Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Tofu Activists Spoof Meat-Based Indie Game

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the have-a-burger-to-celebrate dept.

It's funny.  Laugh. 420

Faulkner39 writes "In response to the recently released independently developed platformer Super Meat Boy, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has released a Flash-based spoof game titled Super Tofu Boy. The spoof attempts to mirror the original by featuring a protagonist made of tofu and an antagonist made of meat in a statement promoting animal rights. Ironically, however, the original game is about a human boy who is vulnerable because he lacks skin (Meat Boy), raising the question: 'is the spoof in reality really about cannibalism?'" The Super Meat Boy team posted a response on their Twitter feed.

cancel ×

420 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Streisand effect (4, Informative)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 3 years ago | (#34414842)

I had never heard of Super Meat Boy.

Re:Streisand effect (5, Insightful)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#34414868)

That's wht the PETA spoof is so important for them. On their site [supermeatboy.com] they explain how they've been trolling the PETA forums, hoping for this to happen. Apparently with success. It's a weird kind of PR, but it works, because now you've heard of Super Meat Boy. Thanks to trolling, PETA and Slashdot.

Re:Streisand effect (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34414898)

I had never heard of Super Meat Boy.

No loss really. It's just another platformer. Never understood why the "indie" crowd starts drooling over platformers so much. They are so unimaginative and boring. There are literally thousands of them out there; all but reskinned versions of the same game.

Re:Streisand effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34414976)

just another platformer with a metacritic score of 90?
http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/super-meat-boy/details

have you played it or just looked at a screenshot and made up your mind?

Re:Streisand effect (1)

.tekrox (858002) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415378)

It still reeks of an N+ clone; with controls that are slightly worse.

I still liked it overall; but it has nothing on its apparent inspirator.

Re:Streisand effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415496)

Even N+ isn't all that innovative. There are dozens - if not hundreds - of these kinds of platformers (hard, skill-based, etc.) around (indiegames.com, Tigsource, dozens of Flash-games sites, etc.). Most of them are just small hobby project and occasionally somebody drops a load of money in one of them and markets them.

Add to that the personality-cult around certain names and you get the kind of popularity Super Meat Boy gets. Too bad really, because I'd rather see more interesting indie games succeed, so those developers create more games; instead of the bazillionth platformer.

Re:Streisand effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415032)

Oh? And what game do you play that is so startlingly original and innovative? Halo?

Re:Streisand effect (1)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415874)

No, but this game isn't either.

Re:Streisand effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415334)

Meat Boy is not a Mario clone, unlike the majority of platformers. It's all about wall jumping.

Re:Streisand effect (1)

Narishma (822073) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415470)

So it's an N clone instead?

Re:Streisand effect (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415926)

There are literally thousands of them out there; all but reskinned versions of the same game.

Hey, Meat Boy doesn't have skin, you insensitive clod!

Re:Streisand effect (1)

prowler1 (458133) | more than 3 years ago | (#34414902)

Neither had I but after seeing this story I got intrigued enough to visit their web site and have to admit, the game plot definitely appeals to the more twisted side of my sense of humor. Without PETA getting upset and doing something about this, I would not be thinking of looking further into the game or even had heard of it.

I feel about PETA like PETA seems to feel about me (5, Funny)

icannotthinkofaname (1480543) | more than 3 years ago | (#34414876)

They offer downloads for PC and Mac. What, no Linux version? You mean I have to play the version on the website to play in Linux?

If they won't give me Linux Tofu Boy, then I have absolutely no incentive to cease my consumption of meat. Clearly, they don't care about me, so I will continue to not care about them.

I should go have a double down or something later....

Re:I feel about PETA like PETA seems to feel about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34414974)

I should go have a double down or something later....

What could be later than a double down?

Re:I feel about PETA like PETA seems to feel about (1)

hat_eater (1376623) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415340)

Eat! Them! Eat! Them! Eat! Them!

PETA (4, Insightful)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 3 years ago | (#34414888)

You know, maybe they could have spent some of that development money on outreach for their shelters, so that they wouldn't have to kill 86% of the animals they shelter.

But no, I guess making video games, stockpiling red paint, and placing ads of naked hippies should really come first.

Re:PETA (0, Flamebait)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 3 years ago | (#34414918)

If a domesticated animal has been abandoned and unwanted, the most humane thing to do is end its suffering as quickly and painlessly as possible. Keeping it caged in hopes that someone will come and adopt it may feel nice, but it isn't in the animal's best interest.

Re:PETA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34414944)

Next up: orphans!

Re:PETA (5, Interesting)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 3 years ago | (#34414962)

The problem is that PETA don't think *any* animals should be domesticated, so mostly they don't even bother to try to rehome animals.

