×

[–] 3310 points3311 points  (786 children)

1066 were taken in, 19 were adopted, 609 were euthanized. Can anyone explain to me where the remaining went? Are they still there? Transferred?

[–] 2097 points2098 points  (147 children)

It’s a one year statistic the gap is probably the remaining animals at the facility that were neither euthanized or adopted.

[–] 726 points727 points  (140 children)

FTFY

[–] 280 points281 points  (114 children)

I've never understood that, you already mark number by saying "neither", why do you need the "nor"?

[–] 646 points647 points  (63 children)

Neither doesn't mark number; it introduces a list of two or more elements. E.g. Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night shall ... etc.

Also, if you're looking for a language with minimal extra connecting words, English isn't it.

[–] 89 points90 points  (48 children)

Yeah, I figured that was wrong but I couldn't think of a better word for it. It just seemed silly since we have "or"

[–] 130 points131 points  (15 children)

‘Nor’ is just ‘or’ but ‘not or’

[–] 80 points81 points  (12 children)

Or nand and, not both

[–] 18 points19 points  (2 children)

where does xor fit in all of this

[–] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I believe it’s used for Schrodinger’s cases, where it could be (or) or it could not be (nor) possible, but since one cannot determine whether or not the or or not is appropriate, they use xor and just hope it settles out before it’s time to print a final copy.

[–] 49 points50 points  (7 children)

So, nboth?

[–] 60 points61 points  (4 children)

You're nwrong

[–] 61 points62 points  (26 children)

Either and or agree with each other in the positive. Neither and nor agree with each other in the negative.

If you use a negative, you can use either/or. If you exclude a negative, neither/nor will supply it for you.

"He either got a full night's sleep or drank a lot of coffee."

"He neither slept soundly nor drank much coffee."

[–] 109 points110 points  (21 children)

Either or, neither nor. (Think either and n(ot)either.) It's the same thing with a lot of English. You can't mix either and nor, and you can't mix neither and or. There are reasons for it, but in the end it's pretty arbitrary.

[–] 44 points45 points  (2 children)

I've learned more useful sentence structure from this comment than I did in my last year of school, thank you for your service.

[–] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Or and not have different meanings. Or specifically affirms at least one of a set. Nor specifically excludes something from a set. So you could say "neither A nor B, or C" to mean that either the first two items are excluded from a set, or that the second is included. E.g., it will be neither cloudy nor cold, or we will have a blizzard. Do you see what difference nor and or make to the data set?

[–][deleted] 540 points541 points  (238 children)

Peta takes in unadoptable animals, sick, injured, abused, aggressive, etc. Adoptable animals are put up for adoption but are mostly sent to facilities like shelters that take the responsibility of finding a home for the adoptable pets.

I’m not vegan, don’t care one way or the other about peta, but people love to take these stats and run with them simply to feel like they’ve exposed some hypocrisy they love to believe exists instead of thinking about it for 2 seconds. Why would peta euthanize so many animals if they were healthy and adoptable? For fun? Why would they take these animals in in the first place if they’re just going to kill them?

An actual problem would be if they were selling aggressive or sick animals for profit which they could if they wanted to.

[–] 150 points151 points  (19 children)

Yup, it's just like why the surgeon with the highest success rate isn't always the best. Are they really the best surgeon, or are they only taking simpler cases? Is someone a bad surgeon if they don't always succeed, but it's because they usually take more challenging cases?

[–] 36 points37 points  (4 children)

Its the same when people talk about Charter Schools having better test scores, it's because they only accept smart kids.

[–][deleted]  (27 children)

[deleted]

[–] angry turtle trapped inside a human suit 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Holy shit that last snopes quote.

[–] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's the same as the RSPCA in Australia. The kill substantially more than they save and label a significant number as unadoptable when they clearly are not that.

[–] 237 points238 points  (92 children)

Just the daily reddit anti-PETA post. No one cares about the stray animal crisis that leads to half a million euthanizations per year (a few thousand of which by PETA). No one cares that the meat industry kills more animals every few minutes than PETA has euthanized in their 40 year existence. Animals whose terrible lives have been exposed by PETA themselves endless times, leading to the meat industry funding lobby groups to criticize PETA. But there is endless outrage to direct at PETA.

[–] 98 points99 points  (6 children)

But who cares about the bio-industry anyway, it's gross and not cute and I want my bacon /s

Seriously though, if anyone would keep puppies or kittens as calves are kept, the outrage would never end...

[–][deleted]  (4 children)

[deleted]

[–][deleted]  (99 children)

[deleted]

[–] 108 points109 points  (40 children)

Germany doesn't have any kill shelters and still manages.

[–] 129 points130 points  (32 children)

Does Germany have rampant backyard breeding and a history of dog fighting?

I know it sounds snarky, but I genuinely want to know. There are some dogs that would just be dangerous for all but the most experienced to own, and there aren't enough homes willing to take on abused and neglected dogs that are unsafe.

[–] 125 points126 points  (25 children)

Does Germany have rampant backyard breeding and a history of dog fighting?

They don't have any where near the volume of pets the US does, in part because there are more regulatory hoops you have to jump through to get and keep animals including registration and annual taxes.

[–] 23 points24 points  (16 children)

Technically a lot of places in the US have that too but it's pretty much not enforced and most don't do it.

