651
0
41
The lesson here, PETA is bad...
Shocker.

I was well aware of PETA's, shall we say, less than noble side already. But it's always fun to hear about their massive amounts of hypocrisy again.

Seriously though, if you're at all interested in Animal rights or prevention of animal abuse, you should definitely steer clear of PETA and instead look to the ASPCA or WWF.
If only because, the less people supporting PETA, the less funding it gets and therefore, the faster it goes away.
 

MonkeyPunch

New member
Feb 20, 2008
589
0
0
This is exactly what I have said before. The worst part about the PETA thing is that they ridicule real organisations who do take care of animals and make people more blaze about the whole thing. It is a real shame that they end up discrediting real animal protection groups who are serious about what they do.

Also, I seriously ignore PETA and have done for a long while. When people mention PETA I just stop listening and shrug it off.
 

Raggedstar

New member
Jul 5, 2011
753
0
0
Great work there, Bob. You brought your opinion (which on the whole I agree with but all disagreements are with me being more on the welfare side) without losing sight and going nuts. As someone who greatly dislikes PETA, I think you also gave me a little more flack to use against them. Never heard of the whole thing about "Ingrid the dog catcher" 0__0. Man I hate that woman.

I'm surprised you didn't talk about the other instances of PETA vs games (like the Battlefield 3, Cooking Mama, Super Tofu Boy, and COD and other shooter that involves killing wild, war or zombie dogs), but I guess this is the more famous case and is the hot topic. I can dig it. Though it does bring a bit of perspective with how they think it would be cruel to try to kill a dog that is lunging at someone's throat. They're not going up there for kisses, that's for sure.
 

Giest4life

The Saucepan Man
Feb 13, 2010
1,554
0
0
CM156 said:
Giest4life said:
CM156 said:
Giest4life said:
I do not believe that there is any such thing as "rights"; the concept of "rights" is a social construct that is fully contingent on the time and place that they exist in.

Solipsistic (I think that's the right word) much?
Solipsistic is the wrong adjective to describe me, there. Solipsism is an epistemological viewpoint, not social theory.
Fair enough.

You are aware, though, that the idea of unalienable rights are the basic foundation of Western Law, along with Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (Presumption of innocence) and due process of law, right? By saying that there is no such thing as "rights" you're calling the western legal system a sham. Perhaps what you're trying to say is that rights change over time due to different values of a culture. Is that correct?
Yes, I supposed, I'm calling the Western legal system a sham. I've always considered my position as antithetical to the conventional view on society, but I've never really singled as Western legal code as more of a shame than, let's say, Islamic law.
a)The idea of "alienable" rights is contingent upon the accepted definition of "freeman" in Western society. "Rights", inalienable or not, were not extended towards women, slaves, and the landless.
b)The Western legal code is largely the product of the works of that famous Athenian duo: Plato and Aristotle. Their works were heavily sampled by their Roman counterparts and the Christian philosophers that followed (e.g. Boethius, St. Anslem, and St. Aquinas). The begins of Western "law" is merely an arbitrary fusion of Plato's ethics with Christian scholasticism.
c)Modern Western saw its introduction in that tragic age historians call "the Enlightenment." Taking the hint from Machiavelli's works in the Renaissance, enlightenment writers expanded the Western legal code to become more liberal. Your "inalienable rights", for the first time in Europe, were now truly "inalienable" because they did not originate from Providence. Rousseau, Voltaire, Molière, Pope, Locke, Hobbes, and the very underrated, Montesquieu laid the foundation for the Western legal system. They combined Plato's ethics with the spirit of utilitarianism which was in the air and tragically created the idea that "Law" was the fundamental pillar of rationality and a defining feature of civilized societies.
d) It is all a sham because it is all built on the view that there is something intrinsically valuable in each and every human being, except that the definition of "human being" was still largely up to the elite. Pre-Darwinian biologists long argued that Blacks weren't the same species as the white, western Europeans.
e)"Due Process" and "presumption of innocence" and etc. was created by the baronies of England to protect their assets against the whims of a monarch. It was only much later that those "rights" were extended towards the plebeians.