Quite often they don't bother to find out if they're abandoned or unwanted - a couple of years ago two PETA activists were arrested for basically trapping cats and dogs (and indeed, going into people's gardens to catch them) and killing them. They claimed that the animals were "abandoned" or "strays", but couldn't offer any convincing reason for thinking they were. They weren't interested in animal welfare, they just liked stealing then torturing and killing people's pets.

Re:PETA (3, Insightful)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415270)

The problem is that PETA don't think *any* animals should be domesticated, so mostly they don't even bother to try to rehome animals.

That's one thing I've never understood. What exactly is wrong with an animal having a caring owner, someone to trust to, a warm home, no need to be afraid of predators, and not having to get cold and sometimes go days without food? I myself have two cats and I would say they are MUCH better off here with me than out there in the Finnish winter. Hell, you don't need to be an expert or anything to see that they actually like their life here. Even if I open the door and let them out they come back after 3 minutes, they just simply don't want to go there.

So, I just simply do not understand PETA and their ideals.

Re:PETA (4, Funny)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415346)

Don't you see man! It's like slavery! thinking you can "own" an animal.
We can't "own" our animal equals!
keeping a pet is so like exactly the same as slavery!

or something absurd like that.

either way everyone knows: dogs have owners, cats have staff.

Re:PETA (2)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415486)

Don't you see man! It's like slavery! thinking you can "own" an animal.
We can't "own" our animal equals!
keeping a pet is so like exactly the same as slavery!

That's what they seem to claim, indeed. However, in slavery the slaver puts the slaves to work for him or her to produce something of value, but pets do not need to work, they do not produce anything, they just exist. Even when some people take their dogs out to hunting or something the pet actually most often enjoys it, it's not forced to it, it's good for it, and again is not slavery in the least bit.

Of course there are some really horrible owners, but I atleast am not aware of any single one. A regular person usually takes good care of their pet or pets and provide for them in all the ways they might need. That is VERY different from what real slavery is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery [wikipedia.org]

Re:PETA (2)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415574)

I hate to think what horses have. If they're so badly treated then think about this - who gets up at 6am to go out in the snow and bring who their breakfast?

And yes, you don't "own" a cat, they just come and live with you.

Re:PETA (4, Insightful)

Ginger Unicorn (952287) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415392)

The reason PETA are disconnected from reality is that they are projecting their own self-loathing onto the arena of animal rights issues, rather than addressing animal rights with logic and rationality. The driving thought in a militant PETA member's head is that humans are disgusting worthless bullies and animals are perfect and angelic. Because humans are in a position of power over animals, they are evil, and revenge must be sought at every opportunity. They're projecting their own self loathing, and their own feelings of powerlessness onto an unrelated issue. When the time comes for them face a logic rebuttal to their behaviour, cognitive dissonance kicks to protect them from facing the fact that they have become the very bullies they despise.

Re:PETA (1)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415910)

What exactly is wrong with an animal having a caring owner, someone to trust to, a warm home, no need to be afraid of predators, and not having to get cold and sometimes go days without food?

I'm all for animal rights, but PETA is just insane. I don't see anything wrong with letting an animal live in your house and taking care of it.

Re:PETA (3, Interesting)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415002)

I would not mind agreeing with you if it weren't for the fact that this is directly against PETA's stated goals. They want to eliminate ownership of animals, and eliminate the euthanasia of animals. Never mind that their central office euthanizes thousands of animals a year.

It's not so much that I am against their ideals. I just can't stand f**ing hypocrites.

Re:PETA (2)

jamesh (87723) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415160)

It's not so much that I am against their ideals. I just can't stand f**ing hypocrites.

Bah. Hypocrisy is everywhere. What bugs me is that they somehow think that they know what is ethical in the first place. Who are they to decide that it is wrong for an animal to suffer? Seeing a suffering animal invokes feelings of sadness, horror, and disgust in most people (or in me at least) and they want to see it stop, but that's just how our brains are programed and it doesn't make it wrong. There have been studies that show that people who enjoy inflicting cruelty on an animal are more likely to grow up to be , but that doesn't mean that letting animals suffer or causing animals to suffer is wrong either.

Unless there is some sort of god above, I don't think there is any innate law of the universe that determines what is wrong and what is right, it's up to us to decide. And just because PETA are noisy and violent doesn't make their point of view valid.

</rant>

Re:PETA (1)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415208)

Moral relativism is a black hole. Besides which, you can't win an argument with it, you can only refuse to accept an argument on the grounds that it's as invalid as any other argument.

Re:PETA (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415376)

yes but at the same time there's part of a point there.
namely:

*who the hell are you to decide if my life isn't worth living*
Or in the case of animals you can't communicate with- killing them can be more about what you want and what you feel than about what the animals wants or feel.
It makes you feel better to no longer see it suffering, the animal on the other hand may be quite determined to keep living.

