Dolores R. sent us the newest message
from associated with PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). Sponsored by both PETA and the Ministry of Waxing (a pubic-hair removal site), the ad features a fur-covered “wallet” (via Ms.):
I guess it’s just an ad for waxing your pubes, but the logic is so convoluted that I’m having a hard time getting my head around it. The fur of slaughtered animals is gross/unethical, so you should shave off your public hair? Pubic hair is gross and that’s how you know wearing animal fur is gross? Shave your public hair as a token of your objection to wearing fur? Skin yourself, not animals?
Or perhaps my problem is looking for a logic in the first place.
UPDATE 1: A reader sent in a clarification regarding the relationship between PETA and the Ministry of Waxing, one with its own sociological lessons about social movement organizations. It appears that the Ministry has donated money to PETA for the privilege of using the “PETA Business Friend logo.” While PETA has apparently made a deal with the Ministry of Waxing, they legally disclaim any responsibility for how their logo is used and it’s possible that they did not approve this ad. Details on the program here.
UPDATE 2: Another reader, though, argues that the logo on the ad isn’t the “Business Friend” logo (see below), but the “real” PETA logo. He links to a page on the PETA website where they endorse the program. This reader writes:
…PETA isn’t somehow being used against their knowledge; they’re co-promoting it. There’s no disclaimer, no weaseling out, no “we didn’t know about it”; this is 100% PETA-approved.
Also in PETA: women packaged like meat and imagined as meat, and in cages, women who love animals get naked (men wear clothes), the banned superbowl ad, and a collection of various PETA advertising using (mostly women’s) nudity.Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions, with Myra Marx Ferree. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.