Why do so many people hate PETA? Are these people justified in not supporting them? For those living under a rock, PETA stands for ‘People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’. In theory, any animal lover should support an organisation that is against cruelty to animals, but that isn’t the case. I’m going to explore the controversies PETA has been involved in and their response to any controversy to see what they say their position actually is.
What do PETA say about themselves?
“Like humans, animals are capable of suffering and have interests in leading their own lives; therefore, they are not ours to use – for experimentation, food, clothing, entertainment or any other reason.
PETA works through public education, research, legislation, special events, celebrity involvement and protest campaigns. PETA believes in non-violence and does not advocate or support actions in which anyone, human or non-human, is harmed. (We are) a charitable organisation that works to educate the public about the horrors of cruelty to animals through peaceful means.” – about PETA
I don’t disagree with anything in the above statement from their website. It’s how I feel. So far, so good.
Rumours & Reasons Some People Hate PETA
Doing lots of internet searches you can come up with so many reasons why people hate Peta. Some of these reasons might be based on rumour not fact, or they might be based on facts but misinterpreted. I can understand why some people are against some of the things PETA are said to believe, but there are plenty of ways I do agree with them; which shouldn’t be a surprise really seeing as they’re an animal rights organisation and I’m an animal lover and vegan.
What makes me wary of PETA is that loads of animal lovers also hate PETA and what they supposedly stand for. Here are some of the rumours and reasons why people are against PETA. See what you think.
1. They don’t believe people should have pets
The above statement is sort of true, this is what they actually believe…
“We at PETA very much love the animal companions who share our homes, but we believe that it would have been in the animals’ best interests if the institution of “pet keeping”—i.e., breeding animals to be kept and regarded as “pets”—never existed”
Although I do currently have 2 cats living in my house with me, I find it hard to disagree with the above statement. They go on…
“Please be assured that PETA does not oppose kind people who share their lives and homes with animal companions whom they love, treat well, and care for properly.”
2. They’re against animal breeders
I have to say I agree with this statement. There are so many animals that need a home and breeding more and more ‘pedigree’, or other, animals just contributes to the problem. But what’s their actual stance on this?
“we very much oppose the puppy mills and private breeders that supply many companion animals; PETA is absolutely opposed to all breeding. In U.S. animal shelters alone, up to 4 million dogs, cats, puppies, and kittens are euthanized each year, simply because there aren’t enough homes for them. Given the astounding number of healthy and loving but unwanted animals who are being killed, we believe that breeding more animals merely to satisfy the desire for a particular behavioral or physical trait is absurd and selfish.”
They are against animal breeding for companion animals, and I support their stance on this.
Update 14/12/23 – The Peta FAQ’s still have the above statement, however the statistic on the number of animals euthanised each year has recently been revised by The World Animal Foundation. They state that “Every year, around 920,000 shelter animals (390,000 dogs and 530,000 cats) are euthanized.” This decrease is in part due to increased adoption rates, but also to stray animals successfully being returned to their owners. Potentially the increase in microchipped pets has helped. It’s still a lot of animals, but not as many as in the past.
3. They don’t believe in using animal crates
This one refers to using dog crates. Personally I’m uncomfortable with the idea of keeping a dog in a crate. It just feels wrong, but then I’ve never had a dog or attempted to train one. The reason for using dog crates is defended by PAWS…
“Crate training has long been accepted by professional trainers and veterinarians as one of the quickest and least stressful ways to mold desirable behaviors in dogs. Although many new dog guardians initially reject the idea of using a crate because they consider it cruel or unfair to the dog, a crate helps satisfy the dog’s instinct to be in a den while alleviating many problems dogs and their people experience.”
Peta on Dog Crates
What do PETA actually believe regarding dog crates?
“There’s no dog on Earth who “loves” to be locked inside a cage. However, dogs do love humans and will tolerate almost anything that their guardians force them to endure, including being locked up. (…) dogs who appear to enjoy being in their crates because they keep running back to them, even when given their freedom, are often really exhibiting an unnatural lack of self-confidence or fearfulness toward the outside world brought on by extreme confinement and long-term isolation.”
“At best, crating is a purely human convenience that merely postpones the day when real training will have to take place, because dogs simply can’t learn to interact successfully with the world while in isolation. At worst, it makes behavior training—including house training—more difficult and has lasting detrimental effects. And we’re not even talking about the dogs who have burned to death when they were unable to escape house fires and other disasters.”
This is tricky, because what PAWS says makes sense with regard to a dogs desire to be in a den. The crate would have to include a blanket or dog bed in it to make it more tolerable though I suppose. I’m not sure I entirely agree with PETA that people use crates to postpone training. The statement regarding not being able to escape if there were a house fire, although probably true, feels like the statement is being used to gain an emotional response.
4. They don’t believe zoos should exist
I recently wrote an article called “Should Zoos Still Exist?” and I don’t believe in caging animals for our entertainment. I do believe that, for now, there is an argument for zoos, but only because we’ve destroyed their habitats so much and have endangered so many wild animals that zoos might be the only way some species can survive humans!
Peta on Zoos
What do PETA say about zoos?
“Imagine not being able to control a single aspect of your life – when you eat, what you eat, when you sleep, where you can go or who you start a family with. That’s the reality for animals in zoos, who are turned into living exhibits. Some animals in zoos are kept in enclosures far too small for them, while others are forced to perform degrading tricks. Even in the best zoos, under the best conditions, a lifetime of captivity is no life at all for wild animals.”
It’s hard to disagree with the above statement – they go on, about the ‘conservation con’…
“Zoos would have you believe that they are all that stand between many of the species they house and extinction (…).
The only effective and sustainable way to help endangered species is to protect their natural habitat, but the massively expensive breeding programmes of zoos divert money from genuine conservation projects. After all, what’s the point of breeding animals if they have no home left to go to?”