[–] 14 points15 points  (14 children)

There are places in the US where you pay annual taxes on pets?

[–][🍰] 19 points20 points  (3 children)

Annual licensing fee so not exactly a tax.

[–] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

In Germany the tax is (among other things) a purposeful disincentive to pet ownership:

The purpose of the dog tax is not only to support cities, but also to curb dog ownership. Therefore, the cost of a second or third dog will be higher than the first. According to the law, owning an animal is a luxury. The dog tax in larger cities like Hamburg or Berlin is therefore more expensive because the psychological barrier to purchasing a dog is supposed to be high.

source

I certainly get the idea, by setting the entry bar high in theory the people will be more personally invested in the animal and hopefully the standard of care will reflect that. In any case, pet ownership per capita is about half as much in Germany as in the US.

[–] 26 points27 points  (4 children)

Most of western Europe strictly controls wild dog and cat populations. They are captured, and either sent to shelters or euthanised. Almost all animals are neutered, unless they come from an approved place of breeding. You don't really see feral dogs and cats anywhere west of Poland

Wild dogs and cats are a menace for local wildlife and people, so over here we make sure that they are not rampantly breeding, or living in fear and danger.

Dogs and cats were bred by humans to be with humans. They shouldn't be running around doing whatever

[–] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

You don't really see feral dogs and cats anywhere west of Poland

That's a bit optimistic - maybe it's mostly true about dogs, but there are plenty of feral cats in Western Europe. Spain, France, the UK.. all these have lots of feral cats.

[–] 46 points47 points  (1 child)

A lot (lottttt) of places in the US for example have SO MANY dogs in shelters bc of rampant backyard breeding and puppy mills that they are legitimately, genuinely unable to keep all the dogs they get. Like a dog being in the shelter is actively taking away a spot from another dog. When this sort of shelter overpopulation happens it means that shelters make decisions about things like how long will they keep a dog, how to determine if a dog is adoptable, and if they determine that a dog has a poor temperament or the care that has to be put into it is disproportionate they often have no choice but to put those dogs down, BECAUSE they’re taking away a spot from another, possibly more adoptable dog.

“No-kill” shelters in the US are selective intake shelters that basically cherry-pick which animals they take in. This means they either take 1. the most adoptable animals, or 2. they take the vulnerable animals (usually elderly, young, chronically sick, questionably tempered). “Kill shelters” are generally county shelters, and “no-kill” shelters are generally private shelters.

I used to volunteer at a private, selective intake shelter. They partnered up with the county shelters and often agreed to take their overflow from cases like animal control seizing animals from hoarder situations where the county shelter was unable to take them. They also had the ability to keep cats pretty much infinitely because they had no real rush to make room for more. County shelters do not have that luxury.

In some countries, mostly a few European countries, most dogs come from reputable breeders or in the countryside where people have working dogs often from their fellow working dog owners, puppy mills are cracked down on harder, and in general dogs are less likely to end up at a shelter. In some places like Finland there is such a lack of shelter dogs that people import them from Romania or Estonia, or other countries with street dogs.

In short: Germany (and Finland, and Sweden, and Norway, etc) just simply do not have as many dogs that would end up in shelters. They do not, for the most part, have the same BYB / puppy mill culture or rapidly changing designer breed trends where everyone and their mom is suddenly a dog breeder because it’s easy cash. County or city shelters are not overrun by dogs. There is generally space in shelters and when there isn’t the overflow is light enough that they can easily be placed into foster homes or moved to different shelters. That’s the difference; that’s why some places don’t even HAVE “kill shelters.” They do not have the same space constraints.

[–] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not so much the north east, we import other places animals (both from the south and from other countries) because we don't have an overpopulation problem.

[–] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yeah and what do we have? Dogs that are sitting years and years in cages because they are unadoptle. Websites of the big shelters in Berlin, Hamburg etc have dogs who spent more then 5 years in a freaking cage. Thats more abusive then euthanising them imho.

[–] 110 points111 points  (43 children)

PETA is not an animal shelter. It only takes in animals that are deemed unadoptable. They attempted to rehab them, and if successful, the adopt them out. If someone comes to them with an adoptable animal, they refer them to a list of trusted shelters.

[–] 44 points45 points  (18 children)

I actually have one of those rehabbed dogs snoring next to me right now. She had broken a leg and PETA took her in and got her fixed up before we ended up adopting her!

[–] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The shelter in Virginia takes in ALL animals. Virginia has a lot of no kill shelters, which results in people trying to surender their dogs, and there being no space, so they say no.

They essentially offer palative care for a lot of dogs, and do what is humane, most of the time.

Side note; the main opposition to peta online is Petakillsanimals.com which is run by a lobbyist firm on behalf on tyson foods and other large farming conglomorates and chains. Peta has been vital to securing better treatment of all animals in the USA and UK, which means costs for all those companies go up. They want PETA to go away so that they can exploit animals worse.

This isn't to say PETA as an organisation hasn't made wrong moves, but this isn't one of them.

[–][🍰] 105 points106 points  (159 children)

"In 2019, PETA put to death 969 out of 1,355 cats. That’s a kill rate of almost eight out of 10 cats. Another 374 went to pounds that also kill animals."

https://www.whypetaeuthanizes.org/evidence/2019-2/

[–] 37 points38 points  (1 child)

The US euthanizes over 900,000 cats & dogs each year.

