I'm back again and today I wanted to raise awareness of a petition that I came across today.
PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) has called for Staffordshire Bull Terriers to be put on the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. This would essentially mean that breeding them or even owning them will be banned. This is going to be a long post.
Before I start, with any important debate or issue, I like to try and look at both sides of the argument and get as much information as possible before I start off on a rant. My rants tend to resemble a Pringles tube- once I pop, I cannot stop. So, here I have researched. I have thought about this. I am hopping mad about this because I feel so passionate, but I will try and write this with some sense of coherence and decorum.
My first, knee-jerk response to this was anger. Matthew owns a 'staffie' and I know plenty of other people who own these lovely dogs. Every one I've ever come across has been gentle and kind and relishes hugs and attention. I know from being with Matthew for nearly three years and by seeing his dog Tilly many times over the course of those three years that Tilly is a beautiful dog. She's also kind, intelligent and loves to play. She's in no way dangerous. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the most dangerous thing about Tilly are her farts. They could legitimately pass for weapons of bio-chemical warfare. But seriously, she has never harmed me or anyone and even when she's out on a walk, she would rather sniff about in the grass or jump about playing with me, Matthew or his mum than give any stranger a second look. In fact, it's other dogs (not on their leads may I add) that have posed more of a threat to us and Tilly.
After the anger I wanted to know why. Why a charity so dedicated (self proclaimed) to the ethical treatment and welfare of animals would want to see a whole breed of dog banned. Why on earth such a charity would not want to put education before bans. I also found it alarming that there was even a banned dogs list in the first place. I know that you see everywhere that it's the 'people' who are to blame. It may seem like just another Facebook protest spam message, but it really is about the owners. It's about the way in which owners ('people') treat their dogs and any animal for that matter. It's due to the irresponsible behaviour of a section in society that made PETA think a ban was a good idea in the first place.
I thought I would just introduce Tilly formally to you all. She is 4 years old and loves to play in the garden with her tennis balls, loves a good belly scratch and farts. A lot. She makes me feel better because she just wants to be my friend and to lick my face off and to play. She greets me like she's not seen me in years. She's not dangerous. She beautiful and I love her.
To further understand who PETA actually were, I went onto their website. I was still angry and am still angry even writing this. On the 'about' page of the website, PETA make some very bold and sweeping statements about their 'mission' and what animal protection and welfare means to them. I will now share some excerpts with you;
" PETA and our affiliates around the world educate policymakers and the public about cruelty to animals and promote an understanding of the right of all animals to be treated with respect."
This is when I became more enraged. The ban they are trying to put through would not just ban dogs and make it illegal to sell, breed or own one, but it would ensure that the existing dogs have a muzzle put on them in public. Now, forgive me if I'm getting the wrong end of the stick here, but isn't this going against everything they claim above. If they really wanted to abide by their own rules of "The right for animals to be treated with respect" then surely they would not want to see this beautiful breed muzzled and marginalised by society. To me, this campaign for a ban by PETA is actually an attempt to incite hatred for the breed and marginalisation by society for no other reason but their own gain. They get publicity, they get the "kudos" for taking the 'danger' off the streets. Nothing but a hate crime fueled by the need for a bit of good publicity.
And that leads me to my next excerpt:
"animals are capable of suffering and have interests in leading their own lives; therefore, they are not ours to use – for food, clothing, experimentation, entertainment or any other reason."
Apart from the selfish need for publicity and for the want to be the "hero" in a pointless hate seeking saga of their own making, what do they think muzzling and marginalising this breed would do to these animals who are capable of real feelings? What about when PETA sanction them all to get neutered or put down one by one? What about that suffering? Also, I'd like to poke another huge hole in their logic that slightly deviates from the dogs for a minute. Have they never watched a David Attenborough documentary? Do they know of the 'circle of life'? Yes, I know that that may be 'different' but to me, it's not. They are not ours to use for "any other reason". Every day in the wild an animal dies or is hurt. That death then feeds the ground. Plants then grow in that ground. We then use those plants for food. Have we not just "used" an animal? Whether you're a vegan or a carnivore, an animal somewhere somehow has died in that food chain. It's called the circle of life for a reason and it's what feeds our ecosystem. Just because we utilise or "use" an animal, does not mean you can't respect it in the same vein. I eat meat and other animal products. That doesn't mean I go out and viciously hunt down cows and pigs and chickens for sport. I respect where my food comes from and I try to buy responsibly sourced meat wherever I can. I don't condone hunting animals for sport at all and that's just about the only thing I'll level with PETA on. Respecting animals is the way forward, but banning them all together is the most barbaric way of doing it full stop.