5. They don’t believe in managing feral cats
There’s quite a common policy used to manage feral cat populations that’s referred to as ‘TNR’; Trap Neuter Return. It means that any feral cats can carry on living out their life in the wild but that their numbers won’t increase. It’s a policy I agree with because it would be very cruel to try and re-home many feral cats, especially the very old ones who would have trouble adjusting to be indoors. The problem with some TNR programmes (ones that could be referred to as Trap Neuter Release rather than Return) is that the cats might be released away from where they were trapped. This is problematic as some kind people do actually look after feral cat colonies by ensuring they have food and water. By releasing them elsewhere they may struggle to feed themselves.
The Cats Protection League say
“The Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) programme involves humanely trapping the outdoor cats (usually feral), having them spayed or snipped and returning them to their outdoor homes. This means that these cats will not be able to produce any more kittens; there will be fewer cats in your community and they can go on to enjoy a healthier, happy life.”
Some people say that PETA prefer euthanising feral cats rather than TNR.
Peta on Feral Cats
“Sadly, our experience with trap, spay-and-neuter, and release programs and “managed” feral cat colonies has led us to question whether or not these programs are truly in the cats’ best interests. We receive countless reports of incidents in which cats—“managed” or not—suffer and die horrible deaths because they must fend for themselves outdoors.”
However, they do go on to say…
“PETA’s position has never been that all feral cats should be euthanized. We believe that trap, vaccinate, spay/neuter, and release programs are acceptable when the cats are isolated from roads, people, and other animals who could harm them; regularly attended to by people who not only feed them but care for their medical needs; and situated in an area where they do not have access to wildlife and where the weather is temperate.”
Again, it’s hard to argue with them as what they say makes a lot of sense.
6. Many of their campaigns are sexist
Following on from their campaigns going too far, some of their campaigns can also be viewed as sexist. The famous “I’d rather go naked than wear fur” campaign was probably the one that first made me aware of PETA. And there’s no denying that this was probably one of their most successful campaigns. Looking back though I don’t remember any male celebrities being naked on the posters, just women, and the poses were often ‘sexy’. Partly though this is me misremembering the campaign. It’s true that far more women were naked on the posters, but there were men included as well. In recent years, a few more men have been involved in the campaign.
One campaign that was definitely sexist, and probably purposefully sexist in order to grab headlines, was when they used women in bikini’s to hand out strawberries and dairy free cream at Wimbledon in 2017. I suppose you could say the campaign was successful as lots of publications discussed it, but many people cancelled their membership because of just how sexist the campaign was. It certainly made me feel uncomfortable.
7. They Promote Euthanasia
One of the reasons I started to become wary of PETA was when I heard how many animals they euthanised. I just couldn’t get my head round why a so-called animal loving organisation would so easily euthanise healthy animals. Is this true? Do PETA really euthanise thousands of healthy animals at their own animal shelters?
There’s a whole website dedicated to ‘outing’ PETA for the number of animals they kill: https://petakillsanimals.com/ and if the numbers they quote are true it’s deeply depressing that such a low percentage of the dogs and cats they take in are adopted, whereas such a high percentage are euthanised.
Peta on Euthanasia
“If anyone has a good home, love, and respect to offer, please go to a shelter and adopt one or two animals. The problem is that few people do that, choosing instead to go to a breeder or a pet shop and not “fixing” their dogs and cats, which contributes to the high euthanasia rate that animal shelters have to face. Most of the animals we took in and euthanized could hardly be called “pets,” as they had spent their entire lives penned or chained up outside. They were unsocialized, never having been inside a building of any kind or ever experienced a scratch behind the ears. Others were indeed someone’s beloved companion, but they were elderly, sick, injured, dying, aggressive, or otherwise unadoptable, and PETA offered them a painless release from suffering, with no charge to their owners or guardians.”
“The majority of adoptable dogs are never brought through our doors—we refer them to local adoption groups and walk-in animal shelters. Most of the animals we house, rescue, find homes for, or put out of their misery come from abysmal conditions, which often lead to successful prosecution and the banning of animal abusers from ever owning or abusing animals again.”
I’m not 100% comfortable with the above statement. I feel that some animals should be given more of a chance. I’ve seen numerous cases of unsociable animals who had lived their lives on chains being given time and love and gradually coming out of their shells to be adoptable. PETA comes across a little like they don’t have the patience to give more animals a second chance at life, although I do understand where they’re coming from in other parts of their statement on euthanasia.
Who are ‘Peta Kills Animals’?
It’s worth noting that the website ‘Peta Kills Animals’ might have its own agenda!
“PETAKillsAnimals.com is run by the disingenuously named Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), a front group that’s funded by KFC, Outback Steakhouse, Philip Morris, cattle ranchers, and other enterprises that cruelly kill millions of animals every year, not to end suffering but to turn a profit.” – https://www.petakillsanimalsscam.com/
8. They lied about sheep shearing
There are actually two different instances where one of their campaigns has ‘lied’ about the wool industry. Back in 2014 there was outrage that PETA had used an image which showed a badly injured sheep. Unfortunately they used a prop. It’s a distressing image but why did they use a prop? If you do any research into the wool industry you find out that sheep are often badly injured when being sheared. Using a prop just gave people a reason to direct hate at PETA, however in their defence, they probably would have experienced an awful lot more hate if they’d used an actual injured animal in their campaign.
Read more ‘Barnaby Joyce Slams Peta Campaign’.
Peta Sheep Shearing Advert Banned – Incident 2
In a more recent incident they had an advert banned, which had been displayed on London Buses. The advert was banned for being misleading.
“The Advertising Standards Authority ruled that the ad by the animal rights group PeTA claiming “wool is just as cruel as fur” was misleading and that sheep “were not killed for their wool as animals were in the fur industry”.