Re:PETA (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415668)

It makes you feel better to no longer see it suffering, the animal on the other hand may be quite determined to keep living.

They have to restrain a healthy animal to put it down for a reason. I think few of us have seen an animal that realizes it's time to die and doesn't resist any more because of our "civilized" (read: city-dwelling) experience. The animals get whisked away to the hospital to be put down.

A man should shoot his own dog. And while we're talking about eating meat, I think that anyone who wants to eat meat should have to participate in the slaughtering, dressing, cooking, and eating of an animal in sequence, or take a full tour of a feedlot and slaughterhouse, in order to get a license to be permitted to eat meat. Of course, this is in my perfect world where you could implement such a thing without cost. Seriously though, I think we'd have a lot less meat eaters with such a system implemented, and that WOULD reduce environmental damage under other current systems.

Re:PETA (1)

attributed insanity (1113991) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415704)

I think we'd have a lot less meat eaters with such a system implemented

I think you're over-estimating people's squeamishness. Speaking as someone who was taught how to skin, gut and otherwise prepare a rabbit for eating recently it's astonishing how quickly it goes from "clearly a rabbit" to "clearly meat".

Re:PETA (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415732)

I think you're over-estimating people's squeamishness.

I'm quite sure that I'm not. I've killed and eaten stuff, the last thing was a deer my lady ran into the fence and it killed its neck, I went out and slit its throat and it ended up in our oven and freezer. The first thing was a goose at Roaring Camp and Big Trees railroad, we lured it with popcorn and stuffed it in a burlap sack, took it off into the hills (away from the others) and chopped its head off with a hatchet. That doesn't mean that I think everyone wants to do the same. But there's really no way to know other than to put the plan in to practice.

Re:PETA (1)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415824)

yes but at the same time there's part of a point there. namely: *who the hell are you to decide if my life isn't worth living*

With moral relativism, who are you to say I'm not to decide if your life isn't worth living? What difference does it make?

Re:PETA (3, Interesting)

The Mighty Buzzard (878441) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415512)

Moral relativism is fine so long as you remember two things:

  • Everyone is under no obligation to respect any beliefs not their own.
  • You are part of the group Everyone, not an outside observer.

Example: Westboro Baptist Church has every right in the world to believe their wacky shit. I have every right in the world to believe the world would be a better place if they were to all be raped, tortured, and then fed into a wood chipper. Neither of us has to give a happy damn about seeing things from the other's point of view.

Re:PETA (1)

The Mighty Buzzard (878441) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415444)

Bah. Hypocrisy is everywhere. ... Who are they to decide that it is wrong for an animal to suffer? ... Unless there is some sort of god above, I don't think there is any innate law of the universe that determines what is wrong and what is right, it's up to us to decide.

Outstanding example.

Re:PETA (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415510)

Just because there isn't an absolute moral code, doesn't mean we can't act to defend ours.

By your POV, abolitionist should not have fought against slavery at a time when it was socially accepted, nor should I help you if you're getting robbed. After all, who's to say if the thieves are wrong?

I am a moral relativist, in the way that I don't believe there is an absolute moral code. But that doesn't mean I believe we shouldn't fight for what we think is right.

And no, I don't agree with PETA on what is right and wrong.

Re:PETA (1)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415886)

I am a moral relativist, in the way that I don't believe there is an absolute moral code. But that doesn't mean I believe we shouldn't fight for what we think is right.

That's where you run into problems. Some people do think murder is right, some people do think rape is alright, some people do think slavery is right; according to your previous statement, you believe that they should fight for that, even if you personally find it repugnant.

Re:PETA (1)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415984)

Unless there is some sort of god above, I don't think there is any innate law of the universe that determines what is wrong and what is right

Actually, even if there was a god, his views on what is 'right' or 'wrong' would only be his opinion, not fact.

Re:PETA (4, Funny)

The Mighty Buzzard (878441) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415420)

I just can't stand f**ing hypocrites.

Dunno why not, they're just as good in the sack as everyone else.

Re:PETA (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415020)

If a domesticated animal has been abandoned and unwanted, the most humane thing to do is end its suffering as quickly and painlessly as possible. Keeping it caged in hopes that someone will come and adopt it may feel nice, but it isn't in the animal's best interest.

It's still an interesting question who gets to determine when death is in your best interest.

Re:PETA (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415788)

If a domesticated animal has been abandoned and unwanted, the most humane thing to do is end its suffering as quickly and painlessly as possible. Keeping it caged in hopes that someone will come and adopt it may feel nice, but it isn't in the animal's best interest.

It's still an interesting question who gets to determine when death is in your best interest.

