RE: [SouthBayVeggies] Nudity as a tactic (why I won't attend Saturday's protest)

[Guest guest]

I agree with Mike on the impropriety of such displays in the workplace.

Once in my workplace somebody posted a Hooters restaurant calendar, and the

boss removed it immediately. Following that I sent out a message to

everybody saying something like

 

 

 

" the calendar has been removed - but if you were the one who posted it,

here's the really good Hooters calendar for you to look at during the lunch

hour: http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_nov2007/2008HootersCalendar.htm - -

- check out the breasts on the February one, my-oh-my !!! "

 

 

 

 

 

As far as PETA naked protests, I am not sure - I see Mike's point about some

people being turned off to animal rights movement because of that. However,

there are also a plenty of people who notice the animal rights causes

precisely because of that. I am not saying it is a good thing that they

are noticing the animal rights because of the presence of nudity. But what

Mike agrees with, is the end result is what matters in those public

demonstrations (unlike in the workplace), and I am not sure, if the end

result is positive or negative - but, I think PETA must have researched

that, and must have concluded that more people are turned on than off.

 

 

 

As for myself, I am turned off, so personally I too would not be attending

 

 

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I expect that PETA does, from time to time, reevaluate its tactics. An

organization that is inflexible and intransigent would not last long.

 

Tactics need to be informed by principles. And principles, of course,

cannot be established by means of public opinion polls.

 

-- Mike

 

 

Mark Galeck [mark_galeck]

Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:36 PM

 

RE: [southBayVeggies] Nudity as a tactic (why I won't attend

Saturday's protest)

 

I agree with Mike on the impropriety of such displays in the workplace.

Once in my workplace somebody posted a Hooters restaurant calendar, and

the

boss removed it immediately. Following that I sent out a message to

everybody saying something like

 

" the calendar has been removed - but if you were the one who posted it,

here's the really good Hooters calendar for you to look at during the

lunch

hour: http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_nov2007/2008HootersCalendar.htm - -

- check out the breasts on the February one, my-oh-my !!! "

 

As far as PETA naked protests, I am not sure - I see Mike's point about

some

people being turned off to animal rights movement because of that.

However,

there are also a plenty of people who notice the animal rights causes

precisely because of that. I am not saying it is a good thing that they

are noticing the animal rights because of the presence of nudity. But

what

Mike agrees with, is the end result is what matters in those public

demonstrations (unlike in the workplace), and I am not sure, if the end

result is positive or negative - but, I think PETA must have researched

that, and must have concluded that more people are turned on than off.

 

As for myself, I am turned off, so personally I too would not be

attending

 

Mark

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>Tactics need to be informed by principles. And principles, of course,

cannot be established by means of public opinion polls.

 

 

 

Yes I agree. The principle here is " how do we get the most people to

support animal rights " . By definition, this particular principle is

established by means of a poll. Mark

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

The principle that I have in mind is that, in working to move the world

in the direction of humane goals, our actions need to be consistent with

those goals.

 

Social movements that have good goals, but whose methods foster

oppression of women, are suffering from an internal contradiction that

must be addressed and corrected.

 

Public opinion is subject to shallowness and volatility, and is not a

reliable indicator of what is right or of what will work in the long

run.

 

-- Mike

 

 

Mark Galeck [mark_galeck]

Thursday, April 30, 2009 2:58 PM

 

RE: [southBayVeggies] Nudity as a tactic (why I won't attend

Saturday's protest)

 

 

>Tactics need to be informed by principles. And principles, of course,

cannot be established by means of public opinion polls.

 

Yes I agree. The principle here is " how do we get the most people to

support animal rights " . By definition, this particular principle is

established by means of a poll. Mark

 

___________

Sage, Mike [mksage]

Thursday, April 30, 2009 2:52 PM

' '

RE: [southBayVeggies] Nudity as a tactic (why I won't attend

Saturday's protest)

 

I expect that PETA does, from time to time, reevaluate its tactics. An

organization that is inflexible and intransigent would not last long.

 

Tactics need to be informed by principles. And principles, of course,

cannot be established by means of public opinion polls.

 

-- Mike

 

 

Mark Galeck [mark_galeck]

Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:36 PM

 

RE: [southBayVeggies] Nudity as a tactic (why I won't attend

Saturday's protest)

 

I agree with Mike on the impropriety of such displays in the workplace.