The authority also pointed to Government guidance to farmers that sheep should be shorn regularly.”
I wrote about wool recently, and by the end of my own research I was more against wool than I thought I would be. This was mainly due to the cruelty handed out by some sheep shearers. If they could all be trusted then wool wouldn’t be as cruel as it currently is. There have been numerous incidents in the UK and abroad of sheep being injured and treated appallingly and that’s certainly what PETA seem to have been trying to shine a light on.
“the ASA said guidelines from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs that mature sheep should be shorn at least once a year by “experienced and competent shearers” who take care not to cut the animals’ skin.
The ruling said: “We considered that [this] demonstrated that the main method of obtaining wool from sheep by shearing would not be regarded by consumers as being cruel.”
PeTA said it found the ASA’s decision “confusing and disappointing” but that it had now amended the ad to say “wool = cruelty to sheep”.”
I have to say after writing about the wool industry myself I’m on PETA’s side on this one, but not necessarily the way they went about highlighting the issue.
9. They Kidnap Pets and Euthanise Them
There are rumours I’ve come across about PETA several times over the years. One of the most common is that they kidnap pets and euthanise them. This is another ‘rumour’ that is in fact partly true. It would be unfair to say that PETA as an organisation goes out looking for domestic pets to kidnap and then euthanise them, but there were two instances where domestic pets were euthanised. It’s worth reading this snopes article on the topic for a full background on this. There’s a lot of information in this article, far too much to summarise here. What you need to know is the story is not quite as bad as it first sounds, although it’s certainly not great.
“Contrary to myth, PETA does not want to confiscate animals who are well cared for and “set them free.” What we want is for the population of dogs and cats to be reduced through spaying and neutering and for people to adopt animals (preferably two so that they can keep each other company when their human companions aren’t home) from pounds or animal shelters—never from pet shops or breeders—thereby reducing suffering in the world.”
10. Dairy Causes Autism
The PETA advert shown below and just the statement “dairy causes autism” have caused outrage and understandably so. A lot of people think it’s just an outright lie, on the other hand there are many autistic people and their families who are offended that this implies being autistic is bad.
However, if you do a google search for ‘dairy causes autism’ you do find some articles that show a link. The website autismkey.com says the following…
“A good number of children on the autism spectrum also suffer from various allergies and food sensitivities. One of the more common issues related to allergies and autism can be linked to milk, or more specifically, the casein protein.
(…) When a person with autism suffers from a casein or dairy allergy, often times, autism symptoms are exacerbated.
Although its effectiveness is still contested by some, many parents opt to place their children on a Gluten-Free Casein Free (GFCF) diet, to help eliminate or curb the autism symptoms caused by milk and dairy. And because gluten (found in wheat and bread) has a similar molecular structure to casein, it too is eliminated from a diet.
(…) there have been many instances where parents claim that a GFCF diet has reduced or even eliminated the symptoms of autism.”
It’s worth noting here that the quote above doesn’t cite any specific scientific research and it’s more anecdotal that there may be a link between an allergy to casein protein and worse autism symptoms.
A scientific article, which actually looked into research carried out on the link states “Critical analysis of each study’s methodological rigor and results reveal that the current corpus of research does not support the use of GFCF diets in the treatment of ASD.”
Peta on the link between Dairy and Autism
On the 28th October 2020, Peta published the following article: “That Decade-Old PETA Ad and What You Need to Know NOW About Dairy“, which begins with the following statement:
“A recently resurfaced PETA ad, more than a decade old and long since removed, was based on a study that had come out at that time and was created in response to the milk industry’s harmful “Got Milk?” campaign, which duped parents into believing that cow’s milk is a healthy drink rather than one linked to asthma, constipation, recurrent ear infections, iron deficiency, anemia, and even cancer.”
The important statement here is “more than a decade old and long since removed”. I don’t believe that PETA ever stated that dairy causes autism, rather they believed that symptoms of autism could be exacerbated with the consumption of dairy. I do wish that in their response they had gone into more detail and maybe linked to the original study they based their campaign on, but it appears they no longer believe there is a link between dairy and autism. That’s not to say of course that eliminating dairy won’t improve autism symptoms in some people, as everyone is different and reacts differently to different food.
11. Pregnant Women are Pigs
I’ve never seen anyone claim that PETA thinks pregnant women are pigs before someone included the following statement in a comment on this article. “Can you declare that PETA putting a pregnant not-so-covered woman in a cage, and placing a sign before her stating pregnant woman are pigs?”
The sign above the 2 naked pregnant women actually said “Unhappy Mother’s Day for British Pigs GO VEGETARIAN”. You can see it here on Alamy. The point of this protest was to show how small the cages that pregnant pigs are confined to are. “Both women were in enclosures similar, in size, to the space that sows are typically confined to for a month while they are pregnant.”
It appears that the commenter is more offended by the women being naked than the cruelty we show towards farmed animals.
12. Peta run campaigns that some feel go too far
I won’t lie, I’ve seen several campaigns over the years which I think go too far. PETA likes to shock people, and although shock tactics can work I think they’ve done their organisation far more harm than good. It seems their mantra is ‘all press is good press’ but I think that’s naive. Some examples of campaigns that people think have been a step too far include the ones mentioned in this video…
Watch Top 10 Times Peta Went Too Far – Watch Mojo Video
I think the biggest problem many people have with PETA’s campaigns is that they compare animals to humans. Personally I see no problem in that, most humans have a disconnect with animals and view them as products rather than living, breathing beings.
I think the strangest response in the video above was from Ben and Jerrys Ice Cream in response to PETA suggesting they source human breast milk for their ice-cream. “We applaud PETA’s novel approach to bringing attention to an issue, but we believe a mother’s milk is best used for her child”. The way I see it they have unintentionally agreed with PETA. A mother cow’s milk is best used for its baby, its calf. It’s hard to argue with that. Read about The Environmental Impact of Dairy
I do think that giving children graphic comics calling their fur-wearing Mothers animal killers is obviously a step too far as it’s not the childs fault what their parent chooses to wear.
