miss new wave Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 The whole thing about Jenny and today's fur protest at Sears and Guess in Vancouver is just really funny to me, because I happened to see her here in Toronto on Matt's last tour, and I know for a fact she was wearing a top from Guess (I know because I have the same one...) and carrying her little Louis Vuitton leather bag... It surprises me that she, and most of all Matt, expects people to take her seriously?! Matt's always preaching that if you 'talk the talk' you better 'walk the walk'. Hmmm, maybe he better take a look in his wife's closet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparq Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 (edited) I'm all for prevention of cruelty and all that, but PETA is not just useless, they're damaging. Their tactics often border on ecoterrorism, and they lie and cheat as much as the people they're allegedly trying to stop. They invariably push it too far, and hide behind the 'we're the good guys' thing to avoid reprisals. Taken seriously? I'd be embarrassed just to be affiliated with them. Edited December 11, 2004 by Sparq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dookas27018 Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 yeah, agreed I dunno about any of you, but Penn and Teller's 'Bullshit' did a great show on PETA on how basically, they are all a bunch of hypocrites and the leader has ties to all kinds of eco terrorists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan #2 Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 (edited) I'm all for prevention of cruelty and all that, but PETA is not just useless, they're damaging. Their tactics often border on ecoterrorism, and they lie and cheat as much as the people they're allegedly trying to stop. They invariably push it too far, and hide behind the 'we're the good guys' thing to avoid reprisals. Taken seriously? I'd be embarrassed just to be affiliated with them. You make a lot of accusations, but you have no examples. I'm not a PETA supporter, and am not familiar with the organization, but anyone who promotes vegetarianism and stopping the use of fur can't be all that evil. At least i wouldn't think so. as for Jenni wearing leather and bitching about fur (keep in mind i'm a vegan so i'm not trying to justify either) at least with leather, you're using pieces of animals already killed, but with fur, the animals are killed for clothing exclusively. I'd say leather is much less evil than fur And what the hell is Ecoterrorism? Throwing mud and sticks at people is fur coats? Edited December 12, 2004 by insober Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dookas27018 Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 This is eco terrorism, a poor excuse for justification Eco Terrorism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan #2 Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 This is eco terrorism, a poor excuse for justification Eco Terrorism well. I'd say it's a little early to call it ecoterrorism, but it does look that way. What makes me think it's not ecoterrorism is the fact that the houses were burnt, and the shit entering the enviroment from fires isn't very enviromentally friendly. Maybe it's a group of stupid ecoterrorists. I'd be curious to know whether the swamps were damaged by the construction, because the article didn't mention it, just saying they were close to the swamp. The article mentioned burning SUV dealerships. Sorry, but i have no sympathy for the dealer. I don't think fire is answer, but SUV's are terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparq Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 (edited) You make a lot of accusations, but you have no examples. Indeed...but I've gone over this sort of thing too often on other forums. It's not hard to find if you're looking for it, so you can either take my word for it or find out for yourself...or not, whatever. Obviously PETAs transgressions aren't well documented, or they'd have been declared a criminal organisation already. Like everything else, it's speculation and logical assumptions, whether there is concrete proof or not. Nobody really wants to be known for incriminating an organisation which the layman will side with based on name alone. Certainly not EVERYTHING they do is a problem. I have the same problem with Greenpeace from time to time...drive a rubber dinghy directly beneath a barrel of nuclear waste being dumped off a ship, then complain when you get hit by a falling barrel of nuclear waste. It's pathetic. Not terrorism in this case, but you get the idea. Either that, or I'm making no sense to anyone other than myself, which doesn't really bother me anyway. Edited December 12, 2004 by Sparq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Help Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Frankly, I’m sort of tired of people e-mailing me about this topic and links to boards like this that mention it. (The post on my blog is up to 105 comments about this). Here’s the deal. Jen’s Guess top is faux fur, completely synthetic. Her handbags and lost of her shoes are indeed leather, she has never made a comment about it and that issue has nothing to do with the fur issue at all. Like many people, with many causes, Jennifer has been effected by animal rights abuses. She stopped eating meat some time ago because of it and struggles every day with issues that concern her. Who is anyone to criticize the attempt to change, to