1 Social Movement Criticism and PETA Rhetoric Pamela Anderson, the Canadian-American actress and model is likely the

envy of many women across the nation with her Barbie like figure and long blonde hair, but could her side work as an animal rights activist oppress females in western culture to intolerable extremes? In 2010 the star posed naked for a PETA ad depicting her body as sectioned off and labeled by part looking as though she's been tagged by a butcher. The ad was banned in her homeland of Canada because it was deemed sexist by officials (Cavanagh, 2010). Pamela is not the only female to pose nude in racy ads distributed by PETA, and in researching rhetoric produced by other animal rights groups it becomes apparent that PETAs rhetoric are centralized around a tactic of sexist imagery which has only increased over time. This essay will utilize social movement criticism to analyze two pieces of rhetoric put out by PETA including the organizations first nude ad published in 1991,Id rather go naked than wear fur featuring an iconic female pop-punk band posing naked, and the Pamela Anderson All animals have the same parts ad described above. Three arguments are made in critiquing this rhetoric: (1) in these ads PETAs message is drowned out by sexual representation of women, (2) both ads are problematic because females bodies are presented in a way that reaffirms dominant societal ideologies about gender which conflicts with the progressive message of animal rights, and (3) the female icons posing in these ads are advocates for an other-directed social movement in which they do not view themselves as disposed in society and therefore are able to fight for the other, the animals. Therefore, the two ads by PETA are ineffective because the extreme use of sexual imagery overpowers the main message of animal rights and deters females, a large target audience for the movement, from viewing its rhetoric. First, it is important to have a vivid idea of the two texts under analysis. Before celebrities such as Pamela Anderson choose bare their bodies for PETA, the iconic female pop-

2 punk band The Go-Gos were the first celebrities to propose that they would Rather go naked than wear fur. The five young, white, skinny, and pretty women launched PETAs rather go naked ad campaign in 1991 when they posed together, standing and smiling, nude behind a red banner with the campaigns logo reading Wed Rather Go-Go Naked than Wear Fur. The second text analyzed was the Pamela Anderson ad briefly described above. The ad depicts the 43- year-old Baywatch star smiling and posing in a blue string bikini. Pamelas body parts are sectioned off and marked with labels including breast, rump, and round to resemble a butchers diagram on a non-human animal. The ad is joined by the slogan All Animals Have the Same Parts. With a clear picture of the two PETA advertisements, it is crucial to apply the theory of social movement criticism first on the rather go naked ad to illustrate both how the text exploits women and hinders its message of animal rights through the use of sexist imagery, and how the ad contradicts other progressive messages of gender equality in society. The fur campaign has been a major target of the animal rights movement, and more specifically PETAs rather go naked campaign was launched in the early 1990s using The Go-Gos ad. On the surface the message seems to be that trapping and killing animals for their fur is an immoral and barbaric practice that need be halted. However, the message of the ad is tainted with sexism as the females in the band pose naked, which is used to catch the attention of the audience. Using white, young, beautiful, and iconic females as sexual objects in this ad directly reemphasizes a white, male dominated, heterosexual audience. Although PETA is sincere in its message that killing animals merely for their fur is wrong, the message may have been more affective in the social movement if it would not have employed the tactic sexual imagery in its ad. Using naked women in its advertisement likely deters that exact demographic from viewing their ad or even more important, adapting to the lifestyle change of rejecting fur as clothing. This is problematic

3 because generally one imagines females as being a sole consumer of fur products, and therefore the target audience that PETA should be aiming to influence. PETA instead targeted a male audience with the sexual imagery of the ad who are more inclined to wear another material manufactured through the slaughtering of animals, wool and leather. If the organization was aiming to make a real influence through their rather go naked campaign they should have considered the audience they were aiming to influence in order to make an actual change, and not simply circulate attention getting sexual imagery that likely attracted male viewers who were not major consumers of fur clothing. Since the original ad in the 90s, PETA has put out many more rather go naked advertisements and in raising consciousness about exploitation of animals the organization in turn exploits the women in this ad and others like it. Sexual objectification of women and other issues encompassing gender and equality have been ongoing in society since the early forms of the Womens Liberation Movement of the 1960s and still exist as a major societal movement today. Although PETA does not have feminist goals as its main objective, the organizations animal rights message is very progressive, and therefore considering other movements in popular culture such as gender equality before publishing an ad would likely help the animal rights movement gain traction. For example feminists today give publicity to PETA, but for all of the wrong reasons. Instead of helping the animal rights organization in promoting what PETA stands for, feminists attack the ads and refocus public interest toward topics of sexism, violence toward women, and rape culture found in PETAs rhetoric. It is here that one can see how PETAs message and stance gets completely lost and the publicity becomes centered on how sexist the organization is and not animal rights. PETAs depiction of females in their ads is a form of oppression and promoting oppression of females to fight oppression of animals may not be the most logical tactic in gaining movement considering it works against equal rights, which