Are people justified to hate PETA?
For those that don’t really concern themselves with animal welfare, or who benefit from treating animals badly (the fur industry, factory farms, puppy breeders etc), I understand the hate. From the perspective of animal lovers I think the hate is probably disproportionate. Many of their adverts or campaigns have made me cringe. I disagree with some of the tactics they use. I find it a little hard to justify some of the things they believe. But I do think it’s done from a place of good and not evil. At the very least they need to employ people who maybe think through their campaigns a little better.
Over the years I went off PETA, and when you read so much negative press about them it’s not surprising. If it’s true that some of the websites which ‘expose’ them are funded by the very people who harm animals on an industrial scale, you start to understand where some of this hate comes from. I have to say that after doing my own research I don’t dislike them as much. At most they have been misguided. In some cases though they have actually done their organisation more harm than good with some of their campaigns. This made more people turn against them, and turn against vegans, and surely that’s not what they wanted?
It’s not just Peta though, there are many wildlife charities that aren’t always what they seem.
I recommend you always do your own research before passing judgement on someone or something. If something sounds untrue, it probably is, or it may have been misquoted or misrepresented. What are your thoughts on PETA after reading this?
Sources
Peta Website
This is why so many animal lovers hate PETA
There’s one thing that really puts me off veganism: PETA
PETA Is Right And All Of You Need To Stop Revving A Dead Porsche
‘Misleading’ PeTA ad banned for claiming wool ‘as cruel as fur’
If you like what I do and want to support me, you can buy me a ‘coffee’ which helps with the running costs of the website. Alternatively come and say hello on facebook, twitter or pinterest.
PIN ME
I suggest you look into animal breeding. Your stance leads me to believe you are basing your opinions on irresponsible animal breeders, as I used to. There are many responsible animal breeders that contribute to people being more responsible pet owners. For example, they screen people very carefully and if will take their animals back if if their circumstances change and cannot have them anymore, or if that animal has too many problems. All these things lead to less animals in shelters, not more. Breeders are also very careful about the genetics of their animals which leads to less animals with health and behaviour problems, also leading to less animals in shelters. Also, when an animal costs a lot of money, people put a lot more thought into whether if not they should get one. I agree that rescues are a good way to go, but with more support for good breeders, there would be far less animals in shelters.
I couldn’t agree more!!!!
Agreed also. I disagree with PETA’s stance on the use of horses to draw carriages and some of the harness and tack used on them. When they speak from knowledge and experience then I shall give them a hearing. Until that day comes and they can prove that what they say is right, they should simply return to whatever dark hole they crawled out of and
shut up!
This is not what the author stated regarding PETA’s stance on animal breeding. No matter what, even responsible breeders contribute to animals being put in shelters, or killed … because Instead of encouraging people to Adopt An Animal That is Already Alive and in Desperate Need … they are creating new animals. This prevents ones that already need adoption from being rescued.
This article was exactly what I was looking for – thank you!
I’ve been hesitant to really form an opinion of PETA as the hate they receive seems disproportionate to their message; so I thought I was missing something important that other people were seeing. After reading this I feel more confident that their intentions are good, but their methods need improvement.
I agree Jess. This well researched article helped me.
I agree with Jess as well. Thank you for your research and taking the time to write this article. I will do more additional research myself because of it.
I absolutely support PETA, even their in your face tactics if it brings instances of animal cruelty to the public eye. Snopes did an investigation into them picking up dogs and euthanising them and their conclusion was that it was pretty much unfounded. It says it all that these websites with hate for PETA are funded by animal abusers and while it’s quite understandable that carnists dislike them its a bit of a shame hearing vegans have a go at the organisation. Its always seemed to me that most vegans are terrified of not being liked though, so PETAS actions causes the timid ones to get a little red faced, but why should anyone feel embarrassed about fighting for something they know is right? Is being liked more important than defending the life of a suffering sentient being? If you think it is, then maybe you need to review your reasons for being vegan.
Sir, I can highly disagree. PETA has been exposed on numerous occasions, by official presses and private investigators. With all do respect, I hate PETA. I am not afraid to say so. I REALLY hate PETA. I have done a report about PETA for my school. I researched for hours. As I am not naive with these kind of situations, When I found a liable piece of information, I would research more about the stories and topics. Many I found were true. Can you declare that PETA putting a pregnant not-so-covered woman in a cage, and placing a sign before her stating pregnant woman are pigs?
When you are saying that-
“It says it all that these websites with hate for PETA are funded by animal abusers and while it’s quite understandable that carnists dislike them its a bit of a shame hearing vegans have a go at the organisation.”
You’re stating that PETA is such an angel, trying to get more people to become vegan. Of course, I have nothing against vegans or vegatarians. You can do whatever you please, as long as it doesn’t hurt you or anybody else. But PETA tends to use shock tactics, as this website stated. They are SO much more than correct. This is a very risky tactic, so them already being hated for putting down completely healthy animals, 40,000 animals since 1998 to be exact, Is not the best remedy to heal their already infamous organization. Take the Zarate case for example.
What I have found (So far) shows that two women working for PETA illegally trespassed onto the Zarate’s property and snatched Maya. She was murdered later that day, because PETA is apparently much too lazy to take in the dogs for a literal 5-day grace period. I swear to God, I cried reading this. Just hearing the name PETA makes my blood boil. If you need more proof, find these incidents.
-Your Mommy Kills Animals
-Comparing meat eaters to the Holocaust
-Maya The Chihuahua
-PETA death toll
PETA has also been exposed to funding a terrorist group, harming those that do not agree with them. They have tried so many times to cover up their horrible deeds, But the hole they punctured keeps growing and growing, the more people realize how much of a fake they are.
