Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

PETA To Launch Pornography Website

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-other dept.

The Internet 348

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals are planning on launching an adult oriented website to help protect animals through a mix of animal suffering footage and porn. I'm not sure how mixing the two will win hearts, minds, or naughty bits, but Lindsay Rajt, PETA's associate director of campaigns, seems to think it's a good idea. She says, "We're hoping to reach a whole new audience of people, some of whom will be shocked by graphic images that maybe they didn't anticipate seeing when they went to the PETA triple-X site."

cancel ×

348 comments

We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (4, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446346)

Fuck it, we're going full-on batshit.

Re:We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (3, Funny)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446394)

For once PETA does something I approve of. Yes, get more female celebrities to pose nude! I'm sure it will turn me from an omnivore to a herbivore once I get enough exposure!

Re:We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (4, Interesting)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446594)

Its PETA, they've been insane since day one. They euthanize animals, while declaring they are for animal rights. Their leder takes insalin derived from canines, while saying that no animals should be used for medical research. They want animals to be treated like humans and be covered by the same laws, which would result in them all being locked up for indecent exposure and public indecency.

Re:We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (2)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446660)

They want animals to be treated like humans and be covered by the same laws, which would result in them all being locked up for indecent exposure and public indecency.

Not to mention all the leg-humping dogs who would be up on sexual assault charges.

Re:We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (5, Insightful)

CelticWhisper (601755) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446854)

Not to mention all the leg-humping dogs who would be up on sexual assault charges.

No dude - this is a PETA article, not a TSA article.

Re:We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (3, Informative)

Kid Zero (4866) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447408)

Their leder takes insalin derived from canines, while saying that no animals should be used for medical research.

They haven't derived "insalin" from Canines in ages. I'm sure their "leder" is using the modern brands of insulin.

We need a new level of crazy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446598)

Thats cleveland-steamer-from-a-diarrheic-fruitbat crazy.

Re:We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (1)

Bardwick (696376) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446752)

Okay, this will sound weird, but I love you man, right up to the point before it's uncomfortable...

Re:We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447036)

Nothing says "invite me home to dinner" like roadkill-rolling chronic masturbators.

This is gonna backfire (3, Insightful)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447130)

I've no doubt there are some sick, twisted people out there who are gonna get off on the animal cruelty pics. :(

Re:This is gonna backfire (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447278)

Yea, I immediately thought of the Seinfeld episode where George starts eating during sex, then starts getting turned on every time he eats. This may not work out for them as well as they think.

Re:This is gonna backfire (1)

frosty_tsm (933163) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447440)

I've no doubt there are some sick, twisted people out there who are gonna get off on the animal cruelty pics. :(

Exactly. I think their plan might back-fire.

Re:This is gonna backfire (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447450)

I can't get it up any more unless I'm watching a panda get pegged by a giraffe.

Re:We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (1)

eric02138 (1352435) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447188)

Hey! Whenever you denigrate bat feces, you hurt the feelings of all bats - Nazi!

Re:We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (1)

XiaoMing (1574363) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447242)

Fuck it, we're going full-on batshit.

What's so funny about this? He's just quoting the third episode where we'll be seeing some hardcore bat-anal.

Re:We at PETA were only *mostly* crazy before (3, Insightful)

neoform (551705) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447252)

Nah, they've been full-on for a long time... I realized this when they released a film called "Chickens are people too". The obvious reply to that title is: "No, they aren't."

/b (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446380)

So PETA is creating /b in other words.

Re:/b (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446472)

Sounds more like /s

Re:/b (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446554)

much closer to /d/

When PETA thinks it's a good idea... (2)

DurendalMac (736637) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446400)

...you know that it isn't. What an absurdly idiotic joke. Then again, as an above poster said, they're probably going to get an influx of /b/tards that will just fap even harder at this stuff. I hope they leave comments open. They're going to get the opposite response they were hoping for.

Re:When PETA thinks it's a good idea... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446654)

I was thinking the same things, perhaps this will only exacerbate the problem.
"Thanks a lot PETA, I can't get off unless I kill an animal now!"

Basically, they are going to give you 4chan.org/b (2)

malakai (136531) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446706)

4chan has already evolved this ( randomly, ergo /b/ ) and the evolutionary outcome was people who can only fap to shocking images of puppies having their heads cutoff juxtaposed with teen webcams or pornographic images of my little ponies.....

I don't think Rule 34 should ever be a marketing campaign.

Why PETA thinks this is a good outcome, I don't know.