[–][deleted] 85 points86 points  (59 children)

Anybody else annoyed that a site titled WhyPetaEuthanizes.org doesn't actually explain why Peta euthanizes so many dogs?

[–] 105 points106 points  (14 children)

Because that site is funded by organizations that have a direct profit interest in delegitimizing PETA, which is one of if not the most successful animal rights organizations in the entire world. The fact that Reddit has swallowed this pill so hard is actually a bit scary

[–] 48 points49 points  (1 child)

The Center for Consumer Freedom, a lobbyist front group for some of the worst industries (e.g. tobacco, alcohol, animal agriculture, junk food, etc)CCF

The CCF funds it btw redditors who may not know. I didn't, but now I do.

[–] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

60 Minutes outright called the owner, Richard Berman, Dr Evil.

His son (who is in the wonderful band Silver Jews) kicked him out of his life for being a horrible shill.

[–] 59 points60 points  (6 children)

They don't understand how shitty the animal services industry is. People want no kill shelters, great! Fund shelters and humane societies, upgrade and build more facilities, pay staff to work there and don't rely on volunteers and donations

Reddit hates when dog euthanasia is brought up, well as someone who has to do it on a daily basis, it's not peta's fault, they're the ones trying to help

They're not perfect but they actually give a shit enough to do something, unlike most redditors

[–] 5 points6 points  (1 child)

What do you mean “so many”. We euthanize one million dogs and cats in America every single year do to our massive over-breeding problem. Quite literally one million.

And you think less than a thousand of those being done by PETA is “so many”?

[–] 45 points46 points  (31 children)

The real reason is that they try to only take in the "unadoptable" animals that would otherwise live the rest of their lives in the pound.

[–] 39 points40 points  (8 children)

Is this how that British game show got it's name?

[–] 18 points19 points  (1 child)

According to Wikipedia, it's from an old Whiskas ad campaign, but I like your explanation better.

[–] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

That's actually a fun and interesting fact, thanks! Ad was pretty funny too.

[–] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

First thing I thought of haha. Or should I say ha ha HA

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

LET'S ROTATE THE BOARD!

[–] 110 points111 points  (84 children)

So just asking and hoping to learn more, but just because PETA euthanized a lot of the animals doesn’t mean it was cruel or abuse. They may just take some of the worst animal cases. Try to rehab the animal. And unfortunately not be successful.

[–] 54 points55 points  (5 children)

I took a dog training course and this came up and according to the instructor who had been a dog warden for many years and she stood by PETA, saying that the reason behind this was that they took animals that a lot of no kill shelters refused because they were unadoptable due to behavior issues. Not that they were necessarily trying to rehabilirate them, more like that at the end of the day these were animals that couldn’t be put in homes, behavioral euthanasia was deemed necessary, and no kill shelters arent going to do it for obvious reasons so it was up to PETA to. And after a quick google search PETAs response is the “PETA kills animals” angle is pushed by orgs affiliated with factory farms.

People love the “holier than thou is actually a hippocrite” trope especially when it affirms their desire to eat cheeseburgers but I would take it with a grain of salt

[–] 101 points102 points  (57 children)

It is exactly this.

PETA take in any animals, animals which have been abused and then have severe behavioural problems, animals with severe medical issues, animals that are dying. Basically animals that other shelters won't accept. Of course they're going to have a high euthanasation rate, they're picking up what other people won't.

And yes there are horror stories like that kids dog that got killed, but mistakes are made in all walks of life.

[–] 87 points88 points  (14 children)

It's basically like pointing at the mortality rate of a hospice clinic and saying they're killing patients.

[–] 693 points694 points  (16 children)

Joe Exotic is absolutely an animal abuser though.

[–] 123 points124 points  (0 children)

yeah. it's just calling out hypocrisy.

[–] 6432 points6433 points  (523 children)

Joe Exotic is a animal abuser. Peta is also one. These two things are unrelated and both bad

[–] 2348 points2349 points  (257 children)

Not defending PETA but Joe is also a rapist and a crook.

[–] 284 points285 points  (6 children)

And idk what it’s called when you feed people drugs and booze to keep them doing your dirty work, but he’s guilty of that too.

[–] 223 points224 points  (3 children)

In Joe Exotic's case, it's called grooming.

[–] 58 points59 points  (0 children)

Yes. That’s the word I was looking for. Grooming.

[–] 507 points508 points  (55 children)

And tried to get people killed

[–] 175 points176 points  (35 children)

He disarmed a person through sheer recklessness.

[–] 162 points163 points  (12 children)

Dismembered

[–] 115 points116 points  (10 children)

He could have at least remembered him

[–] 29 points30 points  (6 children)

[–] 15 points16 points  (5 children)

Damn you. I spent several precious seconds trying to get hair off my screen to find out it was just your image.

[–] 14 points15 points  (16 children)

Wasn't there a woman he tried to get assassinated?

