The Reality of Sex Trafficking in the U.S. and Women-Positive Alternatives to LUSH Cosmetics

Posted on February 1, 2015 by Vegan Feminist Network

PBS is currently streaming an amazing documentary on sex trafficking in the United States called, A Path Appears. The statistics are sobering. While most Americans believe prostitution to be a “choice” and a “victimless crime,” the truth is that these women (primarily poor women and women of color) are surviving severe emotional trauma and child abuse (usually sexual). Prostitution is the revictimization of the most vulnerable. As with the consumption of Nonhuman Animal suffering (“meat,” dairy, rodeos, zoos, “pets,” etc.), it is simply easier to view this relationship of dominance and destruction as a mutually beneficial one built on consent. But that is far from the case. Prostitution is for all intents and purposes sex trafficking.

In my vegan feminist work, I am frequently critical of how women’s bodies are also degraded within the Nonhuman Animal rights movement to sell organizations, to sell veganism, or to sell vegan products. Women’s bodies are bought and sold for someone else’s gain, but we too often take the “live and let live” path and presume that women are engaging in these behaviors purely out of “choice” and that it’s “victimless” or just “harmless antics.” The degradation of women’s bodies should be our business and we should not look away because this is not simply a matter of personal choice. Powerful gender roles and a culture of sexism provide specific opportunities for women, and these opportunities are unevenly distributed. The research is so desperately clear that the sexual objectification and degradation of women’s bodies is linked to actual, physical harm to women as a group, but vulnerable women in particular. White women of means may have the privilege of some degree of agency when getting naked to pass out Tofutti deserts for PETA or flyers for LUSH, but real women in our communities are being hurt by the ideology of misogyny that is upheld by the notion that women’s bodies are commodities.

Readers are often flabbergasted to learn that LUSH engages the sexual objectification of women, and, while many stubbornly defend the company, others ask what other alternatives might be available. The truth is that LUSH is not even a vegan company. Many 100% vegan companies exist that produce body products in a way that respects women and other animals alike. Of course, we do not always have access to 100% vegan companies and some of us like to support the vegan options made available by vegan-friendly companies to encourage the growth of veganism. I was actually quite thrilled to learn that the non-profit featured on A Path Appears that saves and supports women and girls who have survived the sex trade also employs these women and funds the non-profit’s services with an animal-friendly bath and body business. They report on their website that almost everything they produce is vegan (except for some products that contain beeswax and lanolin and are products of violence) and no products are tested on Nonhuman Animals.

Veganism should not end with compassion and justice for Nonhuman Animals alone. If women or any other vulnerable group is being hurt by your consumption, it should also be questioned. I highly recommend this documentary and I hope that you will (after suitably preparing yourself for this potentially triggering material) watch, learn, and expand your activist imagination. The next time you consider purchasing from LUSH, reconsider. Take a peek at Thistle Farms instead. We must understand oppression in terms of intersectionality, because all of these issues are entangled.

Film expires February 17, 2015. Streaming free online through PBS to American viewers. For viewers outside the U.S., try Hola, a free browser add-on.

Dr. Wrenn is Lecturer of Sociology. She received her Ph.D. in Sociology with Colorado State University in 2016. She received her M.S. in Sociology in 2008 and her B.A. in Political Science in 2005, both from Virginia Tech. She was awarded Exemplary Diversity Scholar, 2016 by the University of Michigan’s National Center for Institutional Diversity. She served as council member with the American Sociological Association’s Animals & Society section (2013-2016) and was elected Chair in 2018. She serves as Book Review Editor to Society & Animals and has contributed to the Human-Animal Studies Images and Cinema blogs for the Animals and Society Institute. She has been published in several peer-reviewed academic journals including the Journal of Gender Studies, Feminist Media Studies, Disability & Society, Food, Culture & Society, and Society & Animals. In July 2013, she founded the Vegan Feminist Network, an academic-activist project engaging intersectional social justice praxis. She is the author of A Rational Approach to Animal Rights: Extensions in Abolitionist Theory (Palgrave MacMillan 2016).

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.

PETA Applauds Horrific Maroon 5 Video Glamorizing Violence Against Women

Posted on October 18, 2014 by Vegan Feminist Network

Trigger Warning: Post contains images and discussion of violence against women.