Re:Basically, they are going to give you 4chan.org (1)

Aldenissin (976329) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446928)

I came here for Rule 34, and I got it. So now, we're deliberately trying to see if we can get people to like violence and porn... but with animals.(the violence) And, to get everyone behind it under the guise of something else and quite opposite as well... evil lords over stupidity everyday.

Re:When PETA thinks it's a good idea... (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446780)

This idea is horrible, Exactly who's going to be "pornographic" the animals or the humans? Last time I checked, animals are naked ALL THE TIME so the very fact there walking around is pornography. So if all there doing is combining that with naked humans what exactly will this solve.

Re:When PETA thinks it's a good idea... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447250)

"WOW! When you said donkey porn, you weren't kidding! Set fap to full-auto..."

Worst porn site ever. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446410)

Animal cruelty AND naked birds? Sign me up.

Re:Worst porn site ever. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446872)

Great tits! Poisoned birdseed!

What is this (1)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446414)

I don't even...

Not the best idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446420)

Nothing kills a boner like a video of a raccoon dog being skinned alive for its fur.

Re:Not the best idea (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446510)

Rule 34! 8-(

Sh*ting D*ck Nipples (3, Funny)

0racle (667029) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446442)

some of whom will be shocked by graphic images that maybe they didn't anticipate seeing

So they're implementing Encyclopedia Dramatica?

I can see it now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446448)

"WTF, I thought the site meant having animals AS porn..."

Doin it wrong. (2)

TehNoobTrumpet (1836716) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446452)

So they're training people to beat off to pictures of animal suffering?

Re:Doin it wrong. (1)

danbuter (2019760) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446648)

Eww. You may be right.

Re:Doin it wrong. (1)

TerranFury (726743) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446906)

That's what I thought too. Have they heard of Ivan Pavlov?

Plus, forget about mistreating animals; there's already enough porn in which women are degraded and abused.

Re:Doin it wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447092)

Plus, forget about mistreating animals; there's already enough porn in which women are degraded and abused.

Remember, this is PETA. As far as they're concerned, human beings (besides PETA officials themselves) deserve fewer rights and pity than animals.

Animal porn is illegal here in the UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446464)

Animal porn is illegal here in the UK

Re:Animal porn is illegal here in the UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447174)

Going by what I've heard of PETA's antics I wouldn't be surprised if the entire organisation was banned here too. They sound like Greenpeace, but with more violent/intimidating attacks on their targets.

Lowered opinion (1)

AG the other (1169501) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446484)

I didn't think it was possible for PETA to lower my opinion of them but now they have.
What a bunch of nuts.

The website's motto (5, Funny)

killmenow (184444) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446500)

PETAPORN.COM: Where it's OK to beat your meat.

Re:The website's motto (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446568)

I'm just waiting for some troll to get PEDAPORN.COM to show them PETA people.

Re:The website's motto (3, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446724)

"Give a dog a bone"

Perhaps I'm reading this wrong... (1)

idbeholda (2405958) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446532)

But either we're going to be seeing something similar to snuff videos, or we're going to see a LOT more food porn involving processed meat products. Either way, I'm sure a lot of people will find themselves strangely aroused by this.

Re:Perhaps I'm reading this wrong... (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446710)

I don't see what's so different about this idea. A lot of regular porn sites have gross shit mixed in with the other stuff. Just that instead of avoiding granny porn/BDSM/whatever turns you off, you'll have to avoid animal snuff films.

Re:Perhaps I'm reading this wrong... (1)

idbeholda (2405958) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447214)

That was pretty much what I was getting at lol

Immoral Dilemma (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446558)

Nothing like humiliating women for the ethical treatment of animals.

Re:Immoral Dilemma (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446770)

This whole idea is pretty stupid - I think it falls into the same trap as "educational video games". Namely, that if you assume that people like something merely because of what it is (video games and/or porn) and that you can merely attach extra crap onto that to feed it to them. Both video games and porn, contrary to popular belief, have quality levels that people do pay attention to, and attaching extra crap harms that quality.

That aside, it's a silly prudish notion to think that pornography is any more or less humiliating than any other performance art.

Re:Immoral Dilemma (3, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447046)

That aside, it's a silly prudish notion to think that pornography is any more or less humiliating than any other performance art.

Would you be okay with your mother, wife, or daughter performing in the local theater's production of Hamlet?

Would you be okay with your mother, wife, or daughter performing in a porn flick?