All of the above points, a-f, have not kept pace with the more important philosophical developments. Non-philosophical academic and legal institutions of the West have longed used Kantian philosophy to justify the supremacy of the Western legal code, but often forgetting that Kantian philosophy blasted some big holes in the idea that human reason reigns unchallenged over all other imperatives. Philosophers following Kant's discovery,most notably Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, have vociferously argued that the entire of Western society is built is nothing but a series of successive flaws. In short, it's all a sham.

But take heart, Erasmus praised Folly and reminded us all that we owe our very existence to the mistakes our fathers have made. Nietzsche reminded us that folly is a necessary condition for human survival. So, what does it matter that the entire Western legal code is a shame, right? All that matters is that it works for the majority of us.

In conclusion, I'm not alone in calling it a sham. They are many wiser than I am who have declared it all a shame, but the flaw is just too deeply rooted for even the best of us to rectify.
 

Dr Snakeman

New member
Apr 2, 2010
1,611
0
0
"Here's their contact information. Perhaps you'd like to ask them about it."



Bob, many of your little rants tend to annoy the living hell out of me. But this one? I freaking loved it.

PETA will know the trolly, trolly wrath of MovieBob. They will know it and tremble.
 

Giest4life

The Saucepan Man
Feb 13, 2010
1,554
0
0
Towels said:
Giest4life said:
CM156 said:
Giest4life said:
I do not believe that there is any such thing as "rights"; the concept of "rights" is a social construct that is fully contingent on the time and place that they exist in.

Solipsistic (I think that's the right word) much?
Solipsistic is the wrong adjective to describe me, there. Solipsism is an epistemological viewpoint, not social theory.
Sweet, a game of Semantics. Can I play?
"Its not Psychology, its Sociology."

Anyways, let me ask you this: (and I'm sure I'm opening a dark door here...) Even if you cannot feel any empathy for animals or fellow humans, can you still deny how interaction with them in your life is necessary? If not, can you tell me that supporting their well-being ultimately serves your own existence?
I think you are severely underplaying the importance of language and its various nuances. Nietzsche, who was a classical philologist (an analyzer of classical languages) and a philosopher, famously said in Beyond Good and Evil, "we can't get rid of God because we cannot get rid of grammar."

It is empirically false that encouraging the well-being of each and every animal and person that I encounter will have a positive affect on my well-being. Do not the locusts also need to feed? Yet we poison them ruthlessly. Do not the roaches and the flies have a right to life? Yet we feel no remorse when we exterminate them. Your "empathy" only extends insofar your aesthetic, or your survival instinct allows it to. But, wait, there's more! The computer that I'm using, the snug sneakers that I'm waring, the warm jacket that I've on, and the roof above my house are all a product of someone else living a less privileged life than me. We have put up a facade of caring for the poor little sweatshop laborers. We take comfort that we are spiritually for the well-being of our fellow man, but we leave the decisions to our politicians and then blame them, along with the banks, for not getting more done for the horrible living conditions of people all around the world.
 

Eri

The Light of Dawn
Feb 21, 2009
3,626
0
0
Am I the only one who read the article that they were just kidding? NO ONE ELSE SEEMS TO HAVE NOTICED THIS HUGELY IMPORTANT DETAIL.

Beside that though, yeah they suck.
 

The Cheshire

New member
May 10, 2011
110
0
0
Wow, I know PETA were exaggerated whiney bitches, but this "euthanasia" shit is way beyond anything I had ever imagined. I am startled, to see something as crazy as this exists, I don't understand it. Americans. ARE. WEIRD. :b

Anyway, very inspiring video, I'll be sure to warn my whiney vegan friends about the dangers of PETA. By the way, this people make amazing movie villains, so deliciously full of Evil.
 

