PETA Strikes Again.

Cardcaptor Takato · Post by **Cardcaptor Takato** » Sun May 23, 2004 2:15 pm

The Bailey's circus is back in town, but unfortunately, so is PETA. This time they're protesting against the circus for "animal cruelty." I saw on the news yesterday that they're going out naked with yellow and black spotted body paint on them and wearing tails and cat ears, standing in front of the UTC Arena (the place where the circus comes to ever year at my city) and protesting against the use of animals in the circus because "they're subjecting their children to animal cruelty." This is completely stupid because my parents used to take me to the circus every year when I was a little kid and not once did I ever see them torture the animals or anything like that. If their kids didn't like the circus or something, then they don't have to take them there, but they shouldn't ruin it for everyone else. I think they're blowing things way out of proportion here. So, what's your opinion on all of this? Do you agree with PETA or do you think they're nuts? Personally, I think the kids would be more traumitized by seeing them standing in front of the UTC Arena wearing nothing but body make up stuff then going to go see lions and tigers, but that's just my opinion.

RoastedTwinkies · Post by **RoastedTwinkies** » Sun May 23, 2004 2:19 pm

I completely agree. They are blowing it way out of proportion. A while back, people were lobbying to ban the Shrine Circus from Edmonton because of 'cruelty to animals'. The bill was rejected because they said that if we ban the circus, what's next? Banning zoos? I mean, come on, give me a break.

Post by **Tiff** » Sun May 23, 2004 2:23 pm

Hrm....

This is completely stupid because my parents used to take me to the circus every year when I was a little kid and not once did I ever see them torture the animals or anything like that.

Do you really think that if a circus is torturing its animals, that they'd do it in FRONT of the audience? Of course not, so your point there is pretty moot. There ARE many cases of animal abuse going on at circuses, carnivals, and the like...Now, granted, that's not to say that every circus does it. Some circuses take quite good care of their animals. But to say "oh, I never saw abuse as a kid" is pretty pointless, becuase if an elephant trainer is beating his elephant with chains (which, I have seen in documentaries, and it's quite sickening and inhumane), they aren't going to SHOWCASE it. It's going to be done behind closed doors, when the circus isn't running.

because of 'cruelty to animals'. The bill was rejected because they said that if we ban the circus, what's next? Banning zoos? I mean, come on, give me a break.

Again...do you really think that abuse in circuses, zoos, and the like don't exist? I've read and seen horror stories of such things...people like that DO exist, and they ARE that sick sometimes.

Unless PETA has PROVEN that there was animal abuse going on, then they should leave well enough alone. Is there any proof? Do you have an article that states what PETA has seen or knows, or are they basing this purely on speculation?

Personally, I think the kids would be more traumitized by seeing them standing in front of the UTC Arena wearing nothing but body make up stuff then going to go see lions and tigers, but that's just my opinion.

I do think their methods are quite stupid. Granted, I don't agree that a child would be more traumatized by a nude body than by a trainer kicking a pretty, furry animal in the face...I think a child would burst into tears over THAT. They'd probably just stare or laugh and point at the naked guys...but they'd probably sob hysterically if an animal were being beat in front of them (Unless, of course, their home life includes that sort of thing and they're desensitized to it).

However, stand naked with cat ears and body paint is just idiotic. For crying out loud, do something INTELLIGENT, like research, and perhaps contacting the ASPCA or the local Animal Shelter/Animal Control. If the Humane Society hears of animal abuse, they get down there and investigate it..and it would certainly be more productive than standing around naked.

DuoTheShinigami02 · Post by **DuoTheShinigami02** » Sun May 23, 2004 2:24 pm

They are a bunch of wackos, IMHO.

Sailorasteroid · Post by **Sailorasteroid** » Sun May 23, 2004 2:37 pm

Just about everything they do is marginally insane. According to them, just about everything you can do to an animal, short of letting it overrun everything you own, is cruel. Some of their tactics are just stupid. You read about them running up to people wearing fur and throwing blood on the fur. That's great as an attention-getter, but it necessitates the person replacing the ruined fur, meaning more animals have to die. The people who run a circus live every day with the animals--why wouldn't they want them to be happy? The animals are just as likely to be happy having all their meals and shelter provided for them than having to starve in the wild if they're not strong enough to survive.

The problem is that they're so extremist that they make it impossible to support the cause of animal welfare (not rights, I don't believe animals have rights) without being grouped in with the radicals. There's no need to systematically hunt an animal, but individual hunting is fine, as is raising animals from birth for slaughter. There's no need at all to harvest animals for fur when they can be made synthetically, but if people insist on real fur for some silly kind of status, they have the right to buy it from people willing to sell it. But the only groups arguing are radicals who insist animals are more important than people and radicals who seem to take joy in animal cruelty.