PETA has a rich history of using explicit violence against women to promote Nonhuman Animal rights, a tactic that has been spreading to other organizations that follow PETA’s example. In 2013, a PETA commercial depicted a scantily-clothed model in a locked car dying a sexy death to raise awareness for dogs vulnerable to heat exhaustion in the summer. LUSH hosted an anti-vivisection street demo featuring a woman in a nude suit enduring 10 hours of torture that culminated in her simulated death. Animal Liberation Victoria campaigns against vivisection and whaling by positioning women in various states of undress, doused in blood for public spectacle. Many of PETA’s print ads feature sexualized women in pain, often bloodied or dismembered. In addition to PETA’s 20-year campaign of sexually objectifying young white women “for the animals,” it is clear that misogyny has become an anti-speciesist tactic of choice.

PETA seems pleased that others capitalize on sexualized violence against women as well. “Animals,” a new video release by American pop band Maroon 5, has come under severe scrutiny by feminists who are aghast at the video’s glamorization of stalking and violence against women. Indeed, as the lead singer/stalker Adam Levine (People magazine’s “Sexiest Man Alive” 2013) is also portrayed as a butcher and the sexualized body parts of the female love interest (his “prey”) are juxtaposed with the fragmented, bloody body parts of Nonhuman Animals, the video brilliantly exemplifies vegan feminist theories of intersecting oppression. Despite the loud outcry from feminist and anti-domestic violence communities concerned with the impact this video may have on dating norms, rape culture, and women’s safety, it turns out that images of blood-soaked naked women in danger are right up PETA’s alley. PETA spokesperson Ben Williamson reports to MSN:

Actually, we think Adam does a very convincing job of making slaughterers look deranged… If anything, the video doesn’t go far enough in showing the bloody horror of the meat industry and the misery that animals endure before their carcasses end up on a meat hook or butcher’s chopping block… We’re all ‘Animals,’ but anyone upset by the bloody scenes in the video had better opt out of real life violence by choosing to be a compassionate, vegan animal!

Typical of sexist advocacy in Nonhuman Animal rights, PETA is pulling on misogyny to scare or shame women into compliance. If women are “upset” by exposure to male violence, they “had better” go vegan.

Using images of violence against women should never be an acceptable form of advocacy in a world where violence against women is real, lived, and on-going. Most women will experience violence at the hands of men at least once in their lives, and all women suffer the constant threat of it. The statistics for harassment, stalking, assault, rape, and homicide are staggering. Given this reality, these approaches are nothing short of unethical and irresponsible. By stepping in to defend the Maroon 5 video (what feminists are calling “this year’s ‘Blurred Lines’“), PETA is actively aggravating the distrust many women harbor for the stereotypically sexist Nonhuman Animal rights movement.

Incidentally, PETA’s comment that “slaughterers look deranged” is extremely disableist, classist, and racist. Slaughterhouse work is the most dangerous profession in the United States; and it is grossly underpaid with the highest turnover rate. What this means is that lower class persons, non-native persons, uneducated or illiterate persons, mentally disabled persons, non-English speaking persons, people of color, and other vulnerable groups are pushed into these jobs. Using disableist rhetoric to describe human victims of industrialized food systems further alienates marginalized communities and puts Nonhuman Animal rights activism in an ugly light.

With so many peaceful and creative ways to advocate against speciesism, I reject the movement’s insistence on exploiting systemic violence against women, poor persons, disabled persons, persons of color, etc. Such an approach is inherently limited and can only alienate potential allies.

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.

“Booth Babes” Bad for Business & Animal Rights

Posted on January 16, 2014 by Vegan Feminist Network

The animal rights movement loves using young women to sell veganism, but whether or not this tactic is effective has come under serious scrutiny.

New research on the effectiveness of “booth babes” at techie conferences suggests that the use of provocatively dressed young women to sell items at trade shows doesn’t work. The comparison group, which consisted professionally dressed older local women, performed significantly better:

The results? They were great. The booth that was staffed with the booth babes generated a third of the foot traffic (as measured by conversations or demos with our reps) and less than half the leads (as measured by a badge swipe or a completed contact form) while the other team had a consistently packed booth that ultimately generated over 550 leads, over triple from the previous year.

Why don’t booth babes make good salespersons? Marketing executive Spencer Chen suggests that they are intimidating to men. That is, rather than attracting men, they repel men. Chen also suggests that women who are hired specifically for these events have little incentive to work for the company. As he explains, “They are used to not doing much except showing up to make their fee for the day.” Customers are looking to learn more, something models are not often invested in. This point may or may not apply to vegan booths, as PETA and other organizations that objectify women rely on volunteers as well as paid models.