Furioso

New member
Jun 16, 2009
7,981
0
0
Giest4life said:
Furioso said:
Giest4life said:
Great episode about PeTA, Bob, though I disagree with many of your positions regarding animals. For starters, there should be no such thing as "crimes against animals."
Really? So you wouldn't consider it to be a bad thing if you starved a dog nearly to death, chained it up so that skin actually grew around the metal of the chain, and threw rocks at it for having the audacity to beg its owner for some food, until it inevitably died a long and painful death?
I'm unabashedly apathetic to the pain of my fellow man who is scattered all around the globe, I see no reason why I should feel any differently towards animals. If it helps you get some perspective, I do not believe that there is any such thing as "rights"; the concept of "rights" is a social construct that is fully contingent on the time and place that they exist in.

Varya said:
Giest4life said:
Great episode about PeTA, Bob, though I disagree with many of your positions regarding animals. For starters, there should be no such thing as "crimes against animals."
Yes, it's not like they can feel anything.
No, it's more to do with me not caring than with animals not having feelings.
But the statement that there should be no such thing as "crimes against animals" implies that you think it's a good thing to torture them, a better way to put it would be that you think animal abuse is bad, but you really couldn't care less
 

Crimson_Dragoon

Biologist Supreme
Jul 29, 2009
795
0
0
I'm in conservation biology and even I can't stand these guys. They are extremists in the worst possible way. I get that most of them have their hearts in the right place, but they have to understand that you can't force others into your beliefs and that sometimes, you have to be able to compromise with people. It's their way, and anyone who doesn't follow it is on par with Hitler.
 

tetron

New member
Dec 9, 2009
584
0
0
People seem to get the wrong idea about PETA from stuff like this. The thing is that from PETA's perspective they're not evil. To the rest of the world they look like heartless monsters who run around killing cute little kittens and puppies when they don't feel bad about what they're doing at all, other people just don't understand.

PETA considers domesticated animals aberrations of natural species. Thus they should all be eliminated. Humanity brought something into the world that never should have been, and PETA is the only organization with the cajones to do what must be done to correct the error of domestication.

Other than the corruption in the upper echelons of PETA the only thing they're doing wrong is not siding with the majority of people who don't want to admit that their adorable wittle puppies and cute fluffy kittens were a mistake.


You can call them hypocrites and every insult under the sun but until you understand that this is what they believe then their genocide will continue. PETA isn't something to be ignored, as said in the comments they're the nazis of the animal world and should be treated as such. Ignoring them will only cause their actions to go unchecked, so give them the attention they deserve. The MovieBob brand of attention. PETA needs to be shut down NOW, not ignored.
 

Snotnarok

New member
Nov 17, 2008
6,310
0
0
Glad to see the information being put out there more. After seeing it on Penn and Tellers Bullshit! I was surprised it wasn't more common knowledge, hopefully this and other people will try and spread the word.
 

The Random One

New member
May 29, 2008
3,310
0
0
"PETA knows that gamers are pretty much the only subculture that hasn't figured out that if we ignore them they'll go away."

No. Gamers are the only subculture that are so mired in insecurity that they are almost defined by the way they lash out at anything they perceive as less than 100% supportive of them, and thus are easily exploited by shady business such as this.
 

Random berk

New member
Sep 1, 2010
9,636
0
0
For this episode and the many equally insightful ones that you have made Bob, I would gladly buy you a beer in the extremely unlikely event in which I run into you in a pub somewhere.
 

The Random One

New member
May 29, 2008
3,310
0
0
tetron said:
People seem to get the wrong idea about PETA from stuff like this. The thing is that from PETA's perspective they're not evil.
Really, dude? Really? Did you think anyone thought that PETA people woke up every day and said 'TODAY I SHALL DO EVIL!'? Then they pet their white cat which they proceed to immediately kill?

Of course they don't think of themselves as evil. No one outside of a bad Hollywood movie or videogame does. Bob just pointed out some of the things they do, which they themselves are quite aware that would not curry them favours with the population at large. No one is accusing their poisition of being inconsistent, we're just positioning ourselves on the opposite side to them
 

mlooshka

New member
Nov 19, 2009
35
0
0
I find it hard to believe that there are still people who don't know how messed up PETA is. Nevertheless, thank you for doing this - maybe there's a few animal lovers out there that will now stop giving money to these idiots.