Starscream · Post by **Starscream** » Sun May 23, 2004 2:45 pm

First: Like Tiff said, the comment about never witnessing any abuse done to circus or zoo animals is somewhat moot. There are a lot of things that can go on behind the scenes at these places, and just because the audience does not see it does not necessarily mean that nothing IS happening.

ow, having said that...PETA needs to grow up. Their cause is noble - to an extent - but they are known to use sensationalism to advocate their cause, and things like painting their nude bodies in animal colors is nothing new. They have tried to place advertisements in college newspapers, telling the kids to drink alcohol instead of milk, and have been known to stake out childrens' movies, giving the kids pamphlets that call their parents "evil" for killing innocent animals for meals. Universities and research institutes have had to implement tighter security measures because of agents that try to sneak in, destroy the work that has been done, and then subsequently "liberate" the animals used in such work - animals that end up dying in the wild because they have lived their whole lives under the care of the researchers.

Now, I am not saying that they do not have the right to believe whatever they do; this IS the United States, after all. However, doing things like this just proves that they only way they think they can communicate their ideas is through pseudo-terror tactics and shock-value advertising. I honestly think they would be more respected and taken a whole lot more seriously if they tried working with groups like the ASPCA, doing work LEGALLY in order to get their point across.

Post by **Tiff** » Sun May 23, 2004 2:46 pm

Sailorasteroid wrote: The people who run a circus live every day with the animals--why wouldn't they want them to be happy? The animals are just as likely to be happy having all their meals and shelter provided for them than having to starve in the wild if they're not strong enough to survive.

Again, I've done research on the subject.

Most circus animals (keep in mind i'm saying most, not all. Not ALL circuses do this) are kept in very close quarters, where they are given hardly any room to move, and must sleep and live in their own defication. Sometimes weeks go by before their living areas are cleaned.

Many trainers have been witnessed and charged with abuse. Many elephant trainers tie their baby elephants down, and take them away from their mothers prematurely. They burn them, hit them, and sometimes insert hooks into their skin. Some animals are trained that if they don't obey their animals, then physical abuse will be the result. They are broken, broken knowing that the only way they'll RECEIVE that food and water you speak of is if they do everything their owner tells them, and endure the physical abuse that comes with it.

Again, I'm not saying I agree with PETA'S methods. They are quite stupid. But I think some of you are far too sheltered, and believe that these animals live in wonderful, happy lands with neverending food and water. It's not always the case. And sadly, most of these cases are never brought to justice.

A perfect example is something that happened in my own town..I believe it was back in the 40's. A circus was in town, and there was a legendary black african elephant by the name of Black Diamond. Black Diamond was KNOWN to be temperamental, and only one trainer coul dhandle him. He did it through humane means, NOT by abuse. elephants, when trained, often become attached to their trainer, and become jealous if that trainer is seen with someone else. Black Diamond's trainer stupidly left the animal for long periods of time, and then came back, wanting to parade the elephant through town to introduce the coming of the circus. He allowed people to poke him, irritate him, knowing full well the animal's temperament. Black Diamond finally lost it when his trainer allowed a woman to walk up and pet him, and the elephant tossed the woman, killing her.

Instead of understanding why this animal did what it did, they used many suffering means to try and kill it. They tried to split it apart by tying its legs to vehicles and pulling it. They tried stabbing it with various objects. They tried shooting it. finally, they managed to kill it, and the poor thing's head sits in a museum nearby.

This sickens me, and so to hear that some of you believe these animals always live in wonderful conditions sickens me as well.

Sailorasteroid · Post by **Sailorasteroid** » Sun May 23, 2004 2:58 pm

I don't believe that circus animals live in wonderful conditions, but neither do wild animals. The thing is, they have no concept of choice or volition; they can't say, even to themselves, that they would prefer not to be in a circus.

Are there cruel animal trainers and handlers? Of course. Do they need to be found out and punished? Of course. Does that invalidate the whole concept of animal ownership and circuses? No.Humans are still in at the top of the evolutionary scale, and that accords some priviliges.

RoastedTwinkies · Post by **RoastedTwinkies** » Sun May 23, 2004 3:04 pm

Starscream wrote:First: Like Tiff said, the comment about never witnessing any abuse done to circus or zoo animals is somewhat moot. There are a lot of things that can go on behind the scenes at these places, and just because the audience does not see it does not necessarily mean that nothing IS happening.