Yeah, philosophically interesting question sure, but practically easy to answer: the one with the biggest gun gets to decide. Wether it's biggest antlers on a moose, or most comprehensive ICBM 2nd strike capability, it's the same story all over "animal kingdom".

Re:PETA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415040)

oh, you know, because being dead is totally in his interest! BS and Peta knows it.

Re:PETA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415050)

If the animals could talk, do you think they'd agree with you?

Re:PETA (1)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415090)

This is pretty much the party line that you get from them.

On the other hand, plenty of other organizations do have much, much higher adoption rates. To their credit.

I wonder if it's not just that PETA is quick with the needle, but that they'd still suffer from low adoption rates in their shelters, primarily because most people don't want to deal with PETA if they don't have to.

Re:PETA (2)

jamesh (87723) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415122)

If a domesticated animal has been abandoned and unwanted, the most humane thing to do is end its suffering as quickly and painlessly as possible.

And having done that, it seems like of a waste not to eat its meat, make clothes out of it's skin, and glue out of its tendons.

Re:PETA (1)

The Mighty Buzzard (878441) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415394)

So true. Can we start doing this with politicians we don't reelect, please?

Re:PETA (1)

vidnet (580068) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415014)

You know, maybe they could have spent some of that development money on outreach for their shelters, so that they wouldn't have to kill 86% of the animals they shelter.

Instead they spent in on a campaign for livestock, 100% of which are killed. PETA don't consider livestock inferior to pets, or any less deserving of ethical treatment.

Re:PETA (1)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415082)

And they have pretty much zero effect there. Why? Because they alienate people with combativeness. They get attention because people love to hate them. And they seem completely oblivious to that fact.

Re:PETA (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415796)

I think they have it backwards then. They could start by showing proper stewardship of their own animals. PETA putting down 90% of the animals they take in is rank hypocrisy especially when that's triple the rate of a non-PETA shelter. "Do as I say and not as I do" is just not the way to run an advocacy program. If they trail the industry in pet treatment, why should anyone listen to them on the treatment of any other kind of animal?

Re:PETA (0)

couchslug (175151) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415342)

Trying to find homes for all the animals would literally be stupid because it would only aggravate the surplus critter problem. Even some PETAfiles get that.

If the goal is actually REDUCTION OF ANIMAL SUFFERING, it isn't "cruel" (anyone unsure of the meaning, get a fucking dictionary) to the animals to painlessly kill them.

Pet People can't abide the thought of the DEATH of animals and want to cling morbidly to as many as possible. Rather like the way we keep old folks alive and suffering to the very last, this bitter denial of death isn't about the "victim" at all. It's about making the person who is preserving the "victim" feel better.

Re:PETA (5, Insightful)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415464)

If the goal is actually REDUCTION OF ANIMAL SUFFERING, it isn't "cruel" (anyone unsure of the meaning, get a fucking dictionary) to the animals to painlessly kill them.

Logic failure.. So what if we rounded up all the homeless people; it wouldn't be cruel to painlessly kill them too? I'm sure lots of homeless people wouldn't mind you killing them because you believe they are suffering just as I'm sure the cats and dogs that are homeless wouldn't mind too.

Before you start a debate about animal != human that's exactly what PETA is campaigning for. Rights for animals, so they're pretty much hypocrites.

I can see from your post however that you believe people or animals should be killed regardless of if they want to. I wonder how you will feel later on when you yourself are getting old and your own death squad is coming for you.

Re:PETA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415616)

If humans were in complete isolation from anything, killing them quickly if it were the only way to relieve suffering wouldn't be unethical. They'd not care afterwards, what with being dead. It's the other humans that care and start to get upset, partly from the loss of somebody they knew, partly from fear that it might happen to them.
 
Animals don't communicate the same way we do, don't have the same ability to determine whether a missing individual has been killed, and so the ethical situation is different.
 
It has nothing to do with the worth of an individual, nor how much you judge their ability to feel suffering, it's their social awareness that counts.

Re:PETA (1)

Saint Gerbil (1155665) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415538)

I got sent this on twitter today:
How many Peta members does it take to change a lightbulb?.... None, Peta can't change anything.

http://twitter.com/#!/SuperMeatBoy [twitter.com]

Apparently people are saying that Super Tofu boy cost more to make than super meat boy.

Re:PETA (1)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415542)

"placing ads of naked hippies should really come first."

And for that reason alone I completely support PETA. (NSFW [nakedprotesters.com] probably NSFW [petaasiapacific.com] )

We all know PETA is crazy (3, Interesting)

Dracos (107777) | more than 3 years ago | (#34414932)

They'll attempt to demonize any mention of carnivorous behavior, often without a complete grasp of what they are attacking-- as seen here. A boy with no skin must be countered with a lump of tofu? Obviously no one there actually played Super Meat Boy.