-Pregnant Woman are Pigs
-Milk Causes autism
Actually there are documented cases of PETA workers euthanizing owned pets. Also they misleadingly take healthy animals promising to rehome them, but instead euthanize them. They also declare animals unadoptable without trying to rehabilitate them.
The founder, Ingrid Newkirk, spoke of arriving early to work so she could euthanize animals. She seems to think euthanasia is preferable to finding an animal a home as a pet.
Nathan Winograd who is a big critic of PETA, does not represent any industry that treats animals with cruelty. He is a vegan.
Im sorry, What?? PETA Is horrible. Do you think that calling women pigs, euthanizing healthy animals and being sexist and more Is ok? Im sorry but I think a brick fell on your head. I feel like you should read all of this again and see how bad It Is.
They are extremists and fanatics. Any form of extremism whether it is religious, political (Maga for example), ideological, cultural etc… is abhorrent and promotes violence and rigid, binary thinking. Extremism in any form kills–it kills living beings, it kills dialogue and it kills progress.
Also female pigs who are pregnant are just like pregnant women.
We’re both smart, kind, living beings who deserve tons of respect. We’re both facing similar problems with birth but we both love our children’s.
Us women face tons of problems everyday in the world.
Most pigs are born to be eaten. And they’re also treated barely all their lives until they’re killed by gas.
In a perfect world, women and every person who is pregnant (not only cis women) give birth peacefully and are respected and supported.
In a perfect world pigs don’t live for us to eat them, and they enjoy their life to the fullest, that’s it.
I agree to disagree with many factors in regards to PETA . The few great things I know about peta is they have brought more attention to animal suffering than so many other organizations. Their private investigations into the horrifying truths of how PetSmart and Petco treat the animals they sell and especially the suppliers they get their animals from who cause massive amounts of suffering torture abuse and neglect of innocent animals that I would have never known about had not peta did these investigations. Peta is doing so many great things for animals and I do disagree with some of their practices but all in all peta has helped more than they’ve hurt! I only believe what I know to be the truth about peta and as bad as some people think peta is if you do your own research you’ll find all the good things they do as well educating the public about the horrifying realities of puppy Mills and so much more. I guess it comes down to what you believe can help or hinder petas actions for animals and remember there’s always bad with the good in any animal organizations so I just personally take away the bad and try to only promote the good!
I totally agree!
PETA is their own worst enemy,
PETA is incorrigible. Please stop trying to defend them with this mild-mannered way of approaching their actions. They have absolutely overstepped in many situations, like trying to claim that “milk causes autism” based on studies that have been refuted and using holocaust victims to promote their brand.
They try to catch peoples eye with shock value and controversy, and they do, but they’re so radical about it that no one that is not already a vegan would be convinced by their cause, because they try to use shame and horror to change people, which has never been an effective strategy. 🙁
Would you want to buy a vacuum cleaner if the advertisements say that everyone without a vacuum cleaner are disgusting, horrible and cruel people with social disorders who dirty the world and eat babies?
There are many people in the organization that aren’t horrible or corrupt; but if you support their organization because they mean well, that is enabling their extremely bad, harmful actions. Please reconsider and try to find different sources of information to educate yourself and make your decision. I’m sure everyone here cares about the environment and the well-being of animals, and so do I. There are alternatives to PETA.
My article certainly doesn’t outright defend them. I state several times that they overstep the mark. I truly believe their intentions are good, but how they go about it is wrong. I definitely don’t agree with some of their campaigns or their stance on some issues, and they rely too much on shock value.
I only came across the ‘dairy causes autism’ thing last week, so I do intend to look into that in more detail and add to the article.
I did look into several sources when researching this article, (links are included above) I think it was important to include Peta’s official stance on the issues as well, but I will look into other sources as well. If you have some recommendations do let me know.
Thank you for this article! You explained the positive and negative side of PETA very well with links and examples. I personally support them from their extreme demonstrations to undercovering animal abusers, from their persistence to the fashion industry to stop using leather and fur, etc. One part I understand why many people will be objective is the amount of animals they’ve euthanized….the numbers alone make me want to cry. Regarding snatching innocent animals…, I will have to research more on that. Also, you are correct saying their intentions are good but their tactics need improvement. But let’s all remember that we, along with PETA know more NOW and hopefully a bit more educated then we did 10 plus years ago.
Peta is not trying to use shame or horror to change people. If that was the case, this entire planet would already be vegan. They are showing how animals are treated and the reality is….its horrific. We are more educated now to know that chicken is not the only protein. Doesn’t mean you have to become vegan, I am simply saying there are alternatives which is exactly what Peta has been stating.
Take a look at PETA issues of concern and actions to take. Relieve suffering of the innocent. Who would hesitate to help those cruely treated.
I defy anyone to find an organization, government, or religion that they agree with 100%. Everyone has their individual views.
Some PETA tactics may be shocking, but who takes notice of things that aren’t?
I started believing in PETA with their “Real people wear fake fur” slogan. That and their stance on animal experiments and use in so-called entertainment are more than enough to make me support them.
If the above abuse doesn’t concern you as a human being, don’t support them. And continue to criticize.
This was rather disgusting to read. You clearly haven’t done enough research into this matter and are very obviously happy to jump to youw pwecious angel’s defense. What about the proof of them stealing homeless people’s pets? How about breaking into people’s homes? The private investigators? It’s not all run by chick fil a or something. Actual animals lovers would do their research before blindly jumping into an organization, so I have the right to believe you work for PETA and are trying to cover up your scandals. I read your earlier reply and REALLY? “My article certainly doesn’t outright defend them. I state several times that they overstep the mark.” You DO outright defend them. You use a manipulative writing tactic that essentially goes ‘well yeah they do a little bad thing like murder animals, BUT LOOK AT THIS AND MORE ABOUT THIS GOOD THING THAT OVERSHADOWS THE BAD THING!’