I didn't mean to sound like I think that nothing is happening. I do believe that abuse happens behind the scenes, but my point is that if we ban circuses, what's next? Banning zoos, and attractions? My point is that if we ban circuses, then it leaves room to ban everything else.

I'm not saying that if there is in fact that if there IS abuse that we should just let it happen. Bans should only happen if there is PROOF.

Starscream · Post by **Starscream** » Sun May 23, 2004 3:06 pm

Sailorasteroid wrote:I don't believe that circus animals live in wonderful conditions, but neither do wild animals.

Um, I would think living in the wild, being able to eat whenever you want, sleep whenever and however you like, without fear of hunting or harm from humans, is a lot better than being kept in a cage and FORCED to do things that are normally against your nature.

The thing is, they have no concept of choice or volition; they can't say, even to themselves, that they would prefer not to be in a circus.

Are there cruel animal trainers and handlers? Of course. Do they need to be found out and punished? Of course. Does that invalidate the whole concept of animal ownership and circuses? No.Humans are still in at the top of the evolutionary scale, and that accords some priviliges.

That is the most flawed logic I've ever heard in my entire life. By this logic, then, aliens could visit here, take us away for experiments and abuse, and everything would be ok because they're more advanced than us. Just because we may be the most evolutionarily advanced species on this planet does NOT give us the right to capture, abuse, and torture animals merely for our own purposes. Yes, I like the circus, and I will still visit without thinking of disrupting the services - so long as said circus is treating its animals right. But no where is it written that we can do with other things as we please merely because we have a greater intellectual capacity.

Post by **Tiff** » Sun May 23, 2004 3:10 pm

Sailorasteroid wrote:I don't believe that circus animals live in wonderful conditions, but neither do wild animals. The thing is, they have no concept of choice or volition; they can't say, even to themselves, that they would prefer not to be in a circus.

Of course they have concept of choice. Do you really think animals have no free will? Granted, of course instinct prevails over it in many, many situations...but if I put a pillow case over my dog's head, she fights to get it off..BECUASE SHE DOESN'T WANT IT THERE. Whether it's becuase the pillowcase scares her, or becuase she doesn't like the smell, or because the believes the pillowcase is some invading foreign object...she still had the choice and the free will to get it off of her head. An animal can decide they don't like their environment and have the brain power to do so. If a dog doesn't like being fenced in a yard..they find a way out.

Are there cruel animal trainers and handlers? Of course. Do they need to be found out and punished? Of course. Does that invalidate the whole concept of animal ownership and circuses? No.Humans are still in at the top of the evolutionary scale, and that accords some priviliges.

Let me get this straight...so becuase we're at the top, we have the right to own whatever we want? Last I checked, evolution had to do with survival...an animal evovles to adapt to his habitat, to make sure he can survive. Owning an animal has NOTHING to do with survival. Now, to eat an animal is part of surivival...becuase humans, like animals, hunt and eat meat (unless they voluntarily choose not to). But claiming ownership over an animal just for the sake of having one around (like a pet) contributes nothing to basic survival. It is not our right or privlidge to do these things. I'm not against having pets...but that doesn't mean I have one becuase I feel my dog or rabbit is a lower life form, and therefore, I have the right to rule it and govern its every moves. If I could tell my dog wasn't happy where it was..running away, isolating itself, not eating..then i'd figure out why, and perhaps try to do all I can to make it happy.

Circuses and Zoos don't exicte me like they used to, becuase when you're a child, you simply see the pretty flashing lights and the furry animals. But..I haven't been to a zoo or a circus since I was about 14, becuase I simply don't have the desire to anymore. I think that more and more animals are becoming endangered, and that locking them up and allowing people to poke, prod, and throw things at the animal isn't the answer. Wildlife refuges are one thing..but caging animals or forcing them to perform are another story.

And don't even get me started on the escaped gorilla at the Dallas Zoo.

Cardcaptor Takato · Post by **Cardcaptor Takato** » Sun May 23, 2004 3:12 pm

Ok, now what Tiff-sama says definetly helps me understand PETA's point of view towards circuses a whole lot more. By saying they were "subjecting" their children to it implied that all it was was that the kids just got scared of the circus acts or something. I always got scared of the human cannoball, but that was because I hated loud explosions, so I thought it was something like that and it was soccer moms just over-reacting. That's the impression they gave me with the way they worded their sentences.

I also have rarely have ever heard of animal torture in circuses behind the scenes because I never hear people talk about it any. Actually, this is the first time I'm reading about this, so I'm very shocked and angry at what those people did, but I'm sure they're some circuses who treat their animals with respect and kindess. The Bailey's circus has been around for about 100 years now, so it's always given me the impression of one of those circuses who DO treat their animals with kindess and respect since they've been popular for so long and it's always been an annual tradition every year, but I suppose anything's possible.

