PETA Renames Fish “Sea Kittens” Because They’re Lunatics
Doesn’t Savvy look delicious?
Just when I thought I couldn’t hate PETA any more, they go and do something like this. The cult of PETA has decided that fish need better PR, so they’ve replaced the term “fish” with “Sea Kittens”. Yes, Sea Kittens. This is for real, check out their website, and a quote from it:
People don’t seem to like fish. They’re slithery and slimy, and they have eyes on either side of their pointy little heads — which is weird, to say the least. Plus, the small ones nibble at your feet when you’re swimming, and the big ones — well, the big ones will bite your face off if Jaws is anything to go by.
Of course, if you look at it another way, what all this really means is that fish need to fire their PR guy — stat.
Normally, when silly cults with illogical beliefs do bizarre things, it’s funny, and this is no exception, but there is more to PETA than just jackass publicity stunts. The thing about PETA is that they get a good deal of support from regular, generally solid-minded folks; at least, as solid-minded as regular folks can be. Unfortunately, not too many of those regular people really understand what the group is all about. PETA wants total animal liberation, they’ve said it many times. That means no pets, no guide dogs for the blind, no zoos, no fisheries, no beekeeping, no earthworm farms, no animals kept by humans, anywhere; and all those animals would be set free.
On top of that, PETA gives money to the Animal Liberation Front, which is a terrorist group who firebombs buildings and assaults people in the name of total animal liberation. And the money going to these groups is coming from the regular suburban folks who think they’re just helping baby seals. This Sea Kitten business is funny, but PETA’s other business isn’t. Read on to see some videos about how PETA really operates:
Popularity: 6% [?]
8 comments
Maybe http://sea-kittens.com/ might be of interest to you? It’s mostly about mocking PETA’s stupidity, but there’s also a few Sea Kitten recipes as well
Vito, Thank you for taking a stand against PETA. On January 10, Daphna Nachminovitch PETA’s vice president for Cruelty Investigations had an interview posted on the LA Times blog, “LA Unleashed” decrying the existence of guide dogs.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2009/01/when-we-first-r.html
Her reasoning reflects a wealth of misinformation; she says that guide dogs are in harness almost 24 hours a day, that they aren’t given love and affection, that schools force people to return retired guides, that the schools’ should use shelter dogs instead of having their own breeding programs and she infers that blind people living alone are incapable of noticing health issues. Her solution is to have sighted people help blind people. It’s important to guide dog handlers and the people who volunteer to raise them as well as the schools that these falsehoods be countered.
In the past 37 years, it has been my great joy to have the friendship and help of four guide dogs from the Guide Dog Foundation for the Blind in Smithtown, NY. I know many other blind people who have had guides from this and other schools. Guide dogs have better and happier lives than most dogs, harnesses are not worn all day, schools don’t force people to give up their retiring guides and her solution to a world without guide dogs — having sighted people help us — is one of the most insulting, degrading and backward-thinking things I’ve heard in years.
Our school has a program for retired guide dogs, but using it is up to us, not something which is forced down our throats. I have been fortunate that I have never had to give up a retired guide. I have a lifestyle and resources which have allowed me to keep my retired dogs and not train with a new guide until the old one passed away. This is not always possible or desirable for other people. Some keep their retired dogs or ask a friend or relative to take the dog. If needed, the school will either return the dog to the family where he or she was raised or find another suitable home.
Guide dog schools used shelter dogs years ago. The reason they breed their own is that many shelter dogs could not complete the training. Breeding allows selection for intelligence, good hips and eyes and a temperament suited to the job. Guide dogs enable their blind handlers to live happy, active and independent lives. They can find specific locations, when taught with patience and praise. My first two knew over one hundred destinations in the Philadelphia area, enabling me to pursue a music career, get exercise and do ordinary things like laundry, shopping, banking, etc.
Guide dogs love to work. Many handlers report that their dogs practically jump into their harnesses. Harnesses are not left on all day. I don’t know anyone who uses their dog around their own house, and even the most active guide dog handlers are only working their dogs a few hours a day. Most working blind people take the harness off at work, when the dog is just going to be resting. In instances where they do not, the reasons generally involve misunderstandings on the part of their employers and co workers.
As to petting … Guide dog schools all teach us not to allow people to pet our dogs while in harness. There is a difference between work and play, and it is safer for the person and the dog when people respect that difference. Guide dog handlers regularly report that sighted people come up to them while the dog is in harness and begin petting the dog without even saying hello to the blind person. When most people meet a stranger with a dog, they ask if it’s OK to pet the dog and abide by the person’s wishes. If the person says no, they don’t reach down and pet the dog anyway or assume that no one ever pets that particular dog. The fact that this is what happens when strangers encounter guide dogs is evidence that blind people are not respected as independent adults with the right to be treated as such. I recently heard a woman mutter, “What? You can’t pet the ____ing dog! Who the ____ does she think she is?”
