Animal Rights and Wrongs
13 January 2010
by Anai Rhoads
AnaiRhoads.org -- Confusing twists and turns befall commercialised non-profit organisations as of late. Without naming names, a couple of groups are now out there catering to the whims of the most perverted of audiences under the guise animal rights. Numerous red flags have been erected, and no one seems to be paying attention.
Take for example campaigns where young, attractive men and women are put in the awkward position of posing nude in order to keep their jobs. No, I'm not talking about the porn industry, but I am not veering far off that mark either.
Sex sells, we all know this. However, what place does it have in pleas for animal rights? This is a question many have failed to ask. Whether partially disrobing, baring it all or strategically placing minute items to cover the bits not permitted to be viewed by the FCC, we are facing a trend that is most troubling.
Strictly-vegan organisations are bending the rules and allowing meat-eating celebrities to join in on the cause. There is a deafening ring of hypocrisy going on and many are blinded by the celebrity or group to even notice. It seems the more famous and “current” you are, the more likely you will be sought after for these campaigns.
Without some level of shock-value, multi-million dollar, corporate-styled organisations have little to go on. Clever marketing, even blatant dishonesty, is rewarded through acknowledgement.
One non-profit defended a campaign recently of a basketball player, who allegedly brought weapons onto the court recently. In the advertisement, the group bragged how his tattoos were better than wearing mink. Great idea, however, for a plant-based promoting animal rights group - it missed the point.
Ninety-nine percent of tattoo inks aren't vegan. I guess none of this mattered to the organisation. The guy is famous after all. The group, which makes claims daily that they support veganism, did not take the opportunity to tell its readers and supporters that many tattoo inks aren't vegan.
Then we have Bethenny Frankel from Bravo's The Real Housewives of New York City.
On Monday evening, Jane Velez- Mitchell interviewed Frankel on CNN's Headline News. Velez-Mitchell praised Frankel on her choice to "bare it all" for an anti-fur ad campaign. How generous of Frankel to pose in her underwear only to be later photo-shopped to death to appear completely nude - mysteriously blemish-free and 20 years younger.
Aside from exploiting the human body, these organisations also accept anyone who isn't remotely vegan.
On the CNN interview, Frankel expressed that eating meat is "okay" but that wearing fur is not.
Frankel comes from a family of animal-exploiters. Her father, thoroughbred race horse trainer Robert Frankel, was a National Museum of Racing and Hall of Fame inductee. She continued on with the family tradition with a "natural foods" cookbook, which heavily endorses meat, eggs and dairy.
Is this who we want to represent animal rights?
Pimping out celebrities for financial gain also benefits the celebrity. It's a medium revolved around the idea that getting caught naked gets you noticed, and it does. Step out of a car without underwear or make a sex tape and you are gold. Many are taking the easy road when the road less travelled is being utilised by those who have actual talent.
However, intelligent men and woman are not the types of people non-profit animal rights groups find acceptable for their campaigns.
If vegans and animal rights advocates refuse to support companies that test on animals, exploit them, abuse them – then why support an org that supports non-vegan tattoos, is unethical or uses the human-animal in positions that are exploitive?
Sensational campaigns using the human-animal aren't the only issue I have with these non-profits. These groups also openly share images that, if these animals were human, would result massive lawsuits.
Nonhumans are abused and then abused again in the hands of Executives who know that imagery sells. How can we fight for animal rights if we use "bodies" for the sake of fundraising?
| 