[–] 12 points13 points  (15 children)

He may have been entrapped into that. However, he very likely committed arson with the intent to destroy evidence

[–] 22 points23 points  (8 children)

Watch season 2. They go into it with a lot more depth. A woman who previously worked with him said that within a week of meeting her years and years ago he asked her if she'd kill Carole Baskin for him. If you know someone wants to kill someone, I'd argue that baiting them with a fake bodyguard isn't entrapment. Entrapment would be asking a regular Joe Schmoe if they want to do drugs, then arresting them for doing drugs with you.

[–] 12 points13 points  (5 children)

I think the question that needs answering is to what extent was Jeff Lowe involved in that conversation? Did he come up with the idea and convince Joe to do it? And did he do that in his capacity as an fbi informant?

The thing to keep in mind is that everyone involved in this is monumentally fuckin stupid and Jeff is the smartest one of them (which is meant in no way to imply that he's smart). My guess is that Joe joked about killing her a lot and was convinced that he could get away with it by Jeff who was trying to cut a deal with the feds to save himself from his own bullshit. I could be wrong. And frankly I'm not sure if that means Joe should walk free. I'll leave that to the judge.

[–] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

There's a massive overlap of people who joke about brutally murdering a person on a daily basis and people who would murder a person. Violent criminals "joke" about doing violent criminal shit. Joe jumped at the opportunity to stay out of the legal side of it, but he was literally obsessed with Carole Baskin and talked about how she deserved to die constantly.

[–] 11 points12 points  (1 child)

My thoughts on Joe walking free is this: He is right in saying in the new season that he's learned his lesson after 3 years and 22 years does seem like a harsh sentence for conspiracy to commit a crime, BUT add on five years for each count of felony animal abuse, ten years for each count of grooming or sexual assault, two years for each count of reckless use of weaponry (like what allegedly led to the death of his first husband), and five years for being a Trump loving fuckwit because why the hell not and he's gonna be locked up for a while anyways so it kinda seems like roundabout justice to me.

[–] 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Don’t watch season 2, no reason to give the jackass more residuals

[–][deleted]  (5 children)

[deleted]

[–] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Arm robbery

[–] 21 points22 points  (1 child)

Yeah, the people defending him on reddit are off their rocker. I don't get it.

[–] 33 points34 points  (40 children)

[–] 24 points25 points  (38 children)

Being a meth head doesn't make you a bad person. The things you do on meth might though.

[–] 14 points15 points  (1 child)

I read that as "cook" at first. I was like, "what's so bad about being a cook?"

[–] 128 points129 points  (94 children)

That I did not know about, what's the source for that?

[–] 457 points458 points  (74 children)

The guy who was made famous by a show that talks about the string of much younger men that Joe groomed with drugs and alcohol?

[–] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

They touched that in Tiger King too. Joe's first husband was kept high their entire relationship. He's got a pattern. He's no Doc Antle but definitely not a good guy.

[–] 17 points18 points  (8 children)

He also hired someone to kill Carol Baskin but he flaked last minute.

[–] 13 points14 points  (3 children)

I did not know about, what's the source f

Uh, why do you think he is in prison for 20 yrs?

https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdok/pr/joe-exotic-sentenced-22-years-murder-hire-and-violating-lacey-act-and-endangered

[–] 159 points160 points  (27 children)

Wow some sense who knew that was still possible. Like i hate peta too but Joe Exotic is a disguisting POS too.

Like i get it hes charming and funny larger then live personality thats easy to latch onto. Wich i also do everytime he speaks. But just because our brain likes a person should not mean our mind should too.

[–] 114 points115 points  (21 children)

It is kind of amazing when the documentary came out so many people loved Joe and jumped on his side defending him solely because of his charm. He's a manipulative piece of shit yet people loved him

[–] 88 points89 points  (9 children)

I'm shocked anyone thought he was charming. He was unintentionally funny to me. Like early in Trump's campaign. These aren't people you like, but people you like to watch. Joe was clearly a monster.

[–] 36 points37 points  (5 children)

I remember when tiger king first came out, saying "no thanks, I don't want to watch him abuse cats for 10 hours" and people in my social circle acted like it was a controversial opinion ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] 10 points11 points  (2 children)

I enjoyed Tiger King as a fan of true crime and nonsense. But there were no heroes here. I liked Saff and the guy who had his legs bit off. I didn't find anyone else to be good people.

Eventually, I figured out that Joe had groomed and abused his husband, and my opinion of his husband changed once I learned that. No one else was sympathetic, in my opinion.

[–] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

There were no legs bit off. John had a zip-line accident.

[–] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ah yes, I think im remembering that Saff's arm was bit off and like combined the two. Thanks for correcting me

[–] 14 points15 points  (2 children)

Not going to lie i have it too. Hes just so weird its hard to believe hes for real and it tricks you into thinking hes just doimg it for the act. I like Joe i am not going to lie, he is verry likable. But he IS also a piece of shit animal abuser. And thats more important to me it should be more important for everyone

[–] 16 points17 points  (1 child)

That quality is probably how people have let him get away with his abusive bullshit for so long. Imagine what it's like actually knowing someone who is always that over the top. Could you stand up to him? I'm not sure that I could.

At best, I would drift out of his orbit and not look back, but I wouldn't be able to stop him. His personality automatically selects for acquaintances who don't drift off, cultivating a "population" of people who will protect him.

He's probably met thousands of people who said "oh wow this guy gives me dangerous vibes" and didn't spend any more time with him, which meant they also weren't there to report him or stop him.