Chen also reports, “Business and product execs don’t talk to booth babes.” While vegan “booth babes” are not targeting important business persons, the effect is similar. Animal justice is a serious matter, as is changing one’s diet, and “booth babes” simply do not convey seriousness:

Many times I observed that while my team was busy in demos with other prospects, the booth babes were unable to hold the interest of these execs for the extra five minutes that I needed to get a person from our team to engage.

Who they do tend to attract, however, are young men who are interested more in photo ops than business.

Young man poses next to the "Ice Queen" while another young man takes their picture. The woman is very thin, white, and painted in blue. She wears a tiara and high heels. Sign reads: "Beat the heat with nondairy treats."

So why use booth babes at all? Chen suggests that it’s simply cheaper than relying on qualified individuals and experts. It’s not only easier on the budget, but it’s indicative of cheap advertising standards that dominate the marketplace:

[…] there still exists the “stripper and steaks” mentality in sales, where it’s less about the product and more about relationships and the art of the “close.” Booth babes have long been a part of this dog-and-pony show in this old approach to sales.

This study comes on the heels of the Australian study published in December of 2013 that demonstrated PETA’s “sex sells” approach is actually counter-productive. Male participants recognized that the women were dehumanized and were subsequently less likely to support the animal rights cause.

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.

Does Sex Sell Animal Rights? RESEARCH SAYS NO!

Posted on December 23, 2013 by Vegan Feminist Network

Two researchers in Australia sought to test PETA’s hypothesis that sex sells animal rights:

Images of scantily clad women are used by advertisers to make products more attractive to men. This “sex sells” approach is increasingly employed to promote ethical causes, most prominently by the animal-rights organization PETA. Yet sexualized images can dehumanize women, leaving an unresolved paradox – is it effective to advertise an ethical cause using unethical means? In Study 1, a sample of Australian male undergraduates (N = 82) viewed PETA advertisements containing either sexualized or non-sexualized images of women. Intentions to support the ethical organization were reduced for those exposed to the sexualized advertising, and this was explained by their dehumanization of the sexualized women, and not by increased arousal. Study 2 used a mixed-gender community sample from the United States (N = 280), replicating this finding and extending it by showing that behaviors helpful to the ethical cause diminished after viewing the sexualized advertisements, which was again mediated by the dehumanization of the women depicted. Alternative explanations relating to the reduced credibility of the sexualized women and their objectification were not supported. When promoting ethical causes, organizations may benefit from using advertising strategies that do not dehumanize women.

The conclusion?

Overall, these findings are the first to demonstrate that sexualized images that dehumanize women reduce concern for ethical behavior in a domain unrelated to gender relations and sex.

Salon reports that PETA dug in their heels in response to the research, insisting naked women get the most media attention. So, perhaps we are misrepresenting PETA’s hypothesis. They’re using naked women not to raise awareness and stop animal exploitation, but to raise money and awareness about PETA. The “sex sells” tactic, I have argued, is indicative of the non-profit industrial complex, where compromised messages and fundraising are prioritized over actual social change. Really, PETA is ignoring this research even though it has been demonstrated that their tactics do not help Nonhuman Animals. They will continue objectifying women because it “grabs the headlines.” Can it be any clearer that this is not about social change effectiveness?

Of course, while this study demonstrates that there is no effectiveness, there is also a huge body of research that demonstrates that the sexual objectification of women is directly linked to violence against women and the devaluation of women.

This post originally appeared on the Academic Abolitionist Vegan.

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.

Social Movement Prostitution

Posted on September 4, 2013 by Vegan Feminist Network

Trigger Warning: Discusses prostitution and pornography.

Not Safe for Work: Contains nude images.

Nude protest has a long history in social activism, but it is certainly gaining a lot of momentum in today’s hyper-sexualized world where pornography is mainstream and third-wave feminism prioritizes sexualization as empowerment. Media attention is a social movement’s best asset. It gets the organization more recognition, attracts more volunteers, and more importantly, it brings in more donations. These days, to get media attention in a digitized, high-speed media landscape that is bombarded with trillions of competing images, some social movement organizations attempt to stand out with free soft-core porn. Free sampling is a technique heavily utilized by pornographers in a highly competitive online pornography space. They give the consumer a little taste of the product with the expectation that the consumer will become excited and will want to purchase more.