PETA can't rightfully preach about animal rights while euthanizing tens of thousands of unwanted pets every year. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Re:We all know PETA is crazy (4, Interesting)

dafing (753481) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415494)

As a Vegan, I'm always interested when these issues come up on my usual websites. I, like many of the other Animal Rights people here visit Slashdot, Ars, Engadget, Gizmodo etc daily, we dont cause any fuss, but when these "stories" arise, "ohhhhh, they're hypocrites", or "I'm gonna have me a big steak, yummy mc yum yums!!!111!!!" are the usual posts.

I'm also quite against PETA, they have a New Welfarist approach, I despise how they have Women pose and RE promoting Veganism, "screw the principle" http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/ingrid-newkirk-on-principled-veganism-screw-the-principle/ [abolitionistapproach.com]

"PETA can't rightfully preach about animal rights while euthanizing tens of thousands of unwanted pets every year. Hypocrisy at its finest.".

They can "preach" Animal Rights while also practising euthanasia you realise? Just as I love being alive, but were I to have Cancer such as others in my family, I could well imagine rather being dead, than to die slowly over the months. Now, I much prefer the idea of No Kill shelters, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-kill_shelter [wikipedia.org] , I dont know how practical they are in real life. I've had family members who've volunteered with the SPCA etc, I myself have no hands on experience of this kind.

I agree with practically NOTHING coming from PETA, I think it must obviously be wrong that they "put to sleep" so many animals each year.

However, please dont write off Animal Rights because of PETA's actions.

http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/ [abolitionistapproach.com] and these shows http://bit.ly/veganpodcastinfo [bit.ly] were useful for me.

I also promote Veganism through videos of my Chicken Friends (such as "A Day in the Life..." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj8gL8lj-Yg [youtube.com] ), and through my show http://coexistingwithnonhumananimals.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]

Re:We all know PETA is crazy (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415844)

As a Vegan, I'm always interested when these issues come up on my usual websites.

Hey, maybe you can give your personal opinion, if you've thought about it. What do you think should happen to animals that currently earn their living by being eaten by humans, like pigs? Should humans stop breeding them and let them go extinct? Should they be preserved in some kind of "domesticated animal zoos" in small numbers, so they could earn their upkeep by playing with kids or whatever? What should happen to them?

I personally find eating ethically raised animals just fine morally. The animal gets to live very comfortable (compared to how a wild animal has to live) life fed by humans, and then it gets killed by human to pay for all the food and shelter it received. Actually I find that much more ethical, than hunting, even though hunting is more "natural". Of course then it becomes a question of what kind of conditions the animal should have, so we can consider it's life and death summed together is better than it having never existed... And in practical terms it also becomes question of price of the meat, but then why not just eat less meat and more veggies, if meat is more expensive.

Re:We all know PETA is crazy (1)

c (8461) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415846)

> PETA can't rightfully preach about animal rights while
> euthanizing tens of thousands of unwanted pets every
> year. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Not at all. Animal rights groups are strongly against the ownership of animals. Euthanizing instead of running an effective adoption program is actually seen as the lesser evil. They obviously don't connect those dots in their public fund raising materials...

FUCK YOU PETA! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34414952)

I'm going to go eat some animal parts fried in lard just for reading this.

Vegetarian/vegan whatever is fine. But peta is just insane. Like a crazy religion. (cult)

Yeah it's a flamebait post. The best meats need fire to taste right.

Meet the Characters (1)

crafton (1166353) | more than 3 years ago | (#34414968)

From the 'meet the characters' page:
http://features.peta.org/super-meat-boy-parody/meet.aspx [peta.org]

"Meat Boy is a vengeful, bloody cube of rotting animal flesh. And he smells. After a short-lived fling with Bandage Girl (sympathy dates, really), he became enraged when he was dumped for the tasty and satisfying Tofu Boy. Once Bandage Girl slept with Tofu Boy and saw all that he had to offer, it was bye-bye beef, hello bean curd. Enraged by his loss and lack of ability to compete with the badass that is Tofu Boy, Meat Boy snapped and kidnapped Bandage Girl—because if he can't have her, no one will."

Does anyone else think it's a bit wrong if it's aimed at children?

Re:Meet the Characters (2, Informative)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415058)

They think that's gross? The villain of SMB is Dr. Fetus, a fetus in a jar. Bosses include a happy ball of blood, a meat boy clone made of feces and a living pile of corpses. Oh and animals constantly get murdered by the saw blades everywhere as they try to flee from the carnage as Dr. Fetus destroys more and more of the world.

Re:Meet the Characters (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415096)

I like to think of Dr. Fetus as PETA, then it all makes sense.