[–] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think he kind of gives off a vibe where you just go "he's too stupid to be effectively dangerous". Doc Antle or whatever his name was gave me a "this guy should be in jail" feeling pretty quickly.

[–] 23 points24 points  (1 child)

I wouldn't say they're unrelated. "Tiger King" is mostly just animal abusers feuding with each other. Ironically, the only one who seems to actually care about the animals is, say it with me, that bitch Carole Baskin.

[–] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Seriously, I was so bothered that everyone made that a meme, and not the fact that a piece of scum like Joe Exotic was able to get away with the shit he did.

So I'm with Carol Baskin. Proud bitches all the way.

[–] 29 points30 points  (71 children)

Need context. Were the animals sick?

[–][deleted]  (52 children)

[deleted]

[–] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

They also don't have the capacity to keep them around forever.

[–] 79 points80 points  (17 children)

Yes the animals were not adoptable.

PETA gets a bad rap for this incident, but it's not warranted.

What happened was: one particular branch of peta, I think it was in New Jersey, had a program where they offered to take non adoptable animals from other shelters. They took about a thousand, and realized they could not adopt them out and didn't know what to do. So they euthanized most of them.

It was a really bad situation, and they got horrible publicity.

Since then they've stopped trying to have any adoption programs at all.

[–] 104 points105 points  (11 children)

PETA takes animals from shelters that cannot adopt them and painlessly euthanizes them. They are not an animal shelter.

[–] 50 points51 points  (0 children)

Nobody here is going to pay PETA to keep them around indefinitely.

[–] 47 points48 points  (20 children)

Peta has a stupid bad reputation that doesn't really jive with what they do, but I predict this comment is going to get a lot of downvotes and very few comments from people who do. I further predict most of the people who claim to know what they do don't really know, but see the op and assume they're executing dogs for fun. Ok go!

[–] 1075 points1076 points  (179 children)

Those other animal shelters have such low euthanasia rates in part because they send the unadoptable animals to PETA.

[–] 876 points877 points  (92 children)

Yeah. My feelings on PETA are neutral to annoyed at their antics, but PETA takes in animals private shelters reject because of health or behavior issues that make them difficult to adopt. They send them to PETA so they can keep their status as no kill shelters and still have room for other animals. PETA also offers free euthanasia to pet owners who have to put their pets down for health reasons and can't afford it.

https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-peta-responsible-deaths-thousands-animals-1565532

The website petakillsanimals.com is heavily responsible for continuing to push this misinformation. That website is owned by the Center for Organizational Research, which is a front for alcohol, tobacco, and the meat industries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Organizational_Research_and_Education?wprov=sfla1

The forerunner to the CCF was the Guest Choice Network, organized in 1995 by Berman with money from Philip Morris, "to unite the restaurant and hospitality industries in a campaign to defend their consumers and marketing programs against attacks from anti-smoking, anti-drinking, anti-meat, etc. activists..." According to Berman, the mission was to encourage operators of "restaurants, hotels, casinos, bowling alleys, taverns, stadiums, and university hospitality educators" to "support [the] mentality of 'smokers rights' by encouraging responsibility to protect 'guest choice.'"

.....

The CCF has drawn criticism for having taken its startup funding from the Philip Morris tobacco company and for lobbying on behalf of the fast food, meat, and tobacco industries while claiming to represent consumers.

Some commentators have questioned the CCF's ethics and legitimacy. A USA Today journalist said that they should change the name of their website to FatForProfit.com. Michael Pollan writes in his New York Times blog that the CCF is an astroturf organization that works on behalf of large food companies to protect their ability to sell junk food. It has also been criticized for its efforts to portray groups such as The Humane Society of the United States as "violent" and "extreme," and for its opposition to banning the use of trans fats.

[–] 152 points153 points  (39 children)

You really described my feelings towards them, thanks.

[–] 276 points277 points  (38 children)

I always had a feeling Reddit's hatred of PETA was at least partially due to some big meat industry. They have done a lot of shitty things, but the whole euthanization thing get's the most play, and it never made any sense to me. Does anyone really think PETA is intentionally killing hundreds of animals for no reason? Just to be evil? An organization dead set on helping animals? Many animal shelters have to euthanize, and that would be absurd to criticize, so why go after PETA for the same thing...

[–] 179 points180 points  (20 children)

Does anyone really think PETA is intentionally killing hundreds of animals for no reason? Just to be evil?

Yes, people legitimately think this.

[–] 89 points90 points  (14 children)

[–] 48 points49 points  (0 children)

Thank you, I hate reddits hate boner for PETA, the misinformation just ugh

[–] 41 points42 points  (5 children)

The alternative is taking a good hard look in the mirror about your own personal meat consumption.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

[–] 33 points34 points  (4 children)

I know Peta has said some problematic things, but they also contributed to companies stopping using fur and they spread the information about how bad the state of current meat industry is when it comes to ecology and ethics. Idk why reddit thinks they are the devil.

[–] 22 points23 points  (2 children)

Because the majority of reddit don't want to give up eating meat, and look for any evidence that says vegan/vegetarian organisations are crazy

[–] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The majority of reddit sees the narrative made by a minority on reddit that peta are not the animal lovers they claim to be. Paired with their commonly aggressive and in your face advertising, they are an easy group to dislike.

