you guys are absolutely incredible. looks amazing. i want to join in on this. its hot. brings attention to a powerful message in a hot yet clever way. keep up the awesome work!!

p.s: when we going to do that in Montreal? i want one of those!

Posted by: Lucas Solowey | May 9, 2007 02:28 PM

I had to laugh at the Steve Marcus quoted in that article as having abandoned Peta and animal rights because of the "Go Naked" demonstrations.

Giving up on the animals because of some naked or scantily clad people?

It's nothing worse than all of us see every day in advertising, movies, billboards, beaches, and some of our kooky neighbors.

Something tells me Steve hasn't given up on all that stuff, but the animals should suffer.

Posted by: kelly | May 9, 2007 02:52 PM

Hi Kelly!

I'm in fact the Steve Marcus quoted in the Prince.

And actually, I do disapprove of using female bodies in advertising as well.

I think PETA makes a sort of valid point that they use males in demonstrations, but it's no where near as close as the amount of times that they sexualize women. Read the PETA posts on "three sexy PETA chicks protest a KFC!" and other demonstrations that solely utilize conventionally sexy females.

At the end of the day, there's ONLY a risk that using women is bad. There's NO reason it's good when numerous ad campaigns (the new Beetle, the Budweiser frogs, Mac vs. PC, the wassup? ads) demonstrate that you can create effective advertising WITHOUT essentializing and oppressing women.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still a vegetarian and I still strongly support animal rights... I just don't do it through PETA.

Just some thoughts,

That Steve Marcus guy from the Daily Princetonian.

Posted by: Steve Marcus | May 9, 2007 04:56 PM

Steve, that is the lamest thing I have ever heard.

Have you stopped watching television? Have you stopped watching movies? Reading magazines? Newspapers? Buying clothes?

TOLERANCE is usually something an educated person attains and supports.

You may not support everything an organization does, but to nitpick over one thing- and you bail?

The animals need a little stronger backbone than that!

Posted by: kelly | May 9, 2007 06:04 PM

Hi Kelly,

That's not really a defense of the ads at all-- to defend that they're good, you need to prove

1. The ads are good and
2. There's no alternative to the ads.

If there's any reasonable problem with the ads (which I don't think you contest, other than saying that I personally am not doing enough to challenge them), then why risk alienating the feminist members of PETA who have left over the scandal?

Anyway, as for your other point, you can do a lot of things to challenge sexism in other venues. Here's some things to do:

1. Boycott products that objectify women in their ads. Thrift shop, buy products like Dove and stores that make a point not to use women in that sense.

2. Attend or organize programs that challenge sexism. Education is key (which is why it's good we're having this discussion) to any social change. Here's a great example: http://www.jeankilbourne.com/
Jean came to Princeton and she's excellent.

3. Attend lectures or public events (like Dan Mathews) to challenge sexism in an open dialog-- hopefully my concerns raised at the PETA speech will create an open space to talk about these issues.

4. Empower women in any other manner. Support women speakers, artists, musicians, authors-- challenge stereotypes of women when you hear them.

Those are just some ideas.

As for nitpicking towards organizations, it's a trade-off: I used to give a lot of money to PETA. I can now give that money that I think make more efficient and more responsible choices in their campaigns.

This is a healthy discussion to have,

Steve

Posted by: Steve Marcus | May 9, 2007 07:03 PM

Hey Steve,

It's really not fair to compare PETA's ad campaigns to companies that have multi-billion dollar ad budgets. I'm sure with billions of dollars PETA could make use of other tactics too. But PETA gets FREE publicity through their stunts. That's people hearing about animal rights. No other group reaches so many people with so little money. That's why PETA wins marketing awards.

Posted by: jimmy | May 9, 2007 07:29 PM

I think its great! PETA has used women of all shapes and sizes for their campaigns to liberate and empower women to embrace their shape. Think about it this way: If its helping thousands of animals not to suffer by someone posing for an "I'd rather go naked than wear fur campaign" then is'nt it worth it?
Iam a woman myself (in case you have'
nt noticed) and I'd be the first person to opose any grotesque attittudes in anything towards women.
So the fact that I approve of this means something.
That is all

Posted by: Australian | May 9, 2007 09:13 PM

AMAZING demo today guys.....

Congrats on conveying such a strong message that animal flesh is just thae same as as our flesh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

way to go...

Posted by: doug | May 9, 2007 09:59 PM

Steve, you may also be forgetting that PETA is an organization whose upper echelon is comprised largely of women. It may be assumed that they aren't the type of women who take being pushed around, misrepresented, or objectified lightly, seeing as how they are integral to the running of the world's largest, and most effective animal rights organization (I would like to stress "most effective"). Women have the right to do with their bodies anything they'd like.

Sincerely,

A guy whose posed naked for PETA several times

Posted by: Chris | May 10, 2007 10:16 AM

amazing! I love it!

