Indeed, on the surface, PETA seems right at home in the Bay Area, which it once lauded as the most vegan-friendly corner of the country. Indeed, over the years PETA has been active in the area, butting heads with the San Francisco Zoo over elephant captivity (in life, as in politics, elephants aren't welcome in San Francisco)and taking on Safeway, a local corporate giant, alleging animal abuses by the grocery chain's suppliers.
...So how could PETA possibly run afoul of Bay Area sensibilities? Simple: the group stands accused of putting animals ahead of people in the greater scheme of life. And that doesn't sit well with some San Franciscans--AIDS and cancer patients in particular.
AT PRESENT, PETA FINDS ITSELF in a legal tussle with Covance, a contract medical research firm located in suburban Washington, D.C. A former Covance employee (a technician in Covance's primate toxicology department) and pro-PETA sympathizer snuck a camera inside Covance to film supposed mistreatment of test monkeys. The firm responded by filing a lawsuit against PETA and the ex-employee, charging the pair with a conspiracy to commit fraud and intentionally harm the company's business.
Ordinarily, one could write this off as just one more example of PETA' sometimes-offbeat, sometimes-out-of-bounds behavior. Remember, this is the same group that once ran a "Holocaust on Your Plate" campaign that equated roasting chickens to Nazi genocide. PETA also went to court earlier this year in--you guessed it, San Francisco--to try to halt the California Milk Advisory Board's "Happy Cows" ad campaign (for years, PETA has been trying to fan the flames over what it contends is cow abuse and the detrimental effects of milk).
However, the Covance lawsuit puts PETA on weak ground, morally and politically, even in the safe haven of California. At the same time PETA comes up with creative ways to sway the public against animal-testing, a poll by the Foundation for Biomedical Research shows a majority of Americans in strong support of animal research for medical progress. Back in San Francisco, home to one of the nation's largest gay communities, it raises a question PETA may not care to answer--which matters more: lab animals, or AIDS victims who may benefit from medical advancements animals testing.Let's suppose PETA, keeping in form, chooses monkey over man. The group will find itself having to argue with proponents like Robert Gallo, the co-discoverer of HIV, who once remarked: "With animal research we may have a cure for AIDS in ten years."
This anti-animal testing position is also costing PETA support from one of its most loyal groups - Hollywood.
And PETA will also discover trouble among one of its core California constituencies: show biz folks.
Go to petatv.com and you'll find a plethora of B-list celebrities straight from the E! programming lineup: Cindy Crawford, Dennis Rodman, Anna Nicole Smith. PETA even offers the choice of separate videos featuring the Dalai Lama and Pamela Anderson. (The former Baywatch star's film is less spicier and crisper than the one she did with Tommy Lee; she wants viewers to boycott KFC restaurants until they're nicer to the featured fare.)
However, the stars are not as aligned when the topic switches to animal-testing. Take the example of singer Melissa Etheridge, who's appeared in PETA anti-fur ads. Etheridge, a much-celebrated breast cancer survivor has publicly parted ways with PETA. Her explanation: "My father died of cancer, and I've lost many friends to AIDS, so I believe in animals losing their lives to eradicate cancer and AIDS from our lives."
Such is PETA's future PETA. It can continue to resort to PR stunts in an attempt to hinder animal testing. Yet, ironically, the same group that fashioned the phrase "fur kills" may one day be accused of blood on its hands--if their guerilla tactics succeed and medical breakthroughs are delayed.
No comments:
Post a Comment