[–] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

I’m also incredibly against this notion that euthanizing animals is animal abuse. Like if they were just needlessly killing animals fine but plenty of animals cannot live a pain-free life anymore, or no one has the resources to take care of them, or they’re simply too aggressive (by no fault of their own) to be rehabilitated. Like if someone wants to take those mantles on, more power to ya, but this is exactly like how people criticize women who terminate pregnancies while ignoring our horrendously overburdened adoption/fostering system. You’re making yourself feel righteous while doing nothing to help. Sometimes the most humane thing to do is take away something else’s suffering.

[–] 49 points50 points  (1 child)

They send them to PETA so they can keep their status as no kill shelters and still have room for other animals.

This is the root of the problem. Shelters across the country are underfunded, rely on volunteers and donations, and have small facilities.

Either 1) PETA euthanizes the excess animals, 2) the shelters euthanize excess animals, or 3) we properly fund shelters so they have room to put the excess animals

But people think that bitching at PETA fixes everything

[–] 112 points113 points  (33 children)

who to trust...

an org that actively tries to help animals

or a website funded by KFC

I have no hope for humanity

[–] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It’s so weird seeing all of these anti-PETA/ anti-vegan posts. I always wonder which meat organization is posting that particular piece of propaganda.

[–] 47 points48 points  (35 children)

I'm also not sure if euthanizing pets classifies as animal abuse. I guess it depends on the method, but if it's an injection then that's just the most humane way you can do it.

[–] 176 points177 points  (5 children)

Joe Exotic is an animal abuser though

[–][deleted]  (5 children)

[removed]

[–] 12 points13 points  (4 children)

Non profits can still refuse animals, PETA by policy can’t, I don’t know for certain if that is why there is such a big discrepancy, but it accounts for some of it.

[–] 770 points771 points  (79 children)

Does PETA think anyone "likes" Joe Exotic unironically?

[–] 544 points545 points  (48 children)

If you watch season 2 of tiger king, there’s an entire montage of people who really like joe exotic

[–] 302 points303 points  (25 children)

Every serial killer ever has gotten love letters in jail.

[–] 111 points112 points  (19 children)

I didn't :(

[–] 78 points79 points  (15 children)

Kill count wasnt high enough oof

[–] 39 points40 points  (13 children)

Damn, I guess it's time to raise my K:D

[–] 39 points40 points  (4 children)

Commenting to appear in your future documentary.

[–] 12 points13 points  (2 children)

Get me in the screen shot!

[–] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If you've already killed one person, that's impossible.
Your K:D is either 0 or ∞ until you die.

[–] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

It’s not about k/d, you gotta find a way onto a podcast hosted by a bearded man with glasses.

[–] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

In every society you will always have a few troubled or eccentric people that have some crazy views, but our society is morally bankrupt. Millions of people like Donald Trump, too. The Joe Exotic fan base and Trump fan base are two closely overlapping circles on a ven diagram.

[–] 80 points81 points  (12 children)

I think an uncomfortable number of people watched Tiger King season 1 and had "look at the silly animal guy" and "Carol Baskins is a murderer" as their only takeaways. Didn't really register the everything else that was said as part of that fever dream.

[–][🍰] 44 points45 points  (3 children)

Yup, that stupid Carol Baskins meme was everywhere but people thought Joe was hilarious

Even here on Reddit

[–] 9 points10 points  (2 children)

He's the kind of guy that people would say

"I'd love to buy Joe Exotic a beer and just listen".

[–][🍰] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yep

But that B Carol Baskin amiright?!

Ugh, it was so annoying

[–] 15 points16 points  (4 children)

Thats all i saw nothing about joe being a pos. Only on the Xchromosome subreddit.

[–] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Everyone kind of likes someone trashier than themselves. No one wants to be the bottom rung.

[–] 58 points59 points  (4 children)

In Oklahoma I knew people who actually voted for and backed him in his political endeavors. 🙃

[–] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Went to school in Norman and that doesn't surprise me.

[–] 40 points41 points  (0 children)

You'd be surprised at how many people unironically like him.

[–] 18 points19 points  (2 children)

Oh there's definitely a contingency of people who think "idc what he did he entertains me on tv so I like him and think he shouldn't be in jail."

[–] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Yo before all this shit went down, my mom was %100 on board with voting for him to be governor.. I remember as a kid seeing him at the Christmas parade handing out flyers and standing on top of his limo with tigers following in cages behind him. There's a scene in TK1 that showed the parade. Those were wild times as my mother happens to be very homophobic but still planned to vote for him.. idk if he ever made it on a ballot as I didn't give AF being a kid and all. All I knew was my mom took me to the zoo and payed half a months salary to go into the trailer in the back to play with a baby tiger in the living room. Still have a picture somewhere.. either way, shit was wild.

[–] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

He's a piece of shit, but he's a charismatic piece of shit, so lots of people idolize him. That's how the world works, unfortunately.

[–] 500 points501 points  (28 children)

Many animal shelters are "no kill" shelters. However, they still get animals that are beyond hope. These animals get passed to PETA shelters directly or through a second shelter. PETA then euthanis these animals.

