A PeTA Video I Actually Like

It is a great privilege to be able to laugh at this video. It is a privilege to not suffer from the effects of the KKK. It is a privilege to be unaware of the devastating role the KKK has played in the oppression of African Americans and others.

Americans are not taught this history in school, so here is some context. Basically, Reconstruction was a stunning success and Black people were doing quite well economically and politically. There was even a slavery reparations bill in Congress. The KKK was formed to stop and roll back all of the gains achieved under Reconstruction. They largely succeeded for decades until the Civil Rights Movement. They maintained a campaign of terror and murder. There is nothing funny about the KKK. Now people use the KKK deflect their own racism and white privilege–by thinking that only the KKK is racist allows us to ignore the countless ways white people benefit from the oppression of people of color each and every day even if we aren't using overt racial slurs.

So that is the reality in which this video was made. The reality is that PETA is a largely white-run and white-supported organization, so they feel entitled to take anything–including one of the most vile symbols of the on-going system of white supremacy racism–and use if for their own gain. They are appropriating the suffering and oppression (past and present) of African Americans to further their own political aims.

There is no way a racist campaign for animal rights can succeed in liberating animals. All a racist campaign for animal rights can do is promote the system of white supremacy–the continued advantaging of white people through the oppression of people of color.

First let me say that Kenneth's comment came before Noah's, so he doesn't necessarily agree with Noah.

Next, "It is a privilege to be unaware of the devastating role the KKK has played in the oppression of African Americans and others."

I'm not sure if any of Noah's reprimand is directed at white, privileged me, but here's the way I see it: I'd imagine that most people in America don't consider themselves racist and are disgusted and shocked by the mere image of someone wearing a white robe and hood. Also, most people–particularly the white, privileged types like me who are oddly accused of being racist and ignorant because we're white and privileged–see nothing wrong with buying pure breed dogs.

I could give someone books, recommend they view movies, and send them to websites, but this short video is so ridiculous and immediately connects racism with breedism and even speciesism that I think it's genius.

Noah says, "They are appropriating the suffering and oppression (past and present) of African Americans to further their own political aims." That's not the only way to look at it, though. They're stunning people who would otherwise never make a simple connection Noah has long-ago made, into entertaining that connection.

I am rarely a fan of PeTA's tactics, but when I think about the audience (as my husband calls them: "the average jackass") and what might move them, I think PeTA is spot on.

Noah says, "There is no way a racist campaign for animal rights can succeed in liberating animals." I don't think this campaign is meant to liberate animals. I think it's meant to get people to see breeding for what it really is and to humiliate them out of the pure breed business.

I did find this video quite amusing.

However, I like to view things from different angles, and try to see other people's points of view, so I did read Noah's post twice. I don't think the video is racist either. But his post did provoke me to think more deeply about PeTA's intent and tactics in creating this video. PeTA has a history of exploiting just about anything to further their gains. I have a pretty good feeling that Ingrid Newkirk does not give a rat's ass about blacks (or any other minority – she's made it rather clear in interviews that she is not exactly a philanthropist of any sort), just like she has no problem sexually exploiting women or using any other unethical tactic to make HER point. The connection between breeding and racism is a poignant one, but coming from PeTA it becomes almost an empty sentiment.

On another note regarding Noah's post, imagine if a connection were made between raping turkeys and sexual offenders. Would we find it funny if a sexual offender walked into a room full of turkey rapists? Do we find sexual offenders funny? I do think the KKK is sort of made into something of a joke these days, so that we can laugh at one of its white-hooded members, rather than remembering what an awful, scary, horrifying, evil symbol the KKK really has been throughout much of US history. We should remember that the KKK has been some people's worst nightmare.

On the OTHER hand, the average person has not made a connection between this nightmare and the nightmare of the holocaust of animals happening at this very moment, how breeding is contributing to this, and maybe this video jars people into seeing the similarities between racism and speciesism.

Anyway, though I initially found this video to be humorous, ultimately my feeling is that Newkirk once again is revealing her hypocrisy. Her speciesism could easily be compared to racism. Her aim to kill every living pit bull (based on ignorance of the breed, just like a racist's ignorance of other cultures and races), as well as her euthanasia-happy methods, are sad examples of her speciesist ways. Not sure I myself see much of a difference.

So I send the video to two black social workers in NYC, with no backstory or explanation, and they both laugh and say they never thought of it (breeding) that way.

Later in the conversation I asked if they were offended in any way and both said no.