Re:Immoral Dilemma (4, Informative)

Killjoy_NL (719667) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447180)

Yes to both questions, but I am dutch, maybe we have less hangups about it.
I don't think that there is anything wrong with playing in a porno or even in a theatre production.
I would not watch the porn with them in it though.

Re:Immoral Dilemma (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447098)

I'm all for PETA, except in my opinion PETA stands for People [for the] Eating [of] Tasty Animals.

The denizens of alt.tasteless rate this... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446564)

two choads up!

Thin the herd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446566)

I think it's time nature should thin the herd. By that, I mean the human herd.

Keep those PETAfiles off the internet (3, Funny)

jpvlsmv (583001) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446572)

And get that Kitty porn off my screen, damnit.

--Joe

a .xxx domain, seriously? (1)

badger.foo (447981) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446576)

I'm pretty sure that embracing the root zone poisoning .xxx domain wankers is not ever going to earn them enough cash to help a single animal in need. This is a total waste of time and money IMNSHO. The kind of story you'd expect to see in very-late March or very-early April, but that doesn't fit the calendar in that particular universe I inhabit.

Hustler did this (4, Informative)

Cruciform (42896) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446590)

In the 80s, when we were teens sneaking copies of Hustler away from older brothers or swapping with neighbors I remember seeing several issues with both porn and horrible war footage.

Flynt was not afraid to publish articles showing exactly what kind of destruction the US was, or had been, wreaking overseas. And he showed the cost it had on the soldiers as well.

The nudity and sex were not the obscenity. The murder of civilians and the treatment of those who had signed up to serve the country was the real obscenity.

Re:Hustler did this (3, Interesting)

deKernel (65640) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447452)

So you are liking PETA to Larry Flynt...guess I actually do see the comparison.

So.... (1)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446592)

....is this new website supposed to appeal to people who get excited with both naked women and abused animals? Not sure if there is such a thing, but I know there is a "genre" of porn catering to people who like images of abused women, so it's possible.

mixing vids? (4, Interesting)

danbuter (2019760) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446608)

So halfway through the sex scene, right when you're about to cum, it will switch to cows being slaughtered?

Re:mixing vids? (1)

phil_aychio (2438214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446766)

CLIMAX FAIL.

Re:mixing vids? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447120)

CLIMAX FAIL.

You must be new here - there's doubtless a contingent that will actually JIZZ HARDER at that.

Re:mixing vids? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447392)

no problem there. Most people just jump ahead to the last 40 seconds to get the money shot anyway.

Re:mixing vids? (1)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447484)

If you'd like to see the rest of this scene, sign our petition declaring animals people.

Tomorrow's Headline: "PETA succeeds in getting a million signatures for their latest petition."

(Of course, the above headline's in their heads. The real headline would be "Annoyed porn-surfers flee PETA site. Find free non-animal-cruelty-message-filled porn elsewhere.")

What kind of dork is going to fall for that? (2)

Phillip Birmingham (2066) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446670)

"We're hoping to reach a whole new audience of people, some of whom will be shocked by graphic images that maybe they didn't anticipate seeing when they went to the PETA triple-X site."

Yeah, 'cuz nobody would expect that from PETA.

Is it free or subscription based? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446692)

I'm sure they'll have lots of customers and raise a lot of needed cash to help with their other projects.

Such a bad idea (1)

paxcoder (1222556) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446696)

This will create psychotics, rather than doing *any* (perceived) good. I guarantee that.
If it gets big in the pervo circles that is. Hopefully it'll die in obscurity.

Re:Such a bad idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446934)

Hey my animal suffering sexual fetish is perfectly natural.

Re:Such a bad idea (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447246)

I'm guessing that the materials will be widely pirated as nobody with any sense is going to go to their site. Except perhaps for individuals that are into crush videos and mutilating animals.

Yes obviously it's stupid, that's the point (5, Insightful)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446704)

Of course this is ridiculously idiotic. That's just what they're going for. Say something batshit insane that'll provoke media coverage and public reaction to show people that PETA still exists and believes in ending the suffering of animals or whatever. They have no intention of actually doing this, it's just another cynical attention-grabbing statement to remind people about PETA.

Nothing to see here, just Slashdot getting trolled.

Wonder if... (1)

Etz Haim (856183) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446712)

Wonder if this has anything to do with PETA's previous endeavor to create genetically engineered "meat" for veggies... To hell with them.

porn with PETA ads (2)

ThorGod (456163) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446716)

What they're planning, from the article:

Visitors to the X-rated site will initially be presented with pornographic content as well as images from PETA's salacious ads and campaigns, Rajt said. Those images will be followed by pictures and video shot undercover of the mistreatment of animals. The site will also include links to vegetarian and vegan – using no animal products – starter kits as well as recipes.