When I set out to write this essay, I had hoped to explore social movements as a whole, but sadly, once again, the Nonhuman Animal rights movement steals the show in its problematic treatment of women. The only other large social movement (that isn’t the nudity movement itself, where people advocate for the freedom to be naked without penalization) is the peace and anti-war movement. Breasts Not Bombs, for instance, has female volunteers march in public spaces holding political signs.

Then there’s Femen, a male-led feminist group of mostly white, thin young women who claim to speak on behalf of all women (and sometimes brown women in particular) by going topless in public spaces.

Aside from these exceptions, getting naked for a cause is the Nonhuman Animal rights movement’s modus operandi. And, though many supporters of Nonhuman Animal rights organizations that utilize sexualization as a tactic may claim that men’s naked bodies are used, too, the overwhelming majority of sexualized bodies presented to the public are that of young, thin, white women. With 80% of the movement identifying as female, the movement’s largest volunteer pool offers to organizations a wealth of physical assets. Body parts are politicized to the exclusion of women’s intelligence, skills, creativity, dedication, or leadership ability.

Organizations like PETA take female volunteers, put them on street corners, posters, and film, and, for all intents and purposes, prostitute these unpaid women to extract funding, media attention, or other resources (incidentally PETA may be the most infamous, but it is certainly not the only organization engaging this tactic). This systemic social movement prostitution is defended in ways similar to that of typical street prostitution: women choose to do it, or she’s getting something out of it. But free choice is often an illusion. Women do not have the same choices available to them that men do. Women in Nonhuman Animal rights are being funneled into the “choice” of stripping down for the male gaze in public spaces. Do women get something out of it? Some do, particularly middle-class white women. Is nudity a bad thing? No, of course not. But we need to be cognizant of patterns and power. There is a pattern of women’s bodies being used in a world where men have the power.

PETA protest with person in fish suit holding sign that says "Fishing hurts," next to a thin white woman holding a sign that says, "Don't let your kids become hookers."

PETA sign reads, “Don’t Let Your Kids Become Hookers.”

Female activists are “selling” their bodies for resources, but none of the profit goes to these sex workers. Instead, the money raised goes to the organizations that they represent. If a John buys a prostituted woman for sex acts, he pays her, and more often than not, the money goes to her pimp. If a John buys a PETA membership because of his interest in PETA’s women (see PETA’s “Veggie Love” campaign for example), the money goes to her organization.

Incidentally, there is a vegan strip club in Portland, Oregon where women are also being prostituted for “the cause.” The male club owner insists that “throwing boobs out there” is the only way to get people to visit his restaurant and try his vegan menu. He claims he wants to “end the suffering of all creatures,” but it seems that he and the movement ignore the fact that women are “creatures,” too. We can be certain that “throwing penises out there” would draw some attention as well, but, patriarchy ensures that it is female nudity that will expected.

Stripping, like prostitution, is sex work that often preys on vulnerable populations of women (many feminists and survivors regard “sex work” to be a euphemism; for women who are trafficked, we must recognize it as sex slavery). It is “work” with extremely high rates of sexual assault, rape, and other forms of violence. It is “work” that is extremely difficult for most women to make a living with and it is “work” with little job security. Strip clubs have a strict set of rules that ensure most money stays in the hands of the male owners, not in the hands of the hard-working women. Like prostitution, stripping is glamorized or romanticized in the liberal imagination as something freely chosen by independent women who have full control over their work and lives. Some women enjoy that kind of agency, but most women do not.

Social activism today has been swept into the Non-Profit Industrial Complex, where organizations must compete for vital fundraising in order to survive. This extreme dependence on funding means that tactics are compromised, and advocacy becomes a means of making money to sustain the organization, not changing the world. In other words, even if viewers were to begin supporting Nonhuman Animal rights organizations as a result of being exposed to these sexualized tactics (and there is no evidence to support such a notion), most of the money raised will not be used in support of anti-speciesism. Instead, most of it will be put toward keeping the lights on, paying staff members, and funding more ways to raise money.

I argue that the Nonhuman Animal rights movement squanders an important resource by degrading women’s participation to stripping and legal forms of prostitution. So much more could be accomplished by nurturing women’s brains instead of objectifying their bodies. Beyond the negative impact that these tactics are having on so many of the girls and women groomed by the movement, we also need to take into account the impact that this type of activism has on women as a demographic. The socially-accepted degradation of women and their sexual objectification is directly linked with discrimination and violence against women. This is a consequence that social justice movements should take very seriously.