feel, and to act? If people would only try – my what world this would be. Instead, they bitch for absolutely no good reason and condemn others for trying. My wife isn’t perfect, neither am I. Actually, we’re far from it. But both of us, in our own ways, are active in trying to invoke change – in ourselves and in others. If you back the fur industry then by all means condemn Jennifer’s beliefs. If you agree that killing animals solely for their fur is wrong, then it doesn’t mean you have to stop wearing leather, eating meat, and begin bombing medical labs. It just means that you’re willing to begin “trying”. It’s interesting to me how easily people attack what they do not understand and then claim it opinion – as if an opinion steeped in irrationality should be considered valid simple because of some wild notion that because you have the right to an opinion it somehow make you intelligent enough to have yours matter on just about every subject going. I didn’t attend the peaceful Peta rally today primarily because I don’t know enough about the issues and would most certainly have had a camera shoved in my face. Perhaps I’ll attend the next one after I educate myself a little, I can’t say. But I’m proud of what Jennifer did today because she has never done anything like it before. And that’s a start. As for Peta, spare me the urban legend laden psychosis. Every organization does something it’s not happy about. Even Amnesty, at the highest levels, is right now talking about whether to support military action if it ends human rights abuses or to officially take a non violent position. As of now, AI’s position is that is has none. If they do, as an organization, decide to back military intervention then I will leave the organization. Not everything is written in stone, not even about a human rights organization that I truly believe does immensely important work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparq Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 As for Peta, spare me the urban legend laden psychosis. That's just it...it's not verified either way. I don't pretend to know the whole story anyway - this is just about appearances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miss new wave Posted December 12, 2004 Author Share Posted December 12, 2004 I'm neither for nor against PETA...I'm not familiar enough with the organization to make a fair judgment. And I'm all for Jennifer standing up for what she believes in and trying to make a difference. The point of my post was simply that she needs to be careful that she's being consistent...buying clothes from a store she's protesting sends a rather contradictory message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Well, Yes, guys let's not try to make any accusations such as "Is Jen a hypocrit"... I know the intentions were to investigate a certain matter and such... but that is getting very personal. It's not anybodies fault or anything... it's just wording.... nobodies trying to be offensive. We'll just be a little more careful from now on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 She can still have an opinion guys. But let's lay off on the accusations of hypocrisy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Yeah, like I said... it's bad enough Matt gets this on the comments... and I know were better than making careless mistakes.... If you have an opinion, please share it. Just remember that the being personal is always taking an unneeded risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Help Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Jennifer was protesting in front of Sears, not Guess nor LV. So I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to say. Is it that Sears carries Guess and therefore she must have bought the top at Sears? Everyone in Vancouver uses the Robson street entrance of Sears to get into Pacific Centre, and have done so far eons. Thus, people coming out of that store doesn’t mean they’re shopping there – most are just passing through. I’ve been involved with various causes for some time and know full well the dangers that come with people’s perceptions. I also learned long ago that what people fear or don’t understand they condemn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lauren Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 i am a vegetarian and somehting of a animal activist myself. i've ranted on things here from time to time. i'd like to say that it isn't that easy to just give up something you love esp. if it's not going to do much. jen was a model, so we can assume she loves fashion. having to give up leather - when it's from an animal that has already been killed - could be very hard. as she has stated in her own blog, shes trying to give it up. i say every little bit counts. just giving up meat on those pretenses is enough to make me happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboFactory Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 I'm slightly confused, I thought the "Matthew Good" portion of this forum was supposed to be about Matt Good's music, not his wife's beliefs regarding fur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lauren Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 thats what they want you to think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboFactory Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Ah yes, the proverbial "they"...always throwing that monkey wrench into the works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 