Some people think that, because I don’t let them pet my dog, that must mean that no one ever pets him. When guide dogs are at home, they get more love, playtime and better care than most pets. We are grateful for the help our dogs give us and reward them lavishly with praise, physical affection and play. Guide dogs romp with other dogs at the discretion of their handlers. My current guide enjoys chasing tennis balls, swimming and running with our neighbor’s two dogs. Many live in homes with other dogs and cats and interact freely with those animals. Blind people, even those on low incomes, are more interested in providing high quality nutrition, vet care and grooming for their guide dogs than most pets receive. Most guide dogs have beds, bones, kongs and other toys.
As for PETA’s solution of having sighted people help us … Blind people have proven that we can live productive and independent lives. There are blind chemists, lawyers, engineers, mechanics, teachers, parents and so on. However, more than two-thirds of all working-age blind people are unemployed. Blind people are more likely to be underemployed and more likely to live in poverty than the general public. Why? It is because of attitudes like those inherent in the vitriol put forth by PETA, attitudes that presume blind people are doomed to lives of dependence and uselessness and that it is up to sighted people to “take care” of us.
Some blind people may prefer sighted assistance to using a guide dog, but for those of us who are exercising our rights as citizens to make such decisions based on our own preferences and expectations, her suggestion is insulting in the extreme. Why would I want someone else around for the sole purpose of helping me do something that I can accomplish with greater efficiency and more joy alone? Is a sighted person going to show up just when I want to go shopping? How am I supposed to go for a quiet walk in the country and clear my head? Sighted “help” is often worse than no help at all; many people believe they should be making our decisions for us and are unwilling to respect our wishes as to exactly how they should assist us. Nachminovitch’s idea also neglects the purely pragmatic matter of who is going to pay for someone to be at our beck and call twenty-four/seven. The work guide dogs are doing for us isn’t something that a volunteer can replace in one afternoon a week.
In terms of the adjustments that guide dogs need to make, we are well aware of the sacrifices our furry friends make when they leave their Puppy Walker families, where they live for the first year of their lives. We know it’s a big transition for them, and we are taught to respect that and to treat them with love and patience. Since guide dogs are with us for a greater portion of the day than pets, this transition happens swiftly. These dogs love the constant interaction, the sense of accomplishment, the praise for a job well done and the play time they receive.
Regarding our inability to notice health issues … I had a vet in the ’70s and early ’80s who told me that when he was in vet school, one of his professors said that if a blind person brings in their guide dog and tells you they think something’s wrong and you can’t find anything, keep looking. That man knew that not all diagnostics need take place visually. Nachminovitch is right of course that I can’t see if there’s blood in his urine, but I submit that I would know something was wrong before it got to that point. PETA is guilty of a greater blindness which is self imposed, self perpetuated and within their power to change. My vets have all believed that I have been more in tune with my dogs than the average conscientious dog parent. I’m not the only one. As my vet’s teacher knew, this kind of discernment is common among guide dog handlers.
Please speak out against PETA’s misguided, erroneous and damaging remarks. Contact:
DaphnaN@peta.org
, or call at 757-622-7382, extension 1338. Block quote end Donna to Daphna, 1-12-
Thanks, Donna Hill
[...] animal rights group is a hypocritical, self-serving organization that is full of lunatics. However, you have to admit the organization knows how to get publicity. Whether it’s putting [...]
[...] but all he does (supposedly, he may not even do this) is donate a portion of the proceeds to either the lunatic PETA cult, the SPCA, the World Wildlife Fund, or the Humane Society. What percentage of the funds go to those [...]
[...] I’ve talked about how completely batshit insane PETA is before, but their ideology doesn’t matter this time, my point remains the same. This is just a [...]
Vito Rispo – I can only assume you’re an idiot.
PETA are against pet ownership? Wrong! Where did you get that from? In fact, one of the commenters above kindly posted a link that they support responsible pet ownership.
What PETA is mostly against is the incredibly cruel animal meat industry. (You can be sure that any profit-making activity that relies on sentient animals as the means of production, will involve cruelty.)
It’s also against the fur industry because it’s an easy target.
To whatever extent they are against seeing-eye dogs, it’s a pretty small part of what they do.
Richard… if you would have watched any of the videos in the post that you felt confident enough to comment on… you would know that I am in fact 100% correct. Here are some more facts:
http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/21
http://www.consumerfreedom.com/article_detail.cfm/article/134
Both of those are from well known and respected consumer websites. It is a well known fact that PETA is for TOTAL ANIMAL LIBERATION, which means “the complete abolition of meat, milk, cheese, eggs, honey, zoos, aquariums, circuses, wool, leather, fur, silk, hunting, fishing, AND PET OWNERSHIP”. In a 2003 profile of Newkirk in The New Yorker, author Michael Specter wrote that Newkirk has had at least one seeing-eye dog taken away from its blind owner. PETA is also against all medical research that requires the use of animals, including research aimed at curing AIDS and cancer.
LEARN MORE.
“You can be sure that any profit-making activity that relies on sentient animals as the means of production, will involve cruelty.”
The above statement is not true. Please refrain from lying.
Leave a Comment