Re:Meet the Characters (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415068)

Sex, rape, kidnapping, and murder is ok. Only hurting animals is bad. This is PETA logic.

Re:Meet the Characters (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415474)

No no no, only non-peta members hurting animals is bad.

Re:Meet the Characters (2)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415390)

That's one of the reasons why nobody takes PETA seriously: They operate on the same level as 4chan trolling Habbo Hotel. I mean, I've seen some fairly grown-up actions from Anonymous but PETA consistently acts like an antisocial teenager.

Plus, whenever they want to "parody" something it's always mean-spirited and extremely badly researched, ending up carrying a lot of unfortunate implications - such as Super Tofu Boy, which manages to casually describe eating animals as being identical to cannibalism. Way to go, PETA.

Meat tosser! (1)

nitzmahone (164842) | more than 3 years ago | (#34414978)

Stop the violator!

ARGH! Controls (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34414990)

I wish they changed their key-bindings from space-bar to up-arrow. I fail at the second level already

Peta (2, Interesting)

Teun (17872) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415028)

Peta should stick to their valid core business of fighting ill treatment of animals.

Vegetarians are a whole different and sad subspecies of humankind, they try to deny we've been eating meat from animals since many millions of years.

As a matter of fact we've become the creatures we are because we ate animals, for example there is strong evidence of a correlation in humanoids starting to eat seafood and a jump in intelligence that led to the making and use of tools.

Re:Peta (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415088)

Peta should stick to their valid core business of fighting ill treatment of animals.

Vegetarians are a whole different and sad subspecies of humankind, they try to deny we've been eating meat from animals since many millions of years.

As a matter of fact we've become the creatures we are because we ate animals, for example there is strong evidence of a correlation in humanoids starting to eat seafood and a jump in intelligence that led to the making and use of tools.

That's a bit of faulty logic right there isn't it? Just because something was done in the past, do we have to keep doing it? Many countries practiced slavery or imperialism, which led to their becoming great powers, therefore shouldn't we continue with slavery or imperialism? Now, if you can show that we would _lose_ intelligence if we stopped eating meat, then it would be a bit more convincing. BTW, I am a Person who loves Eating Tasty Animals.

Re:Peta (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415110)

But a correlation is just a correlation...

Maybe it's just really hard to get and eat seafood without the use of tools?

What does eating meat add to you? (2)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415226)

Well, it is a more concentrated form of protein, which leaves you more time from gathering roots and berries, to like, build stuff, like pyramids, dams, hospitals , a civilization and the like.

This guy had a good take at it all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Bronowski [wikipedia.org]

My girlfriend had a veggie book, that claimed that eating meat was against human instinct; "who would ever think of eating a nice, cuddly squirrel?"

I countered with a quote from Benjamin Franklin, "hunger never saw bad bread'.

Veggieism is an ethical, rather than a physiological evolution. If you decide to be a veggie, make sure that you take many vitamin supplements. Otherwise, you will devolve what your hairy assed ancestors discovered . . . eating meat is good for you, and efficient.

Re:Peta (0)

Per Wigren (5315) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415238)

I'm a vegetarian (for 10+ years) simply because I find the whole concept of chewing on dead animals quite bizarre and distasteful and I think the whole large scale meat industry is sick. Vegetarianism, and even veganism, works just fine for modern humans. Yes, eating meat was critical for our survival and evolvement in the past but it's not in the 21st century.

I do agree with you that PETA should stick to their core business of figting ill treatment of animals, though. I also don't agree with their extremist "animals should not be pets" view. I love my pure breed Bengal cats and they [seem to] love me back. I don't like PETA in general.

What I like the least are remarks like "vegetarians are a whole different and sad subspecies of humankind" though. Why the hell do you care that some people don't want to eat meat?

Re:Peta (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415370)

Why the hell do you care that some people don't want to eat meat?

I didn't until I was told that I shouldn't eat meat.

Re:Peta (1)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415400)

I think the statement stands if you amend it to "militant vegetarians" or even "evangelizing vegetarians" but then again evangelizing anything tends to be rather annoying.

Re:Peta (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415508)

... Vegetarianism, and even veganism, works just fine for some modern humans. ...

FTFY. Many people who try to go vegan and even some who try to go veggy actually get sick. Some people just can't follow a restricted diet and no, it's not because they're doing it wrong, it just doesn't agree with their bodies.

Personally I have no problem with people choosing their diets. I can't stand it when someone tries to tell me I'm immoral for choosing mine. Veggies and vegans lose all moral ground when they tell someone they're bad for choosing meat.

Re:Peta (1)

Per Wigren (5315) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415644)

it's not because they're doing it wrong

Yes, it is. If you don't want to do it the classic way and follow a strict diet to make sure you get eat a correct balance of protein/carb/fat and vitamins, minerals, and so on, there are always artificial substitutions for those.

