ted
^ tO pj:
ingitl
Of iltl#-
979-4S
rt-tiine
expeif
Uppt,
aucefs
SriiT^
eded i,
Wellbc-
dornits
lO/rno 7
r mont
ages
7613.
Mm
Apply i
â– Thurs.,
tostm
Opinion
The Battalion
Page 7 • Thursday, August 5,
Promiscuous publicitv
PETA’s advertising campaigns are inconsistent and harmful to children
insopefj
aTiJf
13 M
sTP"
yinpe^l
LINDSYE
FORSON
magine a private scene in
volving a man and a woman
kissing intimately on a bed.
ere bits of fabric separate
em from nakedness. Now
; c p ”; Jnagine this scene transplanted
nto a busy intersection in the
midst of a thriving metropolis.
Before, it was a private expres-
on of intimacy but now it
I nothing more than a cheap
lead-turner.
I Fortunately for those who are imaginatively
ion » J paired, pictures of this scene abound, as do
—J Eyewitnesses to it. On July 23, People for the
thical Treatment of Animals put on this flesh
hibition, which it called a “live make-out tour,”
cording to The Associated Press. The purpose
fthis exhibition: To demonstrate that vegetar-
,ns make better lovers.
Theoretically, those who saw this lurid dis
lay are best able to judge the merits of PETA’s
ilaim but, unfortunately, the group of people who
kneed to walk by it did not elect themselves for
etask. There were a hodgepodge of children,
dolescents and adults from all walks of life stroll-
|igthe streets of Boise that day, many of whom
/ere undoubtedly more offended by being unwit-
Xfngly exposed to a scene tantamount to soft-core
omography on the big screen of life’s stage than
y the sight of a fur coat. But any concern PETA
nay have had for the people who would see this
xhibit was apparently trumped by its insatiable ap-
etite for media attention. This is not the first time
ETA used crass advertising to get its point across.
Many Aggies can remember a similar strat-
gy employed by PETA in College Station a few
ears ago when the Ringling Bros, and Bamum &
m | a ii e y circus came to town. Allegedly to protest
ie circus’ cruel treatment of its animals, PETA
ponsored a demonstration featuring a completely
aked woman, painted like a tiger, sitting in a cage
nd holding a sign with some message of protest
ipt. to cribbled on it, strategically positioned to cover her
leasts. Naturally, she was stationed at the inter-
lection of Texas Avenue and University Drive for
aximum exposure. A similar incident occurred
is summer, but the protester was quickly removed.
For all those who can remember this unholy
lebacle, can anyone recall what was written on
e sign? Probably not.
Kyle Wiese, a senior English major at Texas
or * A&M, said he can remember the incident, but
hat it did little to accomplish PETA’s goals.
noreR
College
rles j
-emplof!
ICpptr.
ace.
Hiring'
oveto
i75-296i
is or
league
or you'
5386.
“There is a certain point at which your
actions have grown so outrageous that you
begin to hurt your cause. For PETA, this
was one of those points, unfortunately,”
Wiese said. “When you’re trying to
be heard on a serious topic that you
genuinely feel strongly about, you have
to go with tact, not tacky.”
On its Web site, PETA claims to be
“dedicated to establishing and protect
ing the rights of all animals.” Perhaps
now would be a good time to remind
PETA of the class of animals called
Homo sapiens. Unfortunately, examples
of PETA’s indifference to the condition
of the human animal are plentiful, but two
related incidents exemplify the point.
In September of 2003, PETA purchased
a weeklong billboard advertisement in Po
catello, Idaho, featuring a young obese boy
eating a hamburger, with the text “feeding
kids meat is child abuse” plastered boldly
across the bottom, according to the Idaho
State Journal.
The Journal quoted Ravi Chand, then-
PETA campaign coordinator, saying,
“If (feeding kids meat) isn’t abuse, then
nothing is.”
In an ironic twist, in December of the
same year PETA came out with another
billboard campaign, this time in Spokane,
Wash. The billboard showed a crude de
piction of a cartoon Santa, eying his nether
region despondently. “Santa’s
not coming to town this
Christmas,” the ad read,
supposedly to inform men
that milk can cause impotence,
according to The Spokesman-Re
view.
