• Mon, Nov 12 2012

New (NSFW) PETA Ad Equates ‘Unattractive’ Pubic Hair With Supporting Fur Industry, Or Something

I’m a definite animal rights supporter, but that doesn’t mean I always support the acts of animal rights groups. In particular, PETA tends to get me more annoyed than revved up on activism. Despite the success of some of their actions, they often venture into the realm of ridiculousness by spending considerable amounts of money on ads that are designed purely to stir up controversy, sometimes at the expense of other issues like autism, domestic violence and the plain ol’ objectification of women to make a point.

In their new ad, PETA uses Joanna Krupa, of “Real Housewives of Miami” fame, to promote the anti-fur industry cause. They do this by declaring “fur trim” i.e. pubic hair “unattractive” and insisting that it ruins “your look.”

GET IT, PUBIC HAIR IS GROSS LIKE ANIMAL FUR!?!

Apparently, PETA Associate Director of Campaigns Lindsay Rajit thinks it’s “fun”:

“Years ago, it was disgraceful for women to show their knees and we all laugh at that today. And I think that some day, nudity will stop being interesting…and when that happens, we will stop using that tactic. But right now, it’s a really fun way to grab attention, and get people on the site. And that’s why we do it.”

Oddly enough, this isn’t actually the first time PETA has used this exact same concept. With a nearly identical ad back in 2000, PETA caused controversy (i.e. the whole point) after people deemed it sexist and oppressive. It seems that instead of coming up with new methods–you know, ones that would be more effective and less offensive–they decided to just repeat it; this time, though, they opted for a reality television star to go naked rather than merely showing a woman’s hip section. High five for change, guys!

In my opinion, the fur industry is a horrible thing. While I understand the idea that humans have always used animals for warmth and coverage, we really don’t need to do so any more. Considering the amount of textiles that are wasted each year, I think it’s ridiculous to call the largely unregulated practice of killing animals for clothing “necessary.” But does that mean I support ads like this? Of course not.

This isn’t a “fun” way of drawing attention to the fur industry; it’s a way of drawing attention to PETA’s idiocy by equating pubic hair to animal fur and calling it “unattractive,” that’s all. Nobody who sees this ad will say, “Oh my god, I do get Brazilians every week and I definitely want my wardrobe to reflect that, so I should quit wearing bunny fur!” We do not live in the kind of world where PSAs like this work on people. But regardless of intent, using body-shaming ideals of what women’s bodies should look like is not justifiable. All it does is promotes sexist stereotypes and standards. Doing a disservice to an incredibly important cause is not an effective, morally sound means of promoting your own, so please PETA, STFU.

From Our Partners

Share This Post:
  • tina

    Anyone knows what products these girls use ? http://www.redflava.com/2010/interesting/before-and-after/

  • delinquent

    Ms. Krupa is stunning, her message apt, and she’s to be commended for expressing her views in accordance with her own style, rather than kow towing to a sanctimonious “party line” with which she may not agree.
    .

  • http://twitter.com/Eva_fate Eva Rinaldi

    I like my pubic hair. My partners like my pubic hair.
    I don’t get ingrown hairs or scratchy stubble on my vagina.
    And aren’t vegetarians supposed to be unwashed hippies who don’t shave their pits and scent the hair with patchouli, anyway?

  • S. Williams

    PETA is a collection of idiots. I would rather join People Eating Tasty Animals, especially ones with pubic hair!

    • Wowzers

      peta = People Eating Tasty Animals = Psychopathic Evil Thugs for Animals = the village idiot of animal advocacy since 1980

  • ana

    ???wtf is this???fighting against fur by discriminating women?????what a sexitic sh.t!!!!!shame shame shame!!!!!!