Not that I'd recommend it, but in the 21st century everybody CAN be a vegan if they have the motivation. With a soy protein drink and some multi vitamin pills every day you can live reasonably healthy from nothing but french fries and ketchup.

Re:Peta (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415552)

While I'm not a vegetarian, I find your argument invalid. There are plenty of examples of things we've done since many millions of years which are not socially acceptable anymore, at least in our society.

Appeal to tradition, also known as proof from tradition, appeal to common practice, argumentum ad antiquitatem, false induction, or the "is/ought" fallacy, is a common logical fallacy in which a thesis is deemed correct on the basis that it correlates with some past or present tradition. The appeal takes the form of "this is right because we've always done it this way."

An appeal to tradition essentially makes two assumptions:

        * The old way of thinking was proven correct when introduced. In actuality this may be false -- the tradition might be entirely based on incorrect grounds.
        * The past justifications for the tradition are still valid at present. In cases where circumstances have changed, this assumption may be false.

Re: (1)

synackpshfin (1622285) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415030)

...People for the Eatig Tasty Animals (PETA)....
There, I fixed that for you....

Re: (1)

synackpshfin (1622285) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415036)

...People for the Eating Tasty Animals (PETA).... There, I fixed that for me....

Re: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415062)

Who are those people that made it into 'People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals' anyway?

Not a bad attempt... (1)

Sits (117492) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415034)

...but Super Tofu Boy seems to lack the polish of the original. The controls feel sticky, the ideas in the levels feel lifted from Super Meat Boy, the difficulties in the levels spike quite aggressively compared to those of Super Meat Boy (I'm not quite sure how to get past Golden Arches 2) and the animation doesn't feel quite so smooth. Is tofu inferior to meat in this case?

Re:Not a bad attempt... (3, Funny)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415408)

So your'e saying that Tofu is presented as a complete replacement for Meat but is neither as tasteful (cf. the STB backstory) nor as satisfying? How deliciously ironic.

Cool PETA Signage - Yummy Cows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415064)

After 11 yrs of Slashdot reading, have finally found something worth posting about!
I clicked on the link to the PETA site....
Found this stupid link about McDonalds Cruelty that lets you "make a sign" suitable for an "activist".

The sign I created was not PETA friendly.
AND they let me download n save it as a GIF

Where should I post it......? :-)

how about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415072)

some tofu brisket then [blogspot.com]

Listen Up PETA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415098)

I am an omnivore. It means I fuckin' eat everything. And if you got a problem with that, I'll fuckin' eat you too.

Bunch of dicks (5, Interesting)

GF678 (1453005) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415150)

No, not PETA, the developers of Super Meat Boy.

After hearing about this game I was curious as to whether a Linux version was available or in the works. I ended up at http://www.indiegames.com/blog/2010/10/indiegamescom_podcast_5_super.html [indiegames.com] , and a commenter put a link to a podcast with the developers here: http://www.levelfortytwo.com/2009/12/talk-is-cheap-12-21-09/ [levelfortytwo.com]

The relevant bit starts at 43:55. Basically, they think that a Linux version would mean it would have to be open source, which obviously it doesn't. To quote one of the developers: "Linux can fuck off as far as I'm concerned." Gee, thanks. I don't mind if you're not going to bother making a port to Linux, but to not even bother to understand what people are asking and instead resorting to profanity shows these guys are a bunch of closed-minded dicks.

It's dicks, all the way down... (5, Interesting)

adamofgreyskull (640712) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415368)

Indeed, I hate PETA as much as any right-minded individual, but these guys pulled a dick-move. They basically trolled the PETA forums with a bunch of sock-puppet accounts in order to goad them into action and to get publicity for their game, which seems, judging by the /. comments, to have not made it onto many peoples' radar. Yet again, PETA have made the world a worse place in which to live. This time by giving these tumbling tumbling dick-weeds the publicity they are so obviously desperate for.

Re:Bunch of dicks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415430)

I don't mind if you're not going to bother making a port to Linux, but to not even bother to understand what people are asking and instead resorting to profanity shows these guys are a bunch of closed-minded dicks.

I couldn't agree more.
Those damn dicks didn't even bother to look into my suggestion of rewriting the game in lisp and bf and/or port it to MSX,C64,TI89 and TDS220.

The thing is that random people on internet making requests is so common that there is no way to research everything that is suggested.
It is very easy to become irritaded and respond to suggestions like like this [gmane.org] .

Re:Bunch of dicks (1)

GF678 (1453005) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415476)

Those damn dicks didn't even bother to look into my suggestion of rewriting the game in lisp and bf and/or port it to MSX,C64,TI89 and TDS220.

