Damn, first I have to be an animal rights abolitionist who explains to people that I hate PETA and pretty much everything they stand for.

Now we have the bull to deal with in the environmental movement?

For millions of years women have used T & A to get what they want — when all else fails, of course.

Aside from this being just totally wrong, what's wrong with using mutual respect and understanding to try to get your point across to people?

And of course there's a mirror set of "Hot Dudes" pictures, because if there were not, they'd be saying that women, you know, as distinct from people, are TEH SEXX. Which would be patriarchal. And since they don't mean that, and they're just pro-sexiness in general, they have very similar Dude-as-ornament products ...

What!? No dudes?

Yikes.

Lame.

Ok, I don't like the ad, I don't approve of using T&A to sell stuff, and I especially hate that the woman is headless and footless, and the only purpose of her hand seems to be erotically stroking the tree...
But I'm not surprised. Women are used to sell cars and Axe. Why not biking to work and taking transit? It's no worse and no better.

I dunno, I find that website rather amusing to be honest.

ok.. I have to say it, as a vegan environmental hippie nut, it DOES get me all hot and bothered when a guy is similar..

BUT!

That is because shared values means I'll more likely find mutual respect aned support in my goals. If he's only acting that way to get chicks, I wouldn't have the respect or support, so that's not really that hot...

I agree. Not only is the presentation problematic, it's lame. Who will change their views on the environment [sincerely] just to allegedly get women?

I agree. Not only is the presentation problematic, it's lame. Who will change their views on the environment [sincerely] just to allegedly get women?

Nice Guysâ„¢. And, when they don't get laid for pretending to care about the environment, it'll still be the evil womenz fault.

Wow. I'm sorry, is this still 1967? Has the feminist movement not happened yet?

This reminds me of the sexist Vietnam protest stickers reading, "Women say yes to guys who say no."

Really disgusting.

What's next?

"Screw misogyny, dudes. It gets you ALL the feminist chicks."

I'm waiting for the day...

How is this any different from Jessica's lovely book cover for Full Frontal Feminism?

Seems like you're throwing stones...

Well, for one, Full Frontal Feminism is about women, so an image of a woman is appropriate. The PETA poster, however, is about trees.

Also, F.F.F. doesn't seem to be promising sex to anyone for behaving a certain way.

ravenfire, I'm so with you. I volunteer for an animal rescue, and I have to explain why I can't stand PETA to many people. Not only because they are insane and actually dont' do anything to help animals in need, but I also hate that they have long used the objectification of the female body to further their cause.

Ugh.

la pobre.... FFF does NOT contain the image of a woman but of a woman's torso and bellybutton. In other words, her body parts. What is different? Peta is advertising bodyparts to sell something. So is Jessica Valenti.

Tell me again what the difference is?

Sadly if Jessica had used the more appropriate head to toe "full frontal" image, it would never have gotten into bookstores.

I'm a lifelong vegetarian and an animal rescue volunteer and am also on the anti-PETA bandwagon. They make all animal lovers look bad with their radical ad campaigns, not to mention they're one of the most hypocritical organizations around.

annika1,

To me, the difference is using sex to sell something. The cover of FFF showed a woman's hip and her curves. IMO, the intention of that was to portray a female and connect that to feminism, not to overly sexualize her. I don't think that an image is immediately sexual just because part of a body is shown, especially since the only body part showing was a hip.

The environmentalist ad is so desperate to sell a political idea with sex. The girl is standing half naked behind a tree, but they make sure her breasts and butt are in plain view. To do this, she is standing in a pretty obnoxious way.

Yes, both show body parts, but which body parts are being shown is very significant. I'm actually surprised you would compare the two images and consider them the same thing.

There is nothing about PETA that is environmentally friendly or hot.

This campaign really annoys me. PETA keeps putting out these ridiculous ad campaigns. I don't know how effective they have been for PETA, but it sure makes me dislike them even more.

Hey, didn't we establish like a month ago that tree-huggers (aka dems and liberals) = uggo? Thank you, PETA, for confusing that image for us.

If the advertising is effective, then I see no reason to change it. I mean, they want young guys to care about the environment, and young guys are too distracted by beautiful women in other ads to pay attention to PSA's. Hot girls sell things. Why not lend their assets to a good cause at least?

I think this Hottentot Venus imagery is racist as well.

The difference is Jessica's FFF does not use a woman's body to promote a product - in other words, the book isn't saying, "Come be a feminist and get laid." But PETA, on the other hand, is using a woman's body for such. That's essentially the difference.

But I am not surprised, PETA has a track record of objectifying women for its purpose. I live about half a mile from its headquarters and run into a lot of its people on campus, and while they're nice people, they clueless as to why we're having a problem with this.

It is my intent, next semester as FMLA president (I took the position!) to work more closely with them on campus, as well as reach out to them at their HQ.

A while ago, I met a PETA woman at a bar who was complimenting my feminist shirt, and in the same sentence, said she's done strip tease and put it on the PETA website to promote animal rights. The message was, "If I can save 30 animals, I don't care if my body is objectified." I turned down the invitation to watch the video.

It's almost like she thinks she's a martyr for doing that. It bothers me, because feminism isn't about just yourself -- it's about how your actions affect other women.

GRRR!

I don't know, I browsed the site a little bit and it seems like they're just being facetious. The girls don't look like your typical anal-bleached airbrushed porn model. In some of the pictures they're wearing silly colored wigs and the poses are goofy. I think it's just a joke. More like they're mocking the whole "sex sells" thing. Peta's ads, on the other hand, are actually trying to use women's bodies to promote their cause.

"The difference is Jessica's FFF does not use a woman's body to promote a product"

You can argue that is does. It is promoting her book which is a product.

" - in other words, the book isn't saying, "Come be a feminist and get laid.""

In FFF, Chapter Two focuses on how feminists have better sex.

How about this:

At worst, you disagree with the cover and think that it was wrong.

In what way is a criticism of FFF's cover at all a justification, defense, or, indeed, anything at all with regards to HotChixDig or Peta's campaigns?

Even if you disagree with the cover to FFF, I think it's a serious stretch to say that the motivation behind it is the same as the motivation behind these ad campaigns. You may not like the cover, but that doesn't make it a good argument against criticizing these campaigns.

I'll be honest--the linked site made me smile. It looks pretty tongue-in-cheek, and I like how the models aren't conventionally beautiful. It's a little tacky, but not nearly on the same level as what PETA does.

This reminds me of the Brazilian thing. I think it is great that the South Americans are getting really agro on environmentalism. I can't really blame that crew for trying to make a sexy ad for environentalism. To them, everything that is good is sexy. It's really funny to hang out with them, either the guys are the girls.

Any of you people been there for carnival? I hear it is pretty remarkable.

Now, to market to me, put a smart looking woman with a face in eco-hiking gear, and thats plenty sexy.

I think the site is pretty funny - if anything I think it's making fun of men (and how easily they can be led), not really derogatory toward women.
After all, men like to look at women. You can claim they "shouldn't" but I'm pretty convinced it's hard wired in and all the "shoulding" in the world isn't going to change that. So considering they like to look at women, they might as well get men to think about the environment at the same time.

seriously. the site is meant to entertain, and at the same time make a point about doing little things to improve your green living. these are women who are using their own sexuality, that they are proud of, and frankly that is as valuable a commodity in this world as intelligence in some cases, to bring attention to an issue they care about.

none of those girls posed because they honestly would put out if a guy bought a reusable coffee mug or used public transportation.

chill out, yo.

Thomas: You're looking for vegporn. Cute vegan boys! Cute veg genderqueers! I was shocked.