Right now I'm re-thinking my opinions about this and if the Bailey's circus is treating their animals in the horrid way you described other circuses did, Tiff-sama, I definetly will agree that it's more traumtizing than seeing someone naked and those circuses who're treating their animals cruely should be closed down. PETA didn't give any sort of proof of why they thought the reason they did, but just said that the circus was "subjecting their children to animal cruelty", so because of the way they worded it, I just thought it meant the kids got scared of one of the circus acts or something as they didn't go into any description of what the circus was actually doing they found so horrid.

Post by **Tiff** » Sun May 23, 2004 3:17 pm

Cardcaptor Takato wrote:
I also have rarely have ever heard of animal torture in circuses behind the scenes because I never hear people talk about it any. Actually, this is the first time I'm reading about this, so I'm very shocked and angry at what those people did, but I'm sure they're some circuses who treat their animals with respect and kindess. The Bailey's circus has been around for about 100 years now, so it's always given me the impression of one of those circuses who DO treat their animals with kindess and respect since they've been popular for so long and it's always been an annual tradition every year, but I suppose anything's possible.

People don't talk about it becuase
a) Many just don't CARE
b) There are many other things, such as rape and murder and terrorism, that understandably take precedence over such manners.

It's probably a very, very good chance that Baily's treats their animals beautifully. Many circuses do. But there IS a darker side to it, and sometimes these things need to be considered to understand other viewpoints. I'm sure Baily's probably does treat their animals with the respect they deserve..and if they don't, hopefully it can be proven.

Right now I'm re-thinking my opinions about this and if the Bailey's circus is treating their animals in the horrid way you described them, Tiff-sama, I definetly will agree that it's more traumtizing than seeing someone naked. PETA didn't give any sort of proof of why they thought the reason they did, but just said that the circus was "subjecting their children to animal cruelty", so because of the way they worded it, I just thought it meant the kids got scared of one of the circus acts or something as they didn't go into any description of what the circus was actually doing they found so horrid.

My intention was not to make you lose faith in Baily's...just to make a few people open their mind a bit. So for that, I'm sorry.

PETA tends to go about things the most extreme and wrong ways. They offer little to no proof, and simply do things moreso to shock people rather than to educate and create change. I find my proof in other research, such a documentaries (try AnimalPlanet sometime. some of the things on there are shocking.), books, or articles.

PETA's statement about "subjecting children to animal cruelty" is just plain stupid, as these animals are not being treated cruelly IN FRONT of them...They should be campaigning to stop abuse behind closed doors, not trying to stop circuses in general.

I do believe that abuse happens behind the scenes, but my point is that if we ban circuses, what's next? Banning zoos, and attractions?

If there is abuse going on...why not? A Zoo that treats it animals unfairly should be shut down.

Sailorasteroid · Post by **Sailorasteroid** » Sun May 23, 2004 3:26 pm

All right, it's a fairly emotional issue, and in the interest of peace and friendship, I won't argue the point. If anyone wants to think of me as a bad person for thinking what I think, it's their right. It's a lot of what Tiff says--I just don't care.

ParaKiss_Groupie · Post by **ParaKiss_Groupie** » Sun May 23, 2004 3:31 pm

Humans are the most evolved species, that's true. But do you want to know what separates humans from most animals? Their ability to speak. Elephants, for instance, take care of their sick and elderly. They're known to "babysit" for others. These animals understand things and respond to them, however they use actions, not wasted words like the human race is prone to doing. Gorillas make weapons out of sticks. Give it a thousand years, and do you know what will happen? Humans supposed "evolutionary advantage" is going to kill them off, and the animals will survive. Animals may not be as advanced as humans, but they do have feelings. There are species of apes that bury their dead. When doves mate, they do it for life. The average animal has more of the elements of humanity in itself that most humans do.

Now, back on topic. I personally support PETA's reasons. Not their actions, but they're reasons. They're doing the wrong things for the right reasons. I don't believe in fur, eating meat, or anything involving the death of animals really. But I don't want to stop other people. Which is why I support organizations like Earthshare and Greenpeace, not PETA. For instance, a few months ago I participated in "Walk for WOOFF." This was a walk-a-thon to raise money for a no-kill animal shelter. Now, my town is a very Southern town. Most people here do not support what we were doing. So, most of the money we raised came from family members and close friends that just gave us money to shut us up. Yet, I alone raised over $300. That's how much I care about animals. I care about animals more than most people. But I respect that not everyone shares my views. Therefore, I don't pester people about it like PETA does.

