Amanda at Pandagon put up this amazing post
entitled "Is PETA the same group as Operation Rescue?" Man did she get a lot of shit about it, but she's got some very good arguments that I agree with.
I'll leave the meat of the post up at her site, but here's her reasons in brief and see if you understand why I love this.
They think grossing you out is an argument.
They think women are just bodies to be manipulated for their ends instead of full human beings.
Both exploit tender young women as cheap labor for their cause.
Both prefer to advocate for "victims" that are silent and therefore can be projected onto.
Both have a strong, irrational loathing for science.
Neither seems to care that much about the real life well-being of the objects of their advocacy as they claim to care.
Now she justifies each of these points with some good arguments, but don't you think the real pattern here is that of denialism
? (now a wiki!)
The most obvious is the anti-scientific attitudes or the insane claims that science can be done without using animals. This becomes apparent in the comments as the ARAs appear and start saying my job can be done without them. But the other arguments are pretty clearly denialist as well. Mostly they are appeals to emotion, and the use of false analogies. For instance when they compare farming to slavery, or comparing eating meat to being a Nazi in the Holocaust. I needed Amanda to help me figure out how big of denialists they are.
Anyway, read her post, and her blog. Pandagon is great.
Labels: animal rights, denialism