Either way, I don't see how this works out well for their message. How about online streaming of tv shows that hulu wont stream for free - supplemented with peta ads? Or, a paypal service - watch 15 minutes of peta ads, take a quiz on their policies, pass, and get $5? The porn angle is just too strange.

Re:porn with PETA ads (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446814)

It doesn't, but PETA is so far removed from reality now that I don't really think it registers with them. They've truly left behind any notions of sanity, let alone any notion of sensible marketing, that it's all irrelevant now. This is so blindingly nuts that I think maybe the time has come to commit their board of directors to the insane asylum. I can only imagine that there is some semi-normal fraction of PETA's support base that's looking at this and going "WTF???"

Re:porn with PETA ads (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446912)

I can only imagine that there is some semi-normal fraction of PETA's support base that's looking at this and going "WTF???"

No, there is no semi-normal fraction of the support base.

FINALLY! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446746)

A Goatse for the 21st century.

Goatse? Old news! (1)

flibbidyfloo (451053) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446762)

I'm 99% sure there's a decent goatse joke in here somewhere.

I'm also 100% sure this is old news. Consumerist and the Daily Mail reported on it a month ago.

Singing! (5, Funny)

Barny (103770) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446810)

Supersadomasochistinecrobestiality.

Its when you get a hard-on making Lassie a fatality!

Does this give new meaning to... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446834)

"give the dog a bone"...

So we cannot use animals as objects... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446858)

... but it is perfectly ok to use people as objects. The previous sentence was supposed to be sarcastic, but I'm not sure anymore. Not only do they use the very animals they want to protect to get the attention and money (They show the films of dying animals to fill their coffers) but then they have animal actors in their commercials and the like. They attempt to show that animals are higher beings then we think they are by anthropomorphizing them. But at the same time, they attempt to show that we are worse than the animals with crap like this (and the holocaust). Oh well, that is what you get with extremists (and don't even get me started with my neighbors who put their animals on a vegetable diet and then sued the vet for all the illnesses and deaths this malnutrition caused).

Veggie diet for pets (1)

Quila (201335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447192)

I know what you mean. When I had ferrets I saw so many posts from vegetarians and vegans wanting to know what kind of veggie diet to feed their ferrets.

Veggie? They're CARNIVORES! Not just that, they're obligate carnivores, they have to eat meat to survive, no other option.

Want a veggie diet for your pet? Get a rabbit.

You're doing it wrong! (1)

John Pfeiffer (454131) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446864)

...some of whom will be shocked by graphic images that maybe they didn't anticipate seeing when they went to the PETA triple-X site.

Aaaand you just ruined it. So yeah, probably not going to surprise anyone now. And what in fuckery are they even trying to do?

Trying to wrap my head around what they hope to accomplish has annoyed me so much, I'm going to go out right now and buy a huge freakin steak for dinner, so I can chew on chunks of nearly-raw beef while I think of other ways to piss PETA off.

Re:You're doing it wrong! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447264)

You love animals? Don't encourage pet businesses by buying pets. Take in strays when you have a choice. If your kid wants a pet, try buying a stuffed toy and some candy first.

et cetera ...

Oh yeah, don't side with these lunatics, they make such mess of their image, it usually makes their messages come out all wrong.

Maybe PETA will be taping its internal operations (2)

Quila (201335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446916)

After all, PETA is one of the most prolific killers of animals in the country.

Re:Maybe PETA will be taping its internal operatio (4, Informative)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447304)

I had to look into it, because it seemed to be a bit of a stretch, even for PETA. But damned if you weren't correct about that. Here's one of the links for folks interested. http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/eight-animals/ [abolitionistapproach.com]

You have to know the real psychology of PETA (3, Insightful)

Quila (201335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447516)

They don't love animals, they just hate people.

Re:Maybe PETA will be taping its internal operatio (2)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447360)

Not only that but they actively fund domestic terrorists. So no big deal in their books. After all, they believe animals have more intrinsic value than you, or me, or that baby of yours, mine, or anyone elses that could be saved using a vaccine. Or stem cell treatment, or heart valve replacement or hell even insulin.

Sausage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446938)

But will they carry "Big Sausage Pizza"?

WTF??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37446950)

I guess it brings a whole new meaning to "clubbing your seal".

Cool! (1)

J.J. Dane (1562629) | more than 2 years ago | (#37446956)

Could a revival of alt.sex.bestiality.hamster.duct-tape be far behind?