i am a vegetarian and somehting of a animal activist myself. i've ranted on things here from time to time. i'd like to say that it isn't that easy to just give up something you love esp. if it's not going to do much. jen was a model, so we can assume she loves fashion. having to give up leather - when it's from an animal that has already been killed - could be very hard. as she has stated in her own blog, shes trying to give it up. i say every little bit counts. just giving up meat on those pretenses is enough to make me happy. I could never give up meat... leather too. But that doesn't make me a bad person does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboFactory Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Of course not, it's being Anton that makes you a bad person Just messin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE MAN Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 You know, Matt must think were all assholes. The only times ive seen him on the bored was for a negative reason. With that, Its near impossible to just suddenly take a 180 and stop doing everything you did before, like in Jen's case, so give her credit for trying. I would never give up meat, and I have leather guitar straps and a leather belt buckle. It Doesnt make me a bad person, and defending animal rights and being a vegetarian, in my eyes, doesnt make you better than anyone else. What people believe in doesnt necesarily make anyone worse or better. Its what they do. If Jen and along with a mob of protesters killed Star Jones, They certainly wouldnt be morally right (well, i may approve, but only because I despise "the view"), so it all depends on your actions really. Im not going to skin some animal for a pair of gloves, but if some one else is willing to, Im not one to stop them, although if they are willing to do it themselves, then they are more than welcome to if they can handle it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest girl Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Her handbags and lost of her shoes are indeed leather, she has never made a comment about it and that issue has nothing to do with the fur issue at all. I saw a link to her blog from matthewgood.net a while ago. She did make a comment about it: Ok, so I am officially a Peta Activist! Which kind of makes me a hypocrite. I just recently went vegetarian, and I am truly happy with that decision, but I still wear things like leather shoes, wool sweaters, silk shirts, and so on. However, I would absolutely NEVER EVER wear fur. I am going to try my best to wear alternatives to these animal products, but it's quite difficult to find non-leather stiletto’s, an addiction I still haven't kicked yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboFactory Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 You know, Matt must think were all assholes. The only times ive seen him on the bored was for a negative reason. ... Some people just tend to respond more to negative things in some cases. Negative things are often times the things that need straightening out. If there was a thread about how Matt Good is great for speaking his mind and telling it like it is, then what would you expect him to do?? Post on how much he agrees?? That'd just be kind of arrogant and pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therethere Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 (edited) I don't really get PETA.... If they're for treating animals humanely, then why are they for neutering? Like, maybe I'm misunderstanding their whole premise, but I thought that their aim was to not let humans affect the lives of animals and sort of give them a stance of free will. Wouldn't an activity such as neutering imply the fact that animals are just human pets and wouldn't that contravene what their principles are? If someone could give me an answer or educate me more about them, I would be very happy to hear it, thanks. Edited December 12, 2004 by therethere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadMan Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Before I start, I must say that I am not completely familiar with PETA or the exact context of the their statements about neutering. Population control in human pet animals is essential to the human treatment of domesticated animals. I must make the point that human treatment does not autonomically preclude domestication. When pet animals are allowed to breed uncontrolled, their is a large degree of strain on the animal shelters. A large number of unwanted puppies/kittens find their way to animal shelters where, if not adopted, they are (unfortunately) destroyed. All to often however animals do not find their way to a shelter, and are forced to live in poor environments. Spaying and neutering isolates the breeding population for animals. I creates a situation where the number of pets in supply matches the number of caring households that desire a pet. Yes, humans removing their intervention with wild animal species is desirable. But for species where we have already intervened we must take care to ensure that the changes we have forced upon those animals is not cruel. Many existing dog and cat breeds are the product of years of breeding manipulation. Many of these breeds lack the traits to exist outside of a domestic environment. Unfortunately we cannot turn back the clock on what our ancestors have done. We can however, take responsibility for it. Peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