Once in my workplace somebody posted a Hooters restaurant calendar, and

the

boss removed it immediately. Following that I sent out a message to

everybody saying something like

 

" the calendar has been removed - but if you were the one who posted it,

here's the really good Hooters calendar for you to look at during the

lunch

hour: http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_nov2007/2008HootersCalendar.htm - -

- check out the breasts on the February one, my-oh-my !!! "

 

As far as PETA naked protests, I am not sure - I see Mike's point about

some

people being turned off to animal rights movement because of that.

However,

there are also a plenty of people who notice the animal rights causes

precisely because of that. I am not saying it is a good thing that they

are noticing the animal rights because of the presence of nudity. But

what

Mike agrees with, is the end result is what matters in those public

demonstrations (unlike in the workplace), and I am not sure, if the end

result is positive or negative - but, I think PETA must have researched

that, and must have concluded that more people are turned on than off.

 

As for myself, I am turned off, so personally I too would not be

attending

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>The principle that I have in mind is that, in working to move the world

in the direction of humane goals, our actions need to be consistent with

those goals.

 

OK, I agree, what I listed is not a " principle " , it is a goal, that PETA is

working towards: " get the most people to support animal rights " .

 

Your " principle " in achieving such a goal, is " do not trample upon any

animal right " - that includes, " do not objectify women " (as humans are

animals).

 

Of course your principle is impossible to follow exactly, because, in order

to do any action, some energy needs to be expanded, and that causes some

global warming to occur, and that causes some cold-loving animal to suffer a

little bit.

 

So your " internal contradiction " is unavoidable - in the real world,

you will always have contradictions like this and you always have to choose

" lesser harm " .

So we are talking, about how closely and completely the principle you listed

should be followed, in order to achieve the goal. The degree of compliance

you would prefer, is more stringent than what PETA is doing.

 

>Public opinion is subject to shallowness and volatility,

 

As volatile as is it, the high public approval of animal rights issues, is

what PETA, and we veggies, would like to see.

 

As for " shallowness " , you are casting a negative judgement here, which is a

wrong thing to do in principle. People's opinion is what it is, neither

shallow nor deep, we have to work with it.

 

>is not a

reliable indicator (.) of what will work in the long

run.

 

" work in the long run " means, " most people support animal rights " , so public

opinion by definition is the indicator of " what works " .

 

Mark

[Guest guest]

At 6:59 PM -0700 4/30/09, Mark Galeck wrote:

OK, I agree, what I listed is not a " principle " , it is a goal, that PETA is

working towards: " get the most people to support animal rights " .

>>

 

Whether they intend it or not, what comes across as the goal

sometimes seems to be " do something outrageous and get lots of free

press. " I thought they saw themselves as gadflies, not so much making

a case or promoting positive change, but more wagging a finger or

making a spectacle, the court jester who gets a minute on stage to

say what no one else dares say.

 

On another vegan forum, discussions of their campaigns have generally

ended up with some people saying, more or less, " whatever they do is

ok because they want to help animals " and other people saying, more

or less, " what they do is so offputting that whatever message they'd

intended gets lost, and they give vegans a bad image to boot. "

[Guest guest]

I am largely in agreement with Mike and " yarrow " . Thank you for

sharing your thoughts. I'm glad there are others who think like me.

 

Lilian

 

On May 1, 2009, at 12:49 AM, yarrow wrote:

 

>

>

> At 6:59 PM -0700 4/30/09, Mark Galeck wrote:

> OK, I agree, what I listed is not a " principle " , it is a goal, that

> PETA is

> working towards: " get the most people to support animal rights " .

> >>

>

> Whether they intend it or not, what comes across as the goal

> sometimes seems to be " do something outrageous and get lots of free

> press. " I thought they saw themselves as gadflies, not so much making

> a case or promoting positive change, but more wagging a finger or

> making a spectacle, the court jester who gets a minute on stage to

> say what no one else dares say.

>

> On another vegan forum, discussions of their campaigns have generally

> ended up with some people saying, more or less, " whatever they do is

> ok because they want to help animals " and other people saying, more

> or less, " what they do is so offputting that whatever message they'd

> intended gets lost, and they give vegans a bad image to boot. "

>

>

>