I had to check the calendar! (1)

BigSes (1623417) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447030)

I wanted to make sure it wasn't April 1st.

Now we know where to go to get crush videos (1)

jlusk4 (2831) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447054)

All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. blah blah blah

Hey, is this enough comment to pass the filter that says I have to say something more than what I can squeeze into the subject line?

PETA and Burning Man (2, Funny)

Teppy (105859) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447056)

Porn is nothing new for PETA. This happened at Burning Man in 2006:

First off, when it comes to art at Burning Man, pretty much anything goes. However, PETA's "art" consisted of a film loop of pigs being beaten to death, shown on a 15-foot screen, complete with sound. They placed this on the Esplanade, Burning Man's "main street." My camp was next door, and while we didn't actually do any of the following pranks, thinking them up was great fun.

Our first prank was to go over with a plate of veal chops:

Us: "Hi, guys. We're from BBQ camp, next door, and ... we're full. Would you like some veal chops? We're just going to throw them out."

Our next prank:

Us: "Hi, guys. We're so glad that you've taken the first step toward a sustainable planet by becoming vegan. But we hope that you'll take the next ethical step like we have. We're from Fruitarian camp, next door, and we would like to invite you to join us in embracing a fruitarian lifestyle, and avoid all but fruit that falls naturally from the tree."

PETA: "If you guys are all fruitarians, how come you're all so fat?"

Me: "Well, I can only speak for myself, but I've been a fruitarian now for a month, and already I've lost over 50 pounds. I feel great, and expect to be at my goal weight in just 10 more days."

For our final prank, we planned to go masturbate in front of their pig-killing video:

Us: "uhhh. Uhhhh. UUHHHH, Oh Yes!"

PETA: "WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU PEOPLE DOING?"

Us: "Oh, hey, sorry. We're from Bestiality Camp, next door. We were just enjoying the snuff films you guys are showing."

Re:PETA and Burning Man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447238)

I think I love you.

Opposite effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447080)

I think it will just encourage sexual abuse of animals among some small subset of the porn-loving crowd. Of course, the rest of that set won't be able to get it up anymore without some serious Viagra, so it could be an overall win for the anti-porn crowd.

PetaChan? (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447124)

This will backfire like bra-burning, and be lulzworthy into the bargain.

Uh... (1)

L1B3R4710N (2081304) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447134)

You know what, I'm not even gonna bother touching this. I'm going to go forget that I ever read this for the sake of remaining sane.

Geniouse (1)

deadcrow (946749) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447140)

Who are the ad wizards that came up with this idea?

Ulterior Motives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447222)

I suspect that this is not really about raising awareness, but funding for PETA, or else PETA is even crazier than I think they are.

PETA kills animals (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447426)

I wonder if they'll shift from wholesale slaughtering puppies to trampling them with high heels?

www.petakillsanimals.com

Makse sense although I don't know there reasoning (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37447480)

Ok,

So this actually makes a whole lot of sense logically if they really were/are doing it. I didn't read anything other than the headline on Slashdot so keep this in mind. First I'll start off by saying I eat meat am not into animals sexually and despite all that I'm not against improving the conditions of animals or even necessarily reducing the number of animals killed for food.

It doesn't really matter of if you accept or not PETA actions or philosophy here.

The thing to think about is the main idea of reducing harm or suffering. They potentially are able to do that through the production of pornographic material with animals. There will always be nut cases which will do the real thing even with plenty of pornographic material available and that shouldn't impact to do or not to do. The majority who like animal porn go out and produce it if they can't get it any other way. If anything the production of material will reduce the *need* for those who are into it from producing it themselves. Given the state of law and societal conditions chances are those people are not able to do it in a safe or humane way so producing it for them is quite rational.

This is a problem of society/law and not really one of those with this sexual orientation. Your personal disgust should be taken out of the equation. Something the majority of people can't do. If you can't do that you shouldn't be making judgements. Just stay away from reading about or viewing this material.

When you aren't a puritan sex can be healthy, safe, and enjoyable for all. It doesn't have to be a disgusting or dirty act (ok, some might enjoy that, but this is besides the point). It doesn't have to be with a man or woman.

And once again. I repeat. I am not into animal sex. Well. I should probably take that back. I do like people and people are animals.... so... maybe I do like animal sex after all.

makes sense.... (2)

jythie (914043) | more than 2 years ago | (#37447494)

Well, PETA has always been more about getting laid then actually helping animals.. so this fits their pattern quite nicely.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...