It is outrageous for PETA to allege that it
is going to bat for children’s welfare one month,
and then publish an arguably pornographic picture
of a beloved Christmas figure to countless children
a mere three months later. It drives home the point
that PETA cares more about publicity than parent
ing, that the well being of children is a trifling
matter compared to the fate of animals — of the
non-human variety, that is. If PETA was con
cerned about the welfare of children, it would not
mastermind illicit public displays that invariably
compromise children’s innocence.
Children are obviously not PETA’s primary
concern; it cares more about the cow being eaten
than the child eating it. And to some extent, this
is as it should be. PETA has clearly limited the
scope of its battle to non-human animals, and this,
in and of itself, is not at all objectionable. But
while PETA is in no way bound to advance the
civil rights of humans, it should not profess to care
about children and then blatantly disregard them
simply because it wants to bask in the limelight.
Relying on sensationalism and titillation to
advance a cause conveys a sense of inherent
ideological weakness, as worthy causes need not
resort to such base tactics. PETA’s chosen strat
egy is regrettable, because it actually has a strong
message to which many people are sympathetic.
But instead
of playing
on its ideological
strengths, PETA is relying
on sordid, attention-seeking
gags that ultimately hurt it as well
as the class of animals that it ever so frequently
seems to forget. , , 1: ,
Lindsye Forson is a senior
journalism major.
Graphic by Ivan Flores
le, reaf
â– oven
enispH
764-1?
lTpS
, dad?
black.
American can’t tolerate
more internment camps
1002 Go
3bdrf
renrf'
h coink
an, rtf
asarei 1
-229-#
s
late i**
to#
lel 2»'
me#
+bills>
;48-9<!!
ia. M*
#
0-846-!
doge.
596-61*
/d. J E '
3/21*
/3ei-
-3564.
ied
trass
is, l^
I P
in M
5713.
By Kelly Rooney
THE DAILY ILLINI
(U-WIRE) CHAMPAIGN,
Ill. -- Allow your mind to flash
back 60 years to a time when
our nation was entrenched in the
second World War. Amongst
the glorification we have all
learned about our country in
history class, there remains a
story that oft gets overlooked or
sometimes briefly mentioned as
a foot note to the breadth of skir
mishes and heroic victories. I’m
talking of course about the still
0 jaundiced black eye our country
still has for sending more than
120,000 Japanese Americans to
internment camps. It is a part of
our nation’s history we’d like
to forget, though doing so only
fosters ignorance to the fact that
it could happen again.
In 2000, the Census Bureau
released an official apology for
their part in assisting the gov
ernment to round up thousands
of Japanese Americans on the
West Coast. During World War
II, the bureau released its statis
tical data to the FBI so that the
FBI could target particular cit
ies and neighborhoods for per
sons whose only crime was be
ing of Japanese descent. While
the Census Bureau might feel
it has washed its hands of the
messy stain of prejudice during
wartime hysteria, the bureau
is again playing the part of the
enabler to a country drunk on
racial profiling.
Recently the Census Bu
reau gave the Department of
Homeland Security specially
tabulated population statistics on
Arab Americans in response to
a request from the Customs and
Border Protection division. This
statistical information includes
data on the number of people of
Arab descent that live in a par
ticular ZIP code, the names of
cities with more than 1,000 Arab
American residents and ZIP
code level breakdowns of Arab
American inhabitants sorted
by their country of origin. This
reeks of severe racial profiling.
Homeland Security has enough
detailed information to recreate
a second nightmarish installment
of internment
camps. However,
the Customs and
Border Protec
tion division
maintains all the
data will be used
for educational
purposes.
Christiana
Halsey, spokes
woman for
Customs and
Border Protection, claimed the
information received from the
Census Bureau was needed to
find out in what airports the
agency needs to post signs and
pamphlets in Arabic. She added,
“The infonnation is not in any
way being used for law enforce
ment purposes. It’s being used
to educate the traveler. We’re
simply using basic demographic
information to help us commu
nicate U.S. laws and regulations
to the traveling public.”
