PETA Un-Happy Meals

http://www.slashfood.com/2009/08/07/peta-unhappy-meals-targeting-kids/3#comments
Kids hoping to grab a Happy Meal from McDonald's might end up with PETA's Unhappy Meal instead.

The animal rights organization lifted its moratorium on the McCruelty Campaign this year and since June has distributed Chicken McCruelty Unhappy Meals to McDonald's customers outside about a dozen restaurants around the country.

"McDonald's markets its food to children by packaging it in brightly colored boxes with toys," Lindsay Rajt, a spokeswoman for PETA, tells Slashfood. "But most kids really love animals, and if they knew that McDonald's suppliers were breaking the wings and legs of gentle animals like chickens, I think that you'd have to drag kids into McDonald's kicking and screaming."

The campaign, though, has parents "hatin' it."

A PETA protest of a McDonald's in Albany, N.Y., upset parents on Thursday, WXXA-TV reports.

"I don't want my son to be around something like this," parent Stephanie Gipson told the station. "This is not fair for a child."

But Rajt says children have seen worse things than PETA's Unhappy Meal, which comes "stained with blood" and containing a bloody rubber chicken, a cutout of a knife-wielding Ronald McDonald, photos of mutilated animals and a Chicken McCruelty T-shirt.

"Kids deserve to be told the truth and we really do need to give them credit," she says. "The bottom line is that they've really seen much worse in movies and videogames, and we all know that kids empathize with animals."

McDonald's told Slashfood that it expects the humane treatment of animals from its suppliers.

Our goal has always been to lead the industry by bringing about improvements in animal welfare including rigorous, ongoing audits of our suppliers' facilities.

"McDonald's works with leading independent animal welfare experts and makes decisions based upon science to promote continuous improvement in animal welfare as part of our broader sustainable supply chain initiatives," Bob Langert, McDonald's vice president of corporate social responsibility, says in a statement to Slashfood.

"McDonald's continues to support our chicken suppliers' use of both controlled atmosphere stunning (CAS) and electrical stunning. There is no conclusive scientific consensus that one practice is better than the other, however, we recognize that in either method, good management practices are critical," he says. "It is also important to note that in the U.S., there are no large-scale chicken producers that currently use the CAS method, therefore demands to purchase chickens from this method to meet McDonald's supply needs are not viable."

PETA says it worked with McDonald's behind the scenes from 2000 to February 2009 before it re-instituted its McCruelty campaign. A PETA protest was expected Friday afternoon at a restaurant in South Burlington, Vt.





+++++++++++++++++
waht do you think? do you think PETA has gone too far? they are against the mistreatment of animals; but does that give them the right to have kids be given things like this to further their own opinions? a lot of children are shielded from violence from a young age; this could definitely give them nightmares or even scar them for life.

Advertisement

Meh, I simply wish PETA wouldn't do stuff like this. It only hurts our cause.

Someone still takes PETA seriously?

Kids should really be educated about how their meat gets on their plates, but yeah...Peta might want to do it in a way that DOESN'T piss everybody off :X

But then they wouldn't get into the news and no one would know nor care about them.

L wrote: But then they wouldn't get into the news and no one would know nor care about them.

True dat. But, as I said earlier, doing stuff like this can do nothing but hurt their cause. I'm sure they can do plenty of other things to get themselves known out there without doing offensive, outrageous things. (Well, outrageous and offensive to some anyway xP)

i think thats a ridiculous measure. whats it doing other than giving peta a bad name?
bring back the ladies in lettuce :] i liked that better

They do make a good point against the protesting mother.
Kids see much worse in videogames.

At least they got attention for the cause, if not a little discredited by the organization.

I'll put it to you this way;
If someone from Peta stopped me outside my local mcdonalds and gave me an un-happy meal, I'd take it. And probably seriously read everything it contains.

This is not to say I would agree or disagree, but you can't do either until you know what your talking about.

The most annoying thing I saw in the whole article was the mother saying "I don't want my son to be around something like this"
I want to stab that mother

Why won't PETA just die already?

BAAWWWWWWWWWWWW YOURE EATING A COW!!!


I am not going to stop eating meat because of some vegetarian/PETA idiots.


PETA needs to be slaughtered.

Ningage wrote: Meh, I simply wish PETA wouldn't do stuff like this. It only hurts our cause.

Justify your cause. I dare you.

MetalSuicide wrote: The most annoying thing I saw in the whole article was the mother saying "I don't want my son to be around something like this"
I want to stab that mother

Condoning the exposure of inconvenient truths unto childrenz? Does that mean children should be allowed and even pressured to watch 2girls1cup? Or what about the subject of rape, politics and the ebola virus?

Look, they're simply looking for sympathy and not valid and concrete god damn arguments. They're forcefully SHOCKING children to be in their side just like how those pro-life people SHOCK people with images of dead babies and shit. It draws out more emotion than thought.

They're eating the McDonalds food, they are not doing anything related to 2girls1cup, they aren't being raped or facing those situations, and they are not infected with the elbola virus
But in the exceptions where they are directly effected they should be told

It's hardly shocking either way

Damnation wrote:

Look, they're simply looking for sympathy and not valid and concrete god damn arguments. They're forcefully SHOCKING children to be in their side just like how those pro-life people SHOCK people with images of dead babies and shit. It draws out more emotion than thought.

True. Emotive arguments are often more effective than logical ones, especially where kids are concerned.

That said, PETA really put in the effort. The meal looks brilliant, I love Ronald as an Pennywise knock off. I'm sure it will cause lots of kids to hate clowns, which is brilliant.

Back to the issue, could someone clarify if PETA are against consuming animals, or just against the unethical treatment of them? Because I could nearly side with them if their main point is to combat torturous treatment of animals (when it's not necessary). But if it's just a smokescreen for making everyone go vegan, than I'm not quite so on board.

MetalSuicide wrote: They're eating the McDonalds food, they are not doing anything related to 2girls1cup, they aren't being raped or facing those situations, and they are not infected with the elbola virus
But in the exceptions where they are directly effected they should be told

It's hardly shocking either way

Point: You think it's ok to expose children with disgusting but truthful things.

I might as well let them see the terrors of war, let naked gay people dance in front of them or how their counterparts work in sweatshops or something. That'll give them the "enlightenment" they need.

Damnation wrote:
Point: You think it's ok to expose children with disgusting but truthful things.

I might as well let them see the terrors of war, let naked gay people dance in front of them or how their counterparts work in sweatshops or something. That'll give them the "enlightenment" they need.

I don't think it should be hidden
What age would you consider it to be appropriate to expose children to these things?
It's not about 'enlightenment', It's just the world