I’m disappointed in this. Do far everything I’ve read regarding peta is either BY Peta, or by people who don’t research beyond the front page of their website.
I’ve tried to be balanced actually, and spent a lot of time researching the article. I certainly don’t work for Peta and have never donated to them, I run this website. But thank you for your input.
oh dear, you are all missing the point
the delivery is irrelevant, the facts remain
i don’t care if PETA lacks tact, i care more about animals not being abused!
homeless people shouldn’t have ‘pets’ – it’s not the responsibility of an animal to make a human feel better about themselves when they are down on their luck! and everyone knows homeless people keep pets so they get more money when begging
you are all demented if you are more concerned about the delivery of a message rather than the message itself
personally the more shocking the better because the treatment of the animals is shocking
This comment reeks of ignorance and classism. Your generalization of houseless people is frankly quite disgusting and disturbing, not to mention the damage it causes to the most vulnerable in our society. Leave your ivory tower and spend an hour as a houseless person and get back to me. (But of course we know you won’t, the thought of people down on their luck disgusts you)
Any organization that shows cruelty is amazing . We watch the news and I can’t breathe is bad. It is. But imagine I can’t breathe and I’m tortured and people say its OK. When does an animal have a defense attorney to represent . I hate all cruelty. I am a teacher of special education students. They get it. It has to stop. Really. How can we love all when we watch the innocent cry and suffer. Be a better Hunan and protect the ones that ate still enslaved. The ones that love unconditionally and have no idea why we hurt them. Make this a better place
I don’t like pita because they post so many horrific and graphic images that are very hard for people to truly love animals to look at. I don’t think they don’t need to go that far to get their message across and I think they’re alienating people while doing so. Also when you try to get involved in one of their Projects you can’t get ahold of anyone. It’s not clear what they are doing and how they are organizing efforts to stop the cruelty that they are showing with their graphic photos Etc. Which is incredibly frustrating. I agree with helping animals and stopping torture but they need to be more mature and organized about how they are running organization. They would get more support that way. Have you taken more seriously. I had no idea they had a shelter and we’re killing that many animals there that is. That is vile. So in conclusion I’d say just keep the goal on helping animals whether it’s through pita or another organization or you’re just doing it on your own just keep the focus helping animals and working together.
It seems hypocritical for you to look down on the wool industry and shearing because, some are irresponsible and abusive but, PETA is also irresponsible and abusive at times and you don’t seem as outraged. In the US, PETA operates one of the most prolific kill shelters in the state of Virginia. They have an open shelter, with no restrictions on which animals they take in. There are 20 similar shelters in the state, with no restrictions. PETA kills 13 times the number of dogs as the average shelter in Virginia. They kill 6 times as many dogs as the average open shelter, with no restrictions. For a highly funded non profit that clames to love animals, there is no reason to kill this many animals. PETA has also funded the Animal Liberation Front which is a known terrorist organization.( https://www.dhs.gov/publication/st-frg-overview-bombing-and-arson-attacks-environmental-and-animal-rights-extremists )
Overall PETA has an annual budget of more than 40 million and spends a ton of money and effort for advertising and publicity but, they are not a responsible charity that effectively helps animals. Extremism in all forms should be recognized for what it is.
There is an explanation for the high kill rate within the article. It is of course Petas own explanation and it is up to you to make up your own mind. As I’m trying to write balanced articles I put all points of view down. I include my opinion, but if after reading you are still of the opinion that their kill rate is justified that’s up to you. I wasn’t entirely happy with their statement, but it did make sense.
Help stop animals from being mistreated in the fur industry and at John Hopkins university. Look it up.
With all due respect, I am not certain what research you have done regarding sheep shearing but I don’t have to research it. I’ve seen many sheep sheared by professionals, I’ve sheared sheep myself and I have seen children shear sheep but I have never ever ever seen any sheep seriously harmed in any way or anything even approaching cruelty. Sheep are sheared for their own health and comfort even when the wool is thrown away! PETA’s advertisement was a complete shock because I know it to be an absolute lie. It astounded me that they could get away with it. Even if the ad was eventually pulled they did damage. There were companies proudly declaring that they would now use only synthetic wool! Great, more micro plastics in the ocean! Wool is a renewable, biodegradable resource. If I did not know about shearing sheep, I would likely assume there must be some truth to what PETA claimed. Now I know that everything they say could be an outright lie. They are totally untrustworthy and, in my opinion, have discredited undercover animal rights activists who shine a light and tell the truth.
Hi Tanya, thanks for commenting. If you have a read of https://greenecofriend.co.uk/pros-and-cons-of-wool/ you’ll see links to lots of articles referring to injuries to sheep during shearing. I certainly don’t believe that every sheep shearer causes injury but there’s no denying that it does happen, unfortunately due to the way the workers are paid on some sheep farms.
Hi Just take a read of the article I linked to about the pros and cons of wool, where I explain where I got that information from and link to articles which discuss the injuries by ‘bad’ sheep shearers
All activists are sick people, that hit extremist ways to gain what they want. I love animals, but don’t believe organizations such as PETA or Greenpeace. Why? Where’s lot of money, there ethic is gone. Don’t be naive. Help animals by yourself. We don’t need advocats. Better to safe one cat, than lock in shelter hundreds of them and not having plan just euthanise one by one, because it’s „right”.
I can see where people come from about dog breeding/training, sheep sheering, euthanizing and all of these things. However, I think just focusing on the bad and not showing light on the good is… immature?