If we’re all supposed to buy
into the agency’s assertion, what
are these signs and pamphlets
going to say? My guess is
something along the lines of:
“Being of Arabic descent in an
airport, you have waived all your
Constitutional rights. Expect sus
picious looks by all airport secu
rity and personnel. You will be
pulled aside and questioned and
have your persons and luggage
thoroughly searched. Thank you
and enjoy your flight!”
The bureau Is
again playing the
part of the enabler
to a country drunk
on racial profiling.
Whether or not the Depart
ment of Homeland Security is
being truthful in their “pam
phlets and signs” story, the accu
mulation of the Arabic Ameri
can statistics remains entirely
disconcerting. To begin with,
these tabulations were produced
in August 2002 and December
2003 specifically for Customs
and Border Protection, on
— their request.
The bureau’s
guidelines for
accumulating
special statisti
cal requests
for agencies
requires con
sideration on
how the data
will be used for
statistical ap
plication or for
law enforcement. These rules,
however, only apply to tabula
tions that the bureau is paid
for. In this instance Homeland
Security set up neither a pay
ment nor a contract, allowing
the statistical information to be
shared without a full review by
census officials. Pretty devi
ous actions for merely setting
up pamphlets and signs in
airports, no?
Though the bureau may not
be responsible for this suspi
cious behavior by the Depart
ment of Homeland Security, our
nation must leam to do what the
Census Bureau cannot: Stand up
to this thinly veiled mass racial
profiling. We will not live in
a time of internment camps as
long as we speak out and pres
sure the shady dealings of the
likes of Homeland Security.
Kelly Rooney is a columnist
at U. Illinois
MAIL CALL
A&M admissions policies
do consider race as factor
In response to a Aug. 4 mail call:
Once again, administration officials have gone to
the defense of their admissions program by trying
to divert criticism from it to The Battalion. Dr. Perry
stated in his mail call that “race is, by University pol
icy, not used" in admissions. Why should students
believe Dr. Perry? Young Conservatives of Texas, like
many others, publicly praised the Texas A&M admin
istration when it announced it would not use race in
deciding admissions. But since that time, a number
of disturbing facts have come to light.
University memos outlining racial hiring quotas in
the college of engineering were uncovered that have
not been renounced by the Texas A&M administration.
On two separate occasions, once at a March 2004
Board of Regents meeting and once to the Houston
Chronicle, A&M regents Bill Jones and Lowry Mays
stated that, “Implicit in the new admissions policy is
the use of race.” That is the same admissions policy
that Dr. Perry claims is devoid of the consideration
of race. Seeing how regents Jones and Mays are ul
timately in charge of university policy, we trust they
know the truth of the matter. And just recently, the
Texas A&M medical school decided to institute racial
discrimination in its admissions policies. What evi
dence does Dr. Perry have they that administrators
are not using race as a factor when judging admis
sions essays? Especially since Dr. Gates has stated
that those essays will be graded on the stories they
tell, rather than for scholarly quality.
Dr. Perry and others in the Texas A&M administra
tion can debate whether or not it is moral to use race
to discriminate in admissions. But until they clarify
how admissions essays are graded and regents Mays
and Jones change their stance, there can be little de
bate that race is a factor in getting into A&M.
Mark McCaig
Class of 2005
All children are wanted
In response to a Aug. 3 mail call:
Instead of igniting demands for society and families
and parents to love and want all children and mothers,
this phrase supposedly justifies the murder of defense
less children in their mothers’ wombs. Those who kill “in
convenient” babies in order to ensure that the survivors
are “wanted” dehumanize us as well as the unborn.
The joy of parenthood is abused by unloving ostra
cism of fornicators, and the natural instinct to protect our
unborn is smothered by a society whose ideal woman
pursues career over motherhood. We throw our children
under a bullet train of personal comfort and advance
ment. Take two hypothetical situations: If my girlfriend
gets pregnant, we are responsible to protect this new hu
man life, even if it is unintended or financially draining.
If my girlfriend is raped and conceives, she is un
willingly obliged to carry the child to term (and I to
comfort and help her), not because there is no pain
or she deserved it, but because inside her is a price
less human being, with a right to life. The baby is not
guilty for her father’s violent crime.
David Dunton
President, Aggies for Life