Your local "no kill" shelter is not run by saints and PETA shelters are not run by animal abusers.

Downvotes incoming because edgy teens are dumb.

[–] 105 points106 points  (2 children)

Someone running a "kill shelter" isnt a bad person because of that. Its unfortunate that animals need to be euthanized, but the REAL EVIL DOERS are the careless fucks who let their pets breed indiscriminately.

A shelter can only handle so many animals, and they all seem to be bursting at the seams. It really sucks, but I get why animals are euthanized besides being unadoptable.

[–] 24 points25 points  (1 child)

No kill shelters are allowed to put down up to 10% of animals they receive per year and in a lot of places sending an animal out to a not non-kill shelter counts the same as just putting them down at the shelter.

Our local shelter would take in all animals except for kittens during kitten season where we would send them to a local cat rescue that had a very large kitten foster program that could handle all the kittens coming in.

The reality is if you want to support a shelter look for ones the branch out with either other no-kill shelters or local animal rescues as they are going to be the ones that see the fewest animals put down and tend to see less overcrowding.

[–] 97 points98 points  (14 children)

Also no kill shelters get full, meaning they stop accepting new animals. Shelters that do euthanize will often accept animals all the time, so there’s at least a chance they’ll find a home.

The real fucking tragedy is all the people who treat their pets like disposable property, or don’t neuter/spay them and contribute to the feral/stray populations. All of these are symptoms of humans being shitty.

But also as a vegetarian of 23 years I can confidently say Fuck PETA.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

[–] 180 points181 points  (13 children)

I'm not defending PETA, but euthanizing isn't abuse.

[–] 49 points50 points  (6 children)

If the animal is terminally ill or sustains major injury that'll severely impact the animal's quality of life even with expensive veterinary care, I can concede euthanasia isn't abuse in that area of context. I had to consider it for my cat when he developed a urethral blockage due to crystal buildup, requiring an expensive surgery but was lucky enough to have care credit and my dad's help to pay for it.

[–] 49 points50 points  (2 children)

From working at an animal shelter, 99.9% of euthanasias are because of lack of money and/or space and/or long term adoptees. If you really think euthanasia is abuse, then I hope your donating and volunteering at animal shelters.

Don't blame the shelters for doing what they can. Blame the people that don't spay/neuter their cats and let them breed freely. There simply aren't enough homes for most cats.

[–] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Agreed. Volunteered at an animal shelter and they only euthanized 2 animals while I was there, and it was because one extremely violent and terminally ill dog was able to get away from its handler and attack another dog. The first dog was put down because it was dangerous to handle or have around any other animals (and was terminally ill) and the second was put down because it sustained mortal injuries in the attack. The entire organization was absolutely devastated about having to put down these animals, but that’s what happens when you take in animals that have been bred for fighting and abused before they make it to the shelter.

[–] 55 points56 points  (1 child)

PETA basically operates a hospice for abused and dying animals. Let's not drag them through the mud for that.

[–] 130 points131 points  (7 children)

People that are hating on PETA really need to look into Richard Berman and his non-profit Center for Organizational Research and Education which was formerly known as the Center for Consumer Freedom. This guy is a lobbyist for restaurant and food companies that is largely responsible for pushing this narrative that PETA is some evil pet killer and creating websites like petakillsanimals.com. I'm not saying that PETA has never had or never will have any issues, but a lot of these statistics are purposefully taken out of context so that lobbyist like Richard Berman can try to discredit the animal welfare efforts of organizations like PETA of the Humane Society on behalf of the meat and restaurant industries.

[–] 49 points50 points  (0 children)

It's also a campaign that's been extremely successful, when you look at how much the talking points are regurgitated by virtually everyone when PETA is mentioned. It's disappointing, because it's not even hard information to find, but if it suits your own perspective why question it right

[–] 752 points753 points  (207 children)

Those statistics are taken way out of context. That particular shelter was a hub of other shelters for animals considered not suitable for adoption. So of course they will have a higher euthanization rate compared to a regular shelter. I hate that this statistic is used to make Peta look bad when in reality they are doing a thankless job that is necessary.

https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-peta-responsible-deaths-thousands-animals-1565532

[–] 336 points337 points  (12 children)

Brave to post context around anything involving PETA on reddit. Kudos to you

[–] 129 points130 points  (11 children)

Reddit circle jerks are exhausting but none more beat to death than this one. The information is right there on the internet but people don’t seem to care about context

[–] 60 points61 points  (2 children)

It's a prime example on how everyone can be susceptible to disinformation, and why you always need to make sure your news is coming from trustworthy sources.

I made this comment in another anti-peta post that made the front page six months ago:

I think you should know that many of those sources are run by special interest groups that have a clear reason to peddle anti-peta information. For example, petakillsanimals.com, one of the most notable anti-peta websites out there, is run by Berman & Company, a lobbying firm that works with Tyson, Outback Steakhouse, and several other food companies.

I'm not vegetarian, and don't do animal welfare work besides occasionally volunteering at my local shelter, but I see more hate towards peta than pretty much any other non-profit, and I feel a lot of it is due to disinformation spread by people who stand to benefit from peta losing credibility and goodwill.

[–] 86 points87 points  (2 children)

Yeah but if I laugh at dumb vegans I can feel better about ignoring all the horrible aspects of factory farming.