Yes, puppy mills are an atrocity, but there are many very respectable dog breeders around the world. Give them credit for their work. Don’t get me wrong, adopting rescues is the optimal choice for me! But think of it this way. We fight for all these exotic animal species to stay alive and try to prevent their extinction/endangerment. Why shouldn’t we do the same for dog breeds, cat breeds, any pet breed!? They’re even developing ways to prevent/treat genetic defects that cause problems. Like a pugs squished snout and long soft pallet preventing proper breathing.
Crate training can be a good thing if done properly! Don’t just leave the dog in there for hours straight! It can be used as their safe place or time out if implemented correctly. But dogs are smart creatures! We have to give them the opportunity to learn and that can’t happen if they’re locked up the entire time. Do you have children? Have you ever had to ground them to their bedroom for getting in trouble? Or do they like their privacy and want to be alone? I see it as something similar.
Now I have absolutely ZERO experience with sheep sheering. Just the fact that it can be very beneficial to them! If done correctly! Once again, I see this as a “Focusing on the bad, ignoring the good” situation. Their wool never stops growing and gets incredibly heavy and hot. Some bleeding is bound to happen, not from the sheering, but just from the wool pulling at their skin. Think of how much more comfortable the sheep are once sheered properly though.
Euthanizing. This can be a very touchy subject, I understand. I personally don’t believe an animal should be euthanized unless they are in a great amount of pain from sickness or incredibly elderly. Now the elderly part is 50/50. If they’re still 100% healthy, let them be. If they’re unable to move their legs or are incredibly inhibited, then by all means. ONLY if the vet recommends it as well. I know my pets, but I’m not a professional.
Now this is purely my opinion and it doesn’t have to be taken to heart. All I ask is that we not just focus on everything bad. Expose the bad PROPERLY and bring out the GOOD!!!
This was a good article! I don’t think I’m willing to give PETA as much leeway as the author, and we disagree on several points, but it did prove illuminating and clarifying and some things weren’t as outrageous as I’d been led to believe. I appreciate the rational and fact based approach.
What is horrible and inadmissible is how we treat animals, PETA is doing a great job in showing the ugly truth, like it or not… Vegans or PETA are not the ones out of their minds, we are…and many people are taking their campaigns out of context ….we must face this reality and do something about it.
I have a small flock of hens in my garden. They all have names and enjoy being around humans. They get to forage and free range for most of the day in a pretty well protected environment. At night they’re in a well proofed coop that they go into of their own accord. Even in winter, when egg laying drops, they’re still providing a lot of nutritious food for humans in terms of the eggs they lay (around 25 per week in winter, other than for 3 or 4 weeks when it drops right down due to moulting and 30+ per week from a flock of 5). Plus they provide high quality manure.
Obviously this isn’t a profit making enterprise. Far from it…there are start up costs that could never be recouped, even if I sold eggs for a couple of pounds per box, which I don’t (I just give the surplus away to friends and family). A few hens in the garden doesn’t make me self sufficient in terms of food…but it’s a small step towards being slightly less reliant on grocery shopping.
According to PETA, it’s exploitative for me, my family & my friends to eat their eggs – no matter how happy & well treated the hens are. That’s just application of human politics & sentiments onto a group of hens who, unless they’re broody, don’t give a stuff what happens to their eggs after they’ve laid them. Hens have ways of letting you know when they’re not pleased about something, but humans collecting their eggs is not one of the things they bother about. The only reaction I get from my hen is the usual interested “give us food” congregation around me when I’m collecting their eggs.
“Feed the back their own eggs” PETA say. Which I’m sure they’d love, but that’s actually illegal where I live (though that’s another story). The hens themselves get all the protein they need from a combination of layers’ pellets and what they forage for in a garden that, other than producing some fruit, salad and veg (and flowers for pollinators), would otherwise be land going to waste. As is the case with so many gardens.
PETA’S attitudes spell waste of land that can be used for food production. Waste of the opportunity to obtain highly nutritious, high protein food in the a environmentally friendly and high welfare way (ie people’s back gardens, so long as they’re responsible in how they look after their poultry). Their belief that even eating eggs produced by well cared for pet chickens is immoral/unethical is an example, to me, of how wasteful of valuable food resources and how completely detached from reality they are. I’ve heard that they also like to attack dairy farmer Fiona Provan who promotes extremely high welfare practices with her Calf at Foot Dairy.
Universal veganism is not the most efficient (or environmentally friendly) use of the food resources we have available to us – particularly since crop producing land can often be used for grazing by meat and/or dairy producing animals at some points of the year. If we all listened to and followed PETA’s diktats, the world would very quickly have a serious food shortage.
Anyway, thank you for your blog and for the opportunity to have a little rant about this – and I very much agree with your points about PETA often employing a horribly misogynistic approach to advertising.
No person nor organisation is without fault. Which organisation has done more for animals than any other?
Good article
How can this person write an article with strong opinions of something they have never experienced. Dog crate training is not at all mean. The dog is given a safe place in the house that is all there own enabling them to rest and also keep the house safe and potty train. Ignorant article by a ignorant person. Don’t give opinions on things you know nothing about.
I don’t think this statement shows a “strong opinion” against dog crates. It’s more of a ‘this is how I feel but how would I know having never trained a dog?”.
“Personally I’m uncomfortable with the idea of keeping a dog in a crate. It just feels wrong, but then I’ve never had a dog or attempted to train one.”
But thanks for calling me ignorant 🙂
I can’t believe you still stick up for Peta after admitting they lied and they did kidnap some ones pet and killed it. You still think they are worth defending? Really are you stupid ?
This is why people hate them..they are liars and they regularly euthanize animals. They kill 77 to 80 % of the animals they receive. And you by pas that as, oh they are too lazy to give them more time. Oh well I’m still going to be on thier side. Really?
I don’t believe I’m really sticking up for Peta, just trying to show that maybe not everything you’ve heard is entirely true.
Can you point me to a link which shows where they admitted they lied?