***GOOD WORK*** (^_~)

Posted by: Nadia | May 10, 2007 11:56 AM

You are a fantastic group of
people.
I so wish we could have done something like this at Berkeley.
We would have made one heck of a statement...
Plain and simple "meat is murder." I also would not want a weak person like Steve Marcus running my company he is to weak of a man.
Also the ladies involved in this were thrilled to be a part of this protest,Why you asked, because they believe in it and they have every right to demonstrate as they feel fit to.
Judith

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | May 10, 2007 05:31 PM

Hi again,

To Jimmy- I'm not saying that stunts in general a bad idea, only the ones that objectify women. By those standards, all stunts that involve equal amounts of nudity and publicity for men and women are okay. What I am critical of is specifically the "rather go naked than wear fur" campaign, which purchased newspaper / magazine / billboard space for the ads. They obviously have money to spend on this business, they should spend it on less sexist forms of advertising.

To Australian-- no, that's not really true. Watch any of their promotional videos or look at their mainstream ads. They use conventionally sexy women, because as Dan Mathews said at Princeton a couple days ago "sex sells." Yeah, it sells, it also objectifies women and furthers the evident patriarchy of our country. Woohoo.

To Chris-- kudos on being a male nude demonstrator, that's really cool. I know that PETA has a lot of women in the top ranks of the organization, as do a lot of other groups that objectify women in their advertising. That doesn't justify what they do, however. Groups with African American leaders can still oppress blacks; the same goes for Jews, or any other minority group. As for women being able to do what they want with their bodies, I agree with that. I just disagree with the way that PETA frames and goes about portraying them-- "sexy PETA chicks go naked for KFC!", "HOT PLAYBOY MODEL POSES NUDE," "[insert conventionally hot looking model] loves animals lol!]," are common place in PETA's advertising.

To Freedom Fighter Judith-- Um, I don't really know what to say to "Steve Marcus is a weak man," (I don't really know what that means...). Fortunately, I don't think you'll have to work for any company I own, considering I don't own any companies.

And, to everyone-- No one has answered my central claim that there's ONLY A RISK THAT THESE ADS ARE BAD. They have

1. objectified women and
2. lost members for PETA; numerous people have quit over this issue.

Also, no one has contested that there are NUMEROUS alternatives that are equally successful. Someone needs to give an reason why ONLY these ads are good, why nothing else could work. If they can do other ads, they should do them-- even if the ads aren't absolutely the worst thing ever, they're still bad to some degree. The only thing we're arguing about is to what degree they're bad.

Posted by: Steve Marcus | May 10, 2007 09:18 PM

Steve, I deeply appreciate your speaking up for women. PETA has had women's groups (many that care for animals) wish that they would stop their tacky campaigns.

I'm glad that men as well get it. Those who don't seem to understand should speak to a women's rights group and educate themselves.

Posted by: Maya | May 11, 2007 02:05 PM

I can't wait to see what exciting, world-altering campaigns they come up with over at Earnest Asexuals for Animals, or whatever group Steve Marcus forms when he puts his money where his mouth is. For now, I think the Princeton protest was pretty damn great, and congrats to all the participants for sparking an important debate on campus and changing some hearts and minds.

Posted by: naked chick | May 11, 2007 05:54 PM

naked chick is cool. i'm gonna join her group - not EAA.

Posted by: jimmy | May 11, 2007 08:17 PM

I agree with you, Steve Marcus. The objectification of women and the perpetuation of an exclusive ideal of beauty is a big problem I have with PETA and with some animal rights activists. Some animal rights activists don't get the connections between all of the different forms of oppression going on in the world. Never stop speaking up for your beliefs. We need more free-thinkers like you who look at things thoroughly with a critical eye instead of jumping on others' bandwagons.

Posted by: Bluebeary | May 12, 2007 11:42 AM

I'm a member of PETA and of their Writers Network, and I actively support their campaigns to the extent that I can and when I think I can have an effect. PETA's more flamboyant publicity stunts and their courting of celebrities are not my style, but I can't blame them for that if they think these pursuits have political value; such advertising methods certainly have a long history in our culture. If you choose not to participate for whatever personal reasons, that's fine, but I don't think it's anyone's place to be casting stones. The women (and men) who do participate in these events do so voluntarily, they're not paid, and they're all adults. So do your own thing, but let's not be so natcissistic as to lose sight of the universal goal of improving the lives of animals.

Posted by: Dennis Vail | May 12, 2007 04:44 PM

As to the comments about opposing using women and their "sexuality" in the campain...common, lets get real here--we live in the same world..right?? If a lady in a bikini or even a naked lady attracts the attention of people that wouldnt normally give but a smug look to peta members gets attention, and further gets our message across--maybe eve as "in"--it saves lives of animals!! It saves animals of getting skinned ALIVE! I mean give me a break, MILLIONS of animals tortured or a few naked ladies to get their attention to the issue-hmmmmmmmmmm, tough choice??? As someone to supports prevention of suffering--- i thingk NOT!!

Posted by: Chrissy | May 13, 2007 03:05 AM

I don't get it, Why not eat peolple? They are tasty.

Posted by: Blake Laatu | September 24, 2007 11:14 PM