I know you're being facetious to prove a point, but Linux isn't exactly obscure or old anymore. It might not be mainstream but it's common enough for it to have had ports of commercial games for it, and also ports of games from indy developers. It's no longer unreasonable for someone to ask, that's all. I've seen plenty of indy games with Linux ports to make me believe there's potential in it.

The thing is that random people on internet making requests is so common that there is no way to research everything that is suggested.

True, but they appear to be misinformed about Linux and are instead going off a stereotype. They're programmers, shouldn't they be at least aware of what's out there? Or am I just being naive?

Re:Bunch of dicks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415434)

The relevant bit starts at 43:55. Basically, they think that a Linux version would mean it would have to be open source, which obviously it doesn't. To quote one of the developers: "Linux can fuck off as far as I'm concerned." Gee, thanks. I don't mind if you're not going to bother making a port to Linux, but to not even bother to understand what people are asking and instead resorting to profanity shows these guys are a bunch of closed-minded dicks.

As a Linux user, I can understand the sentiment. The game doesn't "need" to be open source but making a binary work on all distros is a pain in the ass (the Flash team spent quite a bit of effort just figuring out how) and even if you do get it to work, the libraries are updated to ABI incompatible versions every couple of years necessitating make-it-work-again patches.

Then, finally, you have the fundies who say you should never have proprietary software ever if it isn't baked into the hardware who drum up a racket any time the topic is raised and will even hit you with a mail campaign and other waste-of-your-time activities. It's less painful just to ignore the market, even if it is large enough to be worth considering, it's just a pain in the ass.

Re:Bunch of dicks (1)

GF678 (1453005) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415492)

Seems to have worked for World of Goo. The developers just supplied static libraries where necessary instead of relying on the user to have the right libs already installed. This is EXACTLY how commercial software should be distributed in Linux. It takes the environment down to a more manageable level.

Then, finally, you have the fundies who say you should never have proprietary software ever if it isn't baked into the hardware who drum up a racket any time the topic is raised and will even hit you with a mail campaign and other waste-of-your-time activities. It's less painful just to ignore the market, even if it is large enough to be worth considering, it's just a pain in the ass.

So then you ignore the fundies. They weren't going to buy your software anyway.

Re:Bunch of dicks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415694)

Wow, thanks for that info. I was actually considering buying the game at some point, but from listening to that interview, it is clear that these guys are total douchebags--they will not be getting any money from me.

fucking PETA (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415152)

To do this, they HAD to look beyond the title.

Super Meat Boy has nothing to fucking do with meat on a dietary level. What the hell went through the minds of those at PETA?

What rights!? They are animals! (1, Informative)

Zapotek (1032314) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415170)

How can someone relate to an animal in order to sympathise with it and support its "rights"?
Don't get me wrong I'm not some sadistic freak that tortures animals but c'mon here...

I can relate to human torture because I can mentally put myself in the shoes of the tortured person a bit.
But no, I wouldn't/don't care about animal rights and I'll keep devouring them for a long, long time.

Until they take over and make us their pets no...no sympathy from me.

Re:What rights!? They are animals! (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415354)

Until they take over and make us their pets no...no sympathy from me.

In essence, you're saying that if aliens come here and make us their pets then we don't need rights either and they can do with us as they please.

That's a really limited way of seeing things.

Re:What rights!? They are animals! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415564)

we don't need rights either
In essence, you're saying that a species with the cognizance to comprehend and fight for justice would recognize and accept enslavement from, by merely a show of force, they who came from a world outside our own.

That's a really limited way of seeing things.

It's probably about cannibalism... (5, Interesting)

Grapplebeam (1892878) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415176)

Because their president wants to be cooked at a barbecue when she dies, to disgust people from eating meat. Or something. Honestly, the idea was so nuts, I forgot to take notes on why, and merely listened to the what. Because when you're spoon-out-your-eyeballs crazy like that, it's hard not to be inadvertantly entertaining and terrifying at the same time.

Re:It's probably about cannibalism... (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415752)

It used to be SOP to eat the dead in many cultures. There's still tribes where the custom is for the new chief to eat the heart of the old one when he dies. What's crazy about that? People are made out of meat. Crazy would be killing them to eat them when the alternative is not starvation but merely menu boredom.

This is a /good/ day for animal rights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34415490)

For PETA to have enough free time to waste on this nonsense, they must have successfully stopped all real animal mistreatment.

Otherwise, they'd look like idiots.

Hey PETA (1)

arielCo (995647) | more than 3 years ago | (#34415792)

Animals die, you know, so it's mostly a matter of how and at what age. Me, I'd rather have my head clubbed or my neck slit in a farm than be eaten half-alive by a predator that just mauled me enough to keep me still. And while that's not a true dichotomy, the odds of dying peacefully, surrounded and guarded by my peers are small.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>