|
I believe that animals should be treated ethically. I do not believe that vegetables should be sexually assaulted. PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) failed to get a Super Bowl commercial to air because it featured underwear-clad women interacting with vegetables in a sexual manner. Imagine a Victoria's Secret commercial where the models are rubbing on pumpkins and broccoli. The commercial's message was: studies show that vegetarians have better sex, so become a vegetarian, and you'll have better sex. The fact that PETA used sex to get its point across is disappointing, because one would hope that an organization trying to portray animals as more than pieces of meat would do the same for women. The use of women simulating sexual acts with vegetables to promote vegetarianism would have sent the wrong message to viewers. Sure, this commercial has garnered media attention for its shock value without ever having aired on television, but the attention is more critical than complimentary. Maybe there is some social commentary that is flying right over my head. Is it that PETA thinks the only way to get people to turn to vegetarianism is to convince them it will improve their sex lives? Is it that bad press is good press? Are they promoting the buxom-yet-pencil-thin body image satirically, or are they buying into it to get their point across? The latter seems unethical to me; sell out these women to sell the idea of vegetarianism. There are ways to advocate vegetarianism without using women as sex objects. After all, if vegetarians have better sex, then that would imply than men as well as women are going to benefit from vegetarianism. But there are no men in the commercial - what a surprise. An entirely different approach to supporting vegetarianism would be better than both women and men in that commercial. PETA already has 2-D ads out with nearly naked celebrities with the tag line, I'd rather go naked than wear fur. While still sexualized, it's a still image that promotes an anti-fur ethic most people already understand: Fur is made from killing animals. But people might need further explanation as to why they should become vegetarians. Eating less meat has an impact on your body, the animals you eat and the planet. Red meat, which has a high fat content, is linked to obesity and higher risks of several cancers, according to The Guardian. Part-time vegetarians, called flexitarians, eat less meat because of the health risks associated with it. Cattle contribute to greenhouse gases because of the methane they emit, so less dependence on meat benefits greenhouse gas emissions. The meat production process also leads to water pollution, according to Green America. As for the question of vegetarians having better sex, Slate had an interesting analysis. Vegetarianism is not inherently healthier, but rather vegetarians are generally more health conscious and probably are healthier and have more energy. That is why simply promoting vegetarianism on the basis of better sex is problematic. A meatless diet can still be an unhealthy diet if you eat nothing but chocolate, potato chips and mozzarella sticks, so health consciousness is essential. These important aspects of vegetarianism shouldn't have been trumped by women getting fresh with asparagus. Cathy Wilson is a senior studying journalism and a copy editor for The Post. Send her vegetarian recipes at cw224805@ohiou.edu. |
4 Opinion
Cathy Wilson