I’m not exactly a fan a PETA myself. While I understand that there are good intentions, the execution is absolutely awful. The best way to showcase this is would be a 2012 article my The Atlantic named “PETA’s Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad History of Killing Animals,” which states:
“Out of 760 dogs impounded, they killed 713, arranged for 19 to be adopted, and farmed out 36 to other shelters (not necessarily “no kill” ones). As for cats, they impounded 1,211, euthanized 1,198, transferred eight, and found homes for a grand total of five. PETA also took in 58 other companion animals — including rabbits. It killed 54 of them.”
With that, I think that there is nothing else that needs to be said. The article goes through more of the situation and showcases just how awful the organization really is. If I’m remembering correctly, kill shelters (any shelter that is willing to euthanize, which isn’t an inherently bad thing) need to maintain a euthanization rate of no more than 70% (which I myself think is too high, but I digress) in order to still be considered an animal shelter. As per the above statistics, PETA well surpasses that. 93.8% of dogs, 98.9% of cats, and 93.1% of companion animals were put to sleep. Combining these numbers will get you to an abhorrent 96.8% rate of euthanization. I cannot think of how this could be done under the pretense of “helping animals,” as there is no realistic justification for this. Sure, they do not turn away animals who are incredibly old or sick, but I find it hard to believe that 96.8% of all their animals were too far gone to be saved, or would’ve been suffering had they of been saved.
Also, the “rumor,” as you called it, regarding them stealing pets off of a porch or people’s yards have been confirmed. While I can only think of one successful attempt of this where a dog chained on someone’s porch was lured away, I know that there’ve been numerous unsuccessful attempts made, as well. While the success rate of this “stunt,” if you will, is abysmally low, it doesn’t change the fact that they attempted it. I dare to say that the whole “lets lure people’s animals to our shelters and euthanize them” is no better than the police officers who shoot people’s pets without any realistic justification.
There’s also their seeming focus on misinformation. The sheep one of a key example of this. Even without experience in shearing sheep, it doesn’t take much to find out that it is beneficial to the animal. Either the people at PETA are exceedingly incompetent, or really wanting to spread a false narrative.
For a looser example, lets take zoos. PETA tends to paint all zoos as the same: prisons for animals to suffer poor conditions. While there are definitely instances where this is true (which is where animal welfare organizations should focus on), there are also a fair number of instances where animals have some reason as to why they cannot be released into the wild, so they serve as an ambassador for their species. There are also a fair number of zoos that act as rehabilitation facilities for animals, so it seems like PETA is, once again, exceedingly incompetent to figure this out, or spreading a false narrative.
Why did you not read the information the author actually provided? PETA does kill most of the animals brought to them because the animals brought to their door are the ones who are Not adoptable. Truly, it is Inhumane and Un-compassionate to keep an animal alive in atrocious conditions. Would you prefer to be caged for life in solitary confinement? Or put dow in a peaceful and humane fashion. I know I’d choose the latter.
I suspect that PETA is a State funded operation for divide-and-rule.
Strange how PETA seems to care so much about animal welfare, yet treats women as lesser animals. PETA’s recent stunt regarding women holding ‘sex strikes’ proves the point. A sex strike infers that sex within a relationship is merely a service to men, in which case women have no sexual agency, no bodily autonomy – they exist purely to serve men. More fool the women who’ve participated in this nonsense, which in the end only takes attention away from the serious issue of animal suffering.
Animals would be better served by an organisation that isn’t PETA. An organisation that actually cared about animal welfare rather than about fashion show style publicity stunts. I will never give a penny to PETA. Instead I’ll donate to independently run rescue sanctuaries.
Thank you for this article which isn’t all black or white, but actually considers many different aspects.
I thought your article was going to give strong opinions for or against them, and I’m so happy it’s just trying to inspect all the controversies, crimes, but also god things they’ve been a part of.
At the end of the day, not everyone who supports peta does it for the same reasons.
I’m autistic so of course I hate PETA for spreading such lies.
I think a pregnant woman and a pregnant pig are indeed two living beings who are pregnant. They are both intelligent and feel pain.
They both suffer for different reasons.
I understand why people call out their actions and I hope they continue because this is very important work.
And I hope everyone who does this and is against peta does something, everyday for animals.
There are so many ways to raise awareness. But I know some people just complain without seeing the good that was also done. Good doesn’t excuse the awful, awful bad.
But bad doesn’t erase the great, great good.
So thank you for your article. Have a great day.
Nobody is perfect. I support PETA because they uncover horrible speciesism that everyone should be made aware of. They have guts. I applaud them.
They talk about Compassion then steal family pets from their Front Porch and have them Euthinised and still get the Useful Idiots from Hollywood(Alec Baldwin, Pamela Anderson . James Cromwell. Etc.)to do stupid ads for them and trying to force their mindless philosephies down our throats and get the typical idiots to take part in stupid protests either naked or wearing stupid costumes.Anyone assoiated with PETA is a total Idiot
PETA idiots going around inn stupid costumes or going naked and getting the usual idiots from Hollywood(Pamela Anderson, Alec Baldwin)to do stupid ads and camapigns for them then trying to influance kids with their awful Comic Books and then getting sued by a Family after stealing their little dog off their front pourch and having it Euthinised then yammering their heads off abut Compassion.they hide behind the word Compassion there is no Compassion in them
Hey can you add how PETA shows gory video games to little kids via their website? Thanks
I love Peta, …the most important way that insures a lot less suffering for dogs and cats is to have a lot less of them…and I don’t think ASPCA does nearly enough to campaign for mandatory neutering & spaying(with certain exceptions). Quality not quantity..because u can’t have both…same thing with human overpopulation(concerning overpopulation, not neutering & spaying.) How much more humane it is to prevent animals being born than for so many being born that have a life of suffering because there is proportionately so many more animals being born than there are very good homes for them to go to.