4 is home to many progressives of today. In sum, the sexual representation of women used at a tactic in the organizations advertisements is conflicting with the progressive message of animal rights because it reemphasizes dominant societal ideologies about gender which Americans such as feminists are simultaneously fighting for in society. It has been explained above how the campaign rather go naked exploits women and through its sexual imagery of females PETAs main message for animal rights is lost. Now, in further analyzing PETAs rhetoric in the animal rights social movement, it is important to look at Pamela Andersons ad to reiterate the previously established arguments and give insight into why female icons may be willing to objectify their own bodies and succumb to their own gender oppression in posing for PETA naked. To answer this question, one must turn to the social movement criticism as described in the article Championing the Rights of Others and Challenging Evil: The Ego Function in the Rhetoric of Other-Directed Social Movements (Stewart, 1999). In his article, Stewart states that other-directed movements are created, led and populated by mostly those who do not view themselves as disposed and these people are struggling for freedom, equality, justice, and rights of others rather than selves (1999). Therefore, Pamela may not perceive herself as disposed, which is why she was comfortable posing as an animal who has value only because of its parts, which the labels ribs and rump emphasize; whereas, a feminist who realizes societal objectification and exploitation of women on a daily basis would be conscious of her own oppression and fight for her own rights rather than those of the animals. According to this view, Pamela puts her self-interest aside acts through moral responsibility and a sense of duty to animals in a way that may affirm the actresss self-esteem. Being an iconic woman in society, Pamela may not feel the need to climb to the top of the social ladder as females in the self-directed gender equality movement may feel; instead, she likely feels already at the top of social and moral hierarchy and has the time and resources to

5 carry on the fight for animal rights. Pamelas self-identity in the rhetoric of the animal rights movement, like societal status, likely comes through identity with the movements itself and with the PETA organization. Therefore, it could be said that Pamela established an identity along with The Go-Gos in unity for the struggle of animals and self-identity within from being active in the movement at the sacrifice of their own sexual exploitation. Lastly, ego enhancement may be a bi-product or even aim of Pamelas participation in PETAs rhetoric. She and other female icons who pose naked for PETA suffer not only oppressing themselves, but also the organization they represent, PETA, is negatively impacted by insults and anger from feminists groups in response to their sexist imagery. With this suffering comes a sense of pride in the realization that as advocates, they dared to struggle against forces brutalizing animal and sacrifice their dignity for innocent animals. When one who is familiar with popular culture hears the name Pamela Anderson, associations toward the Television show Bay Watch or images from Play Boy magazine likely come to mind. However, the actress also acts as an advocate in the other-directed animal rights movement. Pamela along with The Go-Gos actively chose to ignore or do not believe in their own oppression highlighted by the movement for gender equality, so they can fight against the oppression of animals. It is argued that although their intentions in posing nude for PETA advertisements are to further advocacy for animal rights, in reality PETAs message is drowned out by this sexual representation. Also, females bodies are presented in a way that reaffirms dominant societal ideologies about gender which conflicts with the progressive message of animal rights. Is the sacrificing the rights of one group in order to make the case for the other justifiable?

6 REFLECTION: This essay utilizes social movement criticism as a method of the analysis of the two pieces of rhetoric described. The essential meaning of social movement criticism is to analyze the rhetoric put out by social movements and how they persuade or do not persuade their audiences. This is was the best choice because the animal rights movement is a large social movement that has been ongoing for decades. I was able to analyze rhetoric from the 1990s and today to compare how PETA has been consistently problematic and ineffective in the way they use sexual imagery in their advertisements. They are not persuading women, which is half of the population. They are leaving out a large target audience by choosing to exploit women and not only are they leaving this demographic out, they are actively turning women against their messages. I pull in beliefs of the gender equality movement and how although PETA doesnt have gender equality on their political platform, contradicts the progressive feel of the gender equality movement. Also, I use the article form class, Championing the Rights of Others and Challenging Evil: The Ego Function in the Rhetoric of Other-Directed Social Movements to clearly explain how the movement is classified as an other-directed movement with females as advocates for the weaker animals. This is ironic because females have been known to be toward the bottom of the social latter themselves in society, taking a back seat to men, and yet Pamela and The Go-Gos they References Cavanagh, K. (2010, July 15). Pamela anderson's sexy body-baring peta ad gets banned in canada. New York Daily News. Retrieved from http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/pamela-anderson-sexy-body-baringpeta-ad-banned-canada-article-1.463753 Stewart, C. J. (1999). Championing the rights of others and challenging evil: The ego function in the rhetoric of otherdirected social movements. Southern Communication Journal, 64(2),

7 91-103. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10417949909373125