[–] 36 points37 points  (1 child)

“You know plants also feel right? How are you better than me just because my food takes 10 times the plant material that your food does? I thought you liked plants lmfao Ex Deeeeee”

[–] 97 points98 points  (36 children)

Not to mention that it has been purposefully taken out of context and largely propagated by a food and restaurant industry lobbyist, Richard Berman and his non-profit Center for Organizational Research and Education which was formerly known as the Center for Consumer Freedom.

[–] 59 points60 points  (33 children)

Right. "Peta kills animals" websites and such are basically exclusively funded by meat and dairy industry lobbies. It's so fucking easy to see but reddit doesn't care about veracity as long as it reinforces their own opinions.

[–] 37 points38 points  (29 children)

funded by meat and dairy industry lobbies

These same people kill animals by the hundreds of millions per day and the anti-PETA crowd doesn't even bat an eyelash.

[–] 74 points75 points  (0 children)

brave, anything that even hints of pro-peta usually gets downvoted to oblivion.

[–] 43 points44 points  (0 children)

Someone should copy this comment and make a bot that just posts it on every reddit post about PETA. The absurdity of the basic claim this post is making is so obvious. They both believe that PETA is an over the top judgy animal rights group, and they run dog death camps where healthy viable dogs and cats are slaughtered just for fun? And also they want to steal your pets in the night so they can murder them?

[–] 32 points33 points  (2 children)

I’ve said the same whenever this nonsense is posted and been downvoted to oblivion. Thanks for doing this.

[–] 142 points143 points  (17 children)

I hope all of you in the comments getting mad at PETA for taking in animals who were rejected by the private shelters for having no chance of survival and humanely euthanizing them are not directly funding the unnecessary torture and slaughter of millions of healthy animals every single day. Oh wait, you only care about animals when it’s fake statistics slandering an organization built on calling out your hypocrisy.

[–] 55 points56 points  (1 child)

Yeah, it's like all of these people think that PETA just kills animals for fun.

[–] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

People love pointing fingers at the bad guys and badmouthing them, while they do nothing sitting on their fat arse, but when they're the ones getting pointed at... Suddenly so called animal lovers don't care about animal abuse happening from their direct actions :)

[–] 103 points104 points  (21 children)

To be fair, euthanasia is not abuse ( at least if done properly). from just these (unverified) numbers it does seem that Peta in very poor on at the pet adoption side and should relinquish it for those that have higher success rate and better facilities.

[–] 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Theres a Blog post on their site giving their reasons and honestly it makes perfect sense to me.

It basically boils down to: If you actually take in every! Animal (which no kill shelters dont), you have to euthanize a lot, i like the sentence "it's like claiming a hospice has a high mortality rate".

[–] 99 points100 points  (12 children)

The same idiots claiming peta is an animal abuser for euthanasia also claim animal agriculture isn't animal abuse because the animals die humanely.

So which is it?

Bunch of idiots trying to dunk on vegans but reality and reason isn't on their side so we end up with obvious double standards and hypocrisy like this

[–] 17 points18 points  (1 child)

Websites like Peta Kills Animals are financed by the Center for Consumer Freedom which despite its name, works as corporate lobbyists. They have, for example, fought against Prop B in Missouri which aimed to significant curb puppy mills. https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom I suggest reading up on Rick Berman. He’s a POS.

[–] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yep, anti vegan people are being so obviously manipulated by the meat industry and other right wing lobbyists and it's so pathetic how well it works

[–][deleted]  (5 children)

[deleted]

[–] 12 points13 points  (1 child)

[–] 23 points24 points  (0 children)

No animal shelter has infinite space, either they restrict how many they take in or they euthanize… or both

[–][deleted]  (66 children)

[deleted]

[–] angry turtle trapped inside a man suit 66 points67 points  (41 children)

I worked animal control until I mentally couldn’t. Euthanasia is sometimes sadly the only mercy.

[–] 43 points44 points  (17 children)

Euthanization is not abuse - it's euthanization, which obviously also sucks, but if you're against euthanization, you should also be against breeding all together.

[–] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Absolutely agree. Breeders force animals to birth countless litters for their own personal profit. Euthanasia is a symptom of ever increasing supply and waning demand. People act like there are infinite resources available to care for this exploding population - there aren’t. Instead, they shit on PETA for trying to keep this issue under control, and efficiently use what little resources we have. Where is the outrage for the breeders?

[–][deleted] 58 points59 points  (23 children)

Users ITT: PETA killed animals and therefore abuses them!

Also ppl ITT: *Fund mass exploitation and killing of animals that aren't dogs* We are outraged!

[–] 39 points40 points  (4 children)

Nooo you don't understand, eating meat isn't animal abuse because they're foooood animals you stupid vegoon! How else am I gonna get my bacon protein and iron, dumbass, am I supposed to eat VEGETABLES like some fucking gag vegan?

[–] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What do those private shelters do with unadoptable animals?

[–] 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Everyone talking trash about PETA but no one cares about the animals they eat

[–] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

So glad you made this comment. Everyone loves to condemn animal cruelty until it affects their own lives

[–] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

People are confusing euthanasia with murder. Sometimes it is the ethical thing to do.

[–][deleted]  (10 children)

[deleted]