KoiNoVash · Post by **KoiNoVash** » Sun May 23, 2004 5:53 pm

I remember hearing reports about abuse in some circuses and such a few years ago, so PETA's objections to having them still has grounds. Everything Tiff has said about some circuses and carnevals and such are absoluetly true and no animal deserves to be subjected to torture for profit. Just because humans are higher on the evolutionary scale and food chain does not mean that we can abuse and treat animals however we feel like. I'm a lot stronger and smarter then a two year old, so does that mean I can push it around and beat it up just because I can? No, absolutely not. It is the responsibility for the strong to look out for the weak because the weak have a harder time defending themselves. If a circus, carnaval, zoo, or any sort of animal owner is abusing their animals then the owner of the animal should be stopped and/or punished.

Akarui Kibuno · Post by **Akarui Kibuno** » Mon May 24, 2004 4:52 am

I'm seeing a very interesting reflexion here, so I thought I would come give my opinion.

Since I'm a complete outsider, you all know my opinion will be solely based on what you all said. But still...

One point that I thought was important was the "If circuses are banned, what's next ?" . I think this implies something. It doesn't mean (as you all said) that every single circus has to be banned. Only the ones who don't treat the animals well. But, in that sort of events, if one "part" is bad, all other ones seem bad. You know, it's like when you get bitten by a dog as a kid, and when you grow up, you're scared of all dogs cause they might bite you.

So what might happen is that not only the bad circuses would be banned, but all of them would be. Then, any animal-related entertainment will be banned. Or any animal-related event. It could go way too far.

As far as I've seen, that PETA thingie... isn't it like our SPA in France (Société Protectrice des Animaux - as Protection of Animals Company) ? Though our SPA doesn't seem as "ridiculous". It seems the most fitting word for the PETA actions you have described. In France, someone would be suspicious, and ask for... err... ah, yeah, investigation, to get proofs. They would alert the SPA and there would be some intelligent action.

One other point that has been made about humans being on the upper scale (is that word correct ?) of evolution... so we basically can do whatever we want...

Lol, that makes me laugh. Someone said the only thing that separates us from animals is speech. Yup. And strength, and other things like that. An elephant could kill a man easily. Lions, tigers... they're all over us. Bigger, stronger. Yet we are said to be superior. Why ? Ah, weapon power... I'm just thinking humans are kinda weak, and some of them want to make friends with animals and share that with the public (good zoos, good circuses) but some of them just want to gain something from it (bad zoos, bad circuses).

It's one of those things I'll care about for some time, then care for something else, then something else again. I'll care for it when I "have to", sort of. I can't care for everything at the same time, after all, no one can.

Let's just hope this PETA group gets this investigation done with proof. After that, let's just hope animals are treated well in the end.

*sorry for the length*

Aya Reiko · Post by **Aya Reiko** » Mon May 24, 2004 10:08 pm

Akarui Kibuno wrote:As far as I've seen, that PETA thingie... isn't it like our SPA in France (Société Protectrice des Animaux - as Protection of Animals Company) ? Though our SPA doesn't seem as "ridiculous". It seems the most fitting word for the PETA actions you have described. In France, someone would be suspicious, and ask for... err... ah, yeah, investigation, to get proofs. They would alert the SPA and there would be some intelligent action.

Depends on whether or not they rely on publicity stunts though, but it sounds to me your SPA is more like our ASPCA instead.

PETA is like SOS. You know whenever you hear their name, you know they've done something incredibly stupid. And a part of you dreads as to what they've done this time while the rest of you is dying to find out.

Parallax · Post by **Parallax** » Tue May 25, 2004 2:10 pm

And we let PETA run around loose without any keepers????

*steam pours out from the ears*

RoastedTwinkies · Post by **RoastedTwinkies** » Tue May 25, 2004 4:12 pm

Akarui Kibuno wrote:I'm seeing a very interesting reflexion here, so I thought I would come give my opinion.

Since I'm a complete outsider, you all know my opinion will be solely based on what you all said. But still...

One point that I thought was important was the "If circuses are banned, what's next ?" . I think this implies something. It doesn't mean (as you all said) that every single circus has to be banned. Only the ones who don't treat the animals well. But, in that sort of events, if one "part" is bad, all other ones seem bad. You know, it's like when you get bitten by a dog as a kid, and when you grow up, you're scared of all dogs cause they might bite you.

So what might happen is that not only the bad circuses would be banned, but all of them would be. Then, any animal-related entertainment will be banned. Or any animal-related event. It could go way too far.

That was exactly the point I was trying to make. Thank you, Akarui Kibuno.