Dear Puffin,
Here, as promised, is my PETA rant. I shall begin with a question: what the actual fuck is this?

Good heavens, it’s a disembodied vagina-purse. What a perfect example of objectification!
In this case I guess the idea is to demonize the wearing of fur. Apparently this has something to do with the guardsmen’s great big hats in the UK, but whatever, I don’t think it really matters. PETA doesn’t usually need an excuse to trot out a hyper-sexualized ‘awareness campaign’, usually one that bears a suspicious resemblance to soft-core porn.
So fur is bad. Except that huge general statements like that are never, ever, correct. Wearing the skins of animals that were killed for the fur industry? Probably bad. Killing so many animals that the species becomes endangered? Definitely bad. Purchasing animal products of any kind that were obtained inhumanely? Bad. Buying an old or antique fur hat? Probably not bad. Not doing your homework and not knowing where your fur came from? Bad. Fur is just like conflict diamonds. There is fur out there that is just fine for humans to use and which is sourced responsibly, both from an environmental and cruelty point of view. And it sounds like the fur for the guardsmen’s hats is actually sourced pretty responsibly. The pelts are taken from the bodies of bears killed in the Canadian government’s annual cull, which is carried out by native Innuit hunters and which is necessary to keep the bear population at a sustainable level. That’s actually way more responsible than most government programs.
But OK, fine. For the purposes of this discussion, maybe it is better for the already-dead bears to be buried (or burned, or eaten, or whatever) with their skins on. So the message is that animal fur belongs on animals, not on humans. Which is sort of something I can agree with, I guess.
But how the hell did we make the jump to pubic hair?
I’ll tell you how we made that jump. It’s because a waxing salon sponsored the fucking ad.
Wanna know what that tiny text at the bottom says?
Fugly or FURgly? It is no secret that Strip: Ministry of Waxing is against fur – be it on our skin, bags, coats or shoes. Strip have partnered with International animal group, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) for the UNFURGIVABLE campaign in the battle against Fur.
Oh my ever loving lord. That’s actually on a par with Nivea’s most offensive ad ever, which was this absolute gem:

Ladies and black men, we had better get on top of our grooming (which of course translates directly to spending money on beauty products) or else we will be ‘uncivilized’, ‘fugly’, ‘FURgly’, or just plain bestial. Apparently I’m not really human if I don’t run a razor blade over my lady bits. Or let someone else cover me in scalding hot wax and then rip it off.
The ‘battle against fur’? Wow, I really love the implication that shooting and skinning animals for their fur is in any way equivalent to me paying someone $40 to slightly (and temporarily, given that it grows back) alter the appearance of my hoo-hah. Or that the fur that grows naturally on me is in any way equivalent to an entire skin sliced off a dead animal. And if you buy the internal logic of the ad, it’s even worse. PETA clearly thinks that killing animals and using their fur (even if those two actions are not actually in a direct causal relationship) is terribly terribly cruel. So if that’s the case then they really really shouldn’t try to draw a connection between something that is basically a haircut and something that they think is inhuman cruelty.
Of course if that’s your thing, if you prefer no hair down there, fine, whatever floats your boat. Frankly, it’s none of my business what you do with your downstairs. That state of your nether regions is entirely a matter for you, and your invited guests. It isn’t any goddamn business of mine. Or PETA’s.
And I’ll tell you something for nothing. Getting waxed does jack-squat for animal rights.
Love
MacGuffin
Like this:
Like Loading...