Receive research updates straight to your inbox by subscribing to my newsletter.

Wichsen für den Tierschutz

Posted on August 18, 2013 by Vegan Feminist Network

Selbstbefriedigung ist doch total langweilig. Überall ist eh alles voll mit Pornographie. Wäre doch gut, wenn das ganze Gewichse, Gefingere und Gedildo noch einen anderen Sinn hätte als nur das eigene Ego zu befriedigen. Das haben sich wohl auch die brillanten Köpfe der Tierschutzvereinigung PETA in den USA gedacht und haben die Idee für eine glorreiche neue Kampagne verwurstet, die „Veggie Love-Casting Session“.

Das Konzept ist simpel: knapp bekleidete Frauen, Gemüse und viel Eigenliebe. Bereitgestellt werden kurze Clips, die Ausschnitte aus der Casting-Session sind. Die wie gesagt spärlich bekleideten Frauen müssen zunächst zeigen, was sie zu bieten haben. Wie es sich gehört, werden ihnen von einer männlichen Stimme aus dem Off Befehle erteilt. Nach der Frontansicht müssen sie sich drehen, damit du auch ihr Hinterteil begutachten kannst und aus einem, für mich völlig unverständlichen Grund, werden sie aufgefordert ihre Hände zu zeigen—die Handfetischisten unter euch können mir das ja in den Kommentaren erklären. Ein Händler stellt hier seine Waren zur Schau. Hätte PETA hierfür einen authentischen Hamburger Fischhändler engagiert, wäre diese Kampagne vielleicht noch zu retten gewesen …

Ist der Körper der Frau ausreichend gemustert worden, darf sie sich ein Gemüse von einem üppig gedecktem Erntedankfesttisch aussuchen und beweisen, wie sehr sie Gemüse liebt: „Choose a vegtable and show us how much you love it.“

Danach folgt das Vorspiel eines üblichen Pornoschinkens, wie du ihn selbst auf der zweitklassigen Plattform xhamster.com streamen kannst. Wie mir PETA mitteilte, seien aber ihre „Materialien wohl kaum als pornographisch zu bezeichnen“. Für mich ist es aber eindeutig, wenn sich eine Frau eine Gurke tief in den Rachen schiebt und dabei laut stöhnt … na ja was soll es denn anderes sein?

Warum aber aufregen? „Sex sells“ und wenn damit erreicht wird, dass etwas für den Tierschutz unternommen wird, ist das doch legitim. Dieser Meinung ist auch die PETA:

„Wir setzen „Nacktheit“ nicht grundlos ein; sie soll unsere Botschaft unterstreichen, ob die nun lautet „Lieber nackt als in Pelz” oder ob es darum geht, die Vorteile einer veganen Ernährung zu unterstreichen. Unser Ziel ist es, Tierleid zu stoppen, und wir nutzen dazu alle sich bietenden Gelegenheiten. Wir haben festgestellt, dass die Menschen eher unseren „aufreizenden“ Aktionen Beachtung schenken.“

Mal kurz durch den “PR-Gebrabbel”-Übersetzter gejagt, ergibt das folgende Message: Kein Trick ist uns zu billig, um mal wieder Aufmerksamkeit zu erhalten. Und seit den Pelzprotesten aus den 90ern haben wir eigentlich auch keine neue Strategie dazu gelernt.

Der Zweck heiligt aber nicht die Mittel. Es ist nicht legitim, wenn der Zweck von Frauen ist mit ihren Körpern Aufmerksamkeit zu erregen. Dadurch wird das Bild der Frau als Sexobjekt nur noch verstärkt. Damit wird signalisiert, dass Frauen einzig für die Befriedigung männlicher Bedürfnisse gedacht sind.