I asked if they thought the video was racist, and neither understood WHY I'd think it was racist. I even got an "I love it when white people wanna tell black people what's racist."

Neither person knows anything about Ingrid Newkirk or much about PeTA, nor do they care.

Score one for PeTA, then, as I believed they achieved their goal of getting people (at least some people) to connect two concepts they might not have connected otherwise.

Us deconstructing the ad and its source is one thing, and is valid of course. But looking at whether it is effective for its intended audience is another.

Maybe we're so used to Peta co-opting the experiences of others and turning serious issues into jokes that we view everything new they put out through the same lens.

I agree with the above commenter on the pit bull issue, too obviously.

I think the difficulty is that we all have to view these things from where we are now. To some people the KKK is a relic of past ignorance, and to those people the KKK maybe does come across as a joke. It's likely not funny to anyone who had a family member murdered by the KKK. It's likely not funny to those who are within living memory of crosses burning on yards, people scared both to leave their homes or stay in them at night. It's not funny when we think of dead children whose only crime was the color of their skin. It's not going to be funny to the white and Jewish families of desegregation activists who went into the South and vanished without a trace.

But that doesn't mean that the video isn't funny to others. And race isn't necessarily the measure of how seriously we take these things. Dave Chapelle did some pretty silly bits mocking the KKK and in those bits it did seem that the white hood was just there to serve as a visual cue, not as an active reminder of decades of murder and terror. It's not for me to say who can be offended or who should or shouldn't be offended, just that I can understand why some people would find it offensive and I can see why others would find it alternately informative or amusing.

Just as I think the Peta press releases and ads that connected notorious murders and murderers back to animal issues probably had valid points, but were likely to be incredible offensive to family members and friends of the victims. Peta is in it to offend though, the discussion seems pointless as I think nothing is likely to change.

Mary, I apologize if I read into your words what wasn't there. The points in your last post are well taken. I'm glad you posted the the video in any case. Even on the occasions when I don't always agree with you on an issue, I always appreciate your blog and the information you provide.

"But someone who has been sexually offended might not find it funny. Especially if the sex offender is being used in a way to illustrate a point about animals by an organization that really couldn't give a crap about victims of sexual predators".

Two comments:

1. We're discussing the video, not Peta. I know that the video makes Peta at best hypocritical, since Peta is breedist itself (apart from sexist etc). But the video in itself is well made and not offensive in any way except perhaps in the way explained in point 2.

2. It takes a speciesist to take offense at showing a similarity between racist injustice and speciesist injustice. The target audience of the video is breeders. If a black person finds the comparison offensive, that's because that person (even if unconsciously) is speciesist.

Of course we should be careful not to provoke offence where it is avoidable and unwarranted. But in this particular case, it is only offensive to the prejudiced.

For all their faults, I have yet to find anything racist about Peta (though I wouldn't be surprised). And claiming that most Peta members and managers or whatever are white does not make one racist, unless it is proven that black people are not allowed in.

"If a tobacco company put out a video that was effective in getting a few people to see the evils of smoking, I would still not praise it in any way because of the years and years of enticement and misinformation about smoking cigarettes that the tobacco company unleashed on the public leading to many illnesses and deaths".

Fair enough. Though I would say "what a clever idea…pity it came from a tobacco company", but that's just me.

"My thought was that someone might become offended at the use of the KKK not because the KKK member was being compared to a breeder, but that a historical symbol of racial terror is being USED to illustrate a point (a humorous point no less) without any sensitivity to the people who are victims of KKK terrorism".

To be clear, I was addressing your post, and not you personally. But again, regarding the "causing offence" thing, should we drop the "animal holocaust" (factory farm) thing as well? And should we also stop calling non-human killing "murder" just because that might offend relatives of victims of human murder? And what about calling the insemination of cows "rape"? Should we drop that too?

The scope of such videos is to make people recognize and see the connections. Some people won't, and they will be offended. That's not something we can control. I like to believe that even if I was a victim of KKK abuse, I still would not find the video offensive, but maybe that's because I do not feel myself superior (not even slightly) to other animals. There is no difference between a breeder and a KKK member to me.

Making a Killing…yes, I must buy a copy. It's on my "to get" list. I do make a connection between a maker and the product (the video in this case). But I also like to be honest. If I find a Peta video interesting and well made, I will say so. This makes my negative criticism of Peta more credible. It makes it clear that my anti-Peta sentiments are not a personal grudge. I'm not saying that you're not honest. I'm just explaining why I chose to comment positively on this (and only this) particular Peta video.