Another excerpt:
"PETA is a charitable organisation that works to educate the public about the horrors of cruelty to animals through peaceful means."
Again, this move by PETA to ban Staffie's says everything BUT the above. It's not a move that a charity with genuine intentions to educate would make. They'd campaign for change, for understanding of this misunderstood breed, not working to ban them completely. PETA say that they are campaigning for this ban because of the number of Staffie's abandoned. While this is upsetting, banning them is not going to help that. Banning them is going to increase the feelings of hatred and disdain against the breed. When I say PETA should focus on education, I mean do the research they so boldly claim to do tirelessly on their website. They would then know that for every idiot with a Staffie, there are many others that have well trained Staffie's who show nothing but kindness. It's about understanding the implications of having a dog in the first place, and then knowing what dog is right for you. For example, if you live a sedentary lifestyle, you should be made aware that having a greyhound perhaps isn't the dog for you. If you then get a greyhound and later abandon it because you couldn't be bothered to walk it, it's not the dogs fault. It's YOURS. However, PETA are burdening Staffie's with this blame. An organisation who a few paragraphs ago were suggesting that they were against all forms of animal suffering.
Burdening them with blame that should be directed at their owners, and subjecting them to hate is alright though, I guess?
I also decided to delve a little deeper into who PETA were and what they stood for. My anger had turned to curiosity by this point. I soon found things I hoped I'd never find. Claims of PETA representatives breaking into homes and stealing animals from their owners- sometimes without permission, claims of neglect and murder at their own PETA shelters and photo's with claims that PETA left bags of dead kittens in bins. Truly disgusting claims. This and the kill rate versus adoption rate at their shelters showed that PETA were exactly who they claimed NOT to be. Cruel, manipulative, careless.....I'll list a couple of links below so you can read more but I warn you, it is upsetting.
Evidence, reports, PETA excuses, you name it, read more here https://www.petakillsanimals.com/proof-peta-kills/
Some awful stats on this article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2305571/Shocking-photos-reality-PETA-animal-home.html
Also, the advertising and the PR campaigns they run raising awareness for their cause I would argue are hugely problematic. They in fact exploit tragic events in society for their own gain. Once again, showing that their squeaky clean intentions and "ethics" are nowhere to be seen. Maybe they should take the word "ethical" out of their name because they sure as hell don't deserve to associate themselves with that word. Here's just one of their most shocking ad's.
And they didn't stop there, there have also been some disturbing demonstrations around the world promoting veganism in the most graphic ways.
"we have learned from experience that the media, sadly, do not consider the terrible facts about animal suffering alone interesting enough to cover. It is sometimes necessary to shake people up in order to initiate discussion, debate, questioning of the status quo, and, of course, action."
Even here they admit that stating facts about cruelty to animals is not enough and that they feel the need to "shake people up" ie: exploit people and emotions in order to "initiate discussion" ie: cause as much hatred towards others and cause as much controversy as possible. Keep up the great work PETA.
If those pictures and that direct quote from the PETA website itself doesn't tell you something more sinister is going on with PETA, then I don't know what will. Just because someone eats meat, it does not mean they do not acknowledge or respect animals. Why are they so hell bent on demonising meat eaters? I think that all these disturbing campaigns just show how low PETA would go for any kind of publicity. The debate about Staffie's is no different. They're exploiting people's emotions and inciting hatred of a breed. PETA have proved that they only care about how much attention they can get. They don't care about the dignity of an animal and they don't care about research and education. Otherwise they would not be campaigning to get a whole breed of dogs banned and they would not treat animals the way they have done.
They are hypocrites.
I sincerely hope that the government go against PETA in this case and that amazing dogs like Tilly do not have to experience shame and marginalisation. 160,000 people amongst other charities like RSPCA have spoken out and petitioned against PETA on this and I hope that this 'ban' gets laughed out of Parliament. Maybe PETA should stop trying to enrage to get attention and actually put their efforts into programmes that re-educate and inform people on how to own Staffie's responsibly.
Or maybe pigs will fly.
Share your thoughts :