Nun sagst du wahrscheinlich, dass sich die Frauen aus den Clips freiwillig für ihr Mitwirken in dieser Kampagne entschieden haben. Das wollte mir auch die Presseabteilung der PETA ans Herz legen und mir durch eine recht graphische Darstellung von Unrecht an Tieren ein schlechtes Gewissen machen:

„Nackte Demonstranten und Plakatmodelle – egal ob männlich oder weiblich – haben sich selbst zu dieser Art der Teilnahme an unseren Kampagnen entschlossen, weil sie die Aufmerksamkeit der Öffentlichkeit auf die ernste Problematik des Tiermissbrauchs lenken wollen:

Diese Aktivisten sind entschlossen, Füchsen zu helfen, die in Millionenzahl für die Pelzindustrie per Stromschlag getötet und gehäutet werden, Kälbern, die ihren verstörten Müttern entrissen und für die Fleischindustrie geschlachtet werden, Elefanten, die blutig geschlagen und zu einem jahrelangen Leben in Ketten in Zirkussen gezwungen werden, und den Milliarden Tieren, die Qualen, die zum Wahnsinn treibende Isolation, Hunger, Terror und einen gewaltsamen Tod aus den Händen völlig gleichgültiger Industrien erleiden.“

Ich will natürlich nicht behaupten, dass die Frauen aus den Castings zu ihrem Mitwirken gezwungen wurden. Diese Ausrede wird auch zu gern von Pornoproduzenten verwendet, um ihre erniedrigenden Filmchen zu rechtfertigen. Wie freiwillig kann die Teilnahme sein, wenn Frauen in unserer Welt immer noch überwiegend als Sexobjekte gesehen werden, dafür gedacht, Männer zu befriedigen? Viele Frauen haben es aufgrund ihrer Umgebung oder ihres Status schwer, sich von diesem Konstrukt zu befreien. Niemand kann also hier behaupten, dass alles auf freiwilliger Basis geschieht.

Sogar vor angedeutetem Inzest macht die PETA nicht Halt. Ein Bild aus einem Clip mit dem Namen „The Twins“.

Die Rolle der Frau scheint PETA jedoch wenig zu interessieren, sie sind ja eine Tierschutz- und keine Frauenrechtsorganisation. Leicht bekleidete Frauen wurden schon sehr oft für Kampagnen missbraucht, wie etwa für die „All Animals have the same parts“-Plakate, auf denen auch schon Pamela Anderson zu sehen war. Offensichtlich ist, dass nur Frauen für diese Art von Marketingstrategie benutzt werden. Der einzige Casting-Clip mit einem Mann ist kaum ernst zunehmen. Anstatt ebenfalls seine große Liebe für Gemüse zu beweisen, wirkt die Szene eher wie ein Sketch.

Der Grund für die spärliche Männerquote scheint offensichtlich zu sein. Es wird angenommen, dass Männer „sexbesessener“ sind und Kampagnen mit Frauen deshalb ein größeres Publikum erreichen.

Die Darstellerin soll wie ein Tier ihren Broccoli auf allen Vieren und ohne Hände verzehren.

Aber die Casting-Kampagne der PETA stört mich nicht nur, weil ich sie für frauenverachtend halte, sondern weil sie zur Realisierung ihre Ziele, sogar ihre eigenen Prinzipien vergisst.

Denn ein offizieller Slogan der PETA lautet: „Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any way.“

Wozu sind denn aber die Casting-Clips gedacht? Natürlich um Aufmerksamkeit für den Tierschutz zu erregen. Aber wie geschieht das?

Durch Unterhaltung oder neudeutsch: Entertainment! Die Frauen in den Filmchen dienen unserer Unterhaltung. Wir sollen angelockt werden. Erst danach sollen wir auf Tierrechte aufmerksam gemacht werden. Menschen sind auch nur Tiere. Das wird von PETA immer wieder betont. PETA missachtet ihre eigenen Werte und reduziert die Frau zur Sex-Maschine, zum Unterhaltungs-Objekt unterster Schublade.

Es existieren auch abseits von PETA ausreichend Möglichkeiten sich für den Tierschutz einzusetzen. Aber falls euch die Clips immer noch aufgeilen, dann wichst und fingert wenigstens eine Runde für das Recht von Tieren. Bringen wird das natürlich nichts.

Von Luca Antonio Sagnotti

Vegan Feminist Network

Critical essays and resources for vegan women and their allies

Tag Archives: Sexual Objectification

The Reality of Sex Trafficking in the U.S. and Women-Positive Alternatives to LUSH Cosmetics

PETA Applauds Horrific Maroon 5 Video Glamorizing Violence Against Women

“Booth Babes” Bad for Business & Animal Rights

Does Sex Sell Animal Rights? RESEARCH SAYS NO!

Social Movement Prostitution

Wichsen für den Tierschutz

Follow Vegan Feminist Network