You've heard of PETA right? They're the people who count themselves as the world's biggest champions of animal rights and the protection of animals in the world. Now you may be thinking "Oh, I don't go around kicking animals into rivers; PETA's message doesn't sound so bad to me." And you'd be completely justified in thinking that, until you look a little deeper and realise that PETA is one of those organisations that excel in taking things to new, wholly stupider, extremes. They're basically a collection of animal rights activists who don't really understand what the animals they're 'protecting' actually require and how they function, which leads to moronic campaigns like when their people campaigned the shearing of sheep because it "Hurts them!" Even a quick google search could have shown them how actually backwards that logic was, but it's PETA so they don't have to hold personal accountability. They hide behind the anonymity of their shared name to do dumb stuff and face little repercussions; aside from losing all credibility and becoming the butt of every joke, I guess.
But why, oh why, am I bringing up a rights activist group on my blog about Video games? Well you read the title, you know where I'm going with this. Every now and then, when PETA get sick of getting dozens of cats and dogs put down or smashing someone's car with baseball bats (both real incidents, by-the-by) some of their number feel it's safer for them to interact with a world in which their actions don't contradict their very core philosophy. A world in which they can push their ill thought-out beliefs and brain-farts with absolutely zero real world consequences. That's right, PETA comes to the world of video games. And in the throes of quarantine lockdown, PETA found themselves a juicy target to latch onto this April with the release of 'Animal Crossing: New Horizons' (It's got Animal in it! Of course they'd play it.) As such I thought I'd browse through the article on their official website to see what conclusions they've drawn.
Firstly, I will point out that the article is called 'PETA's Vegan guide to Animal Crossing' and so much of the points they made are intended to be viewed in that light. As utterly dumb as some of their points are, within that context they could be seen as technically true. These are stipulations that someone should follow if they intend to roleplay a vegan. (Why anyone would want to do that is totally beyond me, but I won't shame anyone's roleplay time.) First of all, the people at PETA do go out of their way to praise Animal Crossing for it's depiction of animals living alongside humans, before roasting it for not being that, but at least some critical thought went into this article so I'll praise them for that, gratis. After that, however, the headache starts.
No fishing. Obviously. You can't fish if your vegan. That's illegal. Animal Crossing is yet another video game that has included a nice little fishing pastime for players to enjoy and that is clearly against the path of the vegan, because of the many unintended deaths that result of discarded tackle lines. (At least that's the excuse provided in this part of the article) I'm not going to lie, this part did confuse me a little bit. So their issue isn't with the fish that are caught and killed, but those that die unintentionally as a result of discarded tackle? If that's the case then why don't PETA advocate for better etiquette to be instilled into fishermen, rather than a blanket ban on an activity that many do to feed themselves and have done since time immemorial? Is that just not sexy enough for PETA? Is any action more complicated then shouting the word "ban" beyond their ability to process? (Big if true.)
This starts a trend down the article; things that a good Vegan cannot do. (Because it looks like in PETA's eyes Veganism is all about not doing things. Which I guess ain't so far off from the truth now that I think about it.) You can't catch fish and insects using your net! Because in real life animals suffer from captivity in places like... Seaworld and road side zoos? Wait, what does that have to with insects? Neither of those places host insects. (You're mixing your points, PETA!) Don't pick up clams because they can feel pain! And the same goes for Hermit Crabs, you bastards! All of these points revolve around the ideology that 'these aren't objects, they're individuals!' which drives into the conversation of what animal rights should be in comparison to human rights. Now right away I feel like that's an interesting conversation to have, and it would be so if PETA were ever interested in having it. Instead they seem content on the idea that 'All animals are humans and therefore should be left alone', which shows a distinct lack of understand for what human rights are, and a surprising lack of understanding for how many animals exist in today's world. In their defence it is very Utopian, but one usually expects activists to be a little more in touch with the world they want to change.
Next is the section that makes a little more sense; that which the player needs to observe in order to maintain a virtual vegan lifestyle, Such as a diet. As just about everyone knows, one of the key tenants of veganism is about researching all of your food and ensuring you eat nothing which is the byproduct of a living thing. Except, you know; stuff that drops from plants. (They're living things afterall.) But of course picking plants doesn't hurt the trees... but then neither does milking cows... Look, veganism may or may not be another ill thought out venture, but it makes a lot of people feel like their lives are a little worth more than exactly nothing (like all our lives really are) so I'm not going to pick holes in a lifestyle that does that to it's self anyway. (If it makes ya happy, why not?) This section of course also spreads to clothing that they wear, in which they remembered this time to include cotton on the 'safe to wear' side. (At least they learn from their blunders. Sometimes.)
The next one really did get under my skin, however, it really ground my gears. Those apologist ass-hats had the absolute gall to turn around and tell me that the world's most notorious landlord, Tom Nook, should be let off the hook because others of his species have a rough go of things. For the record, Tom Nook is a slave driver who upsells chunks of empty, useless land to dumb kids who don't know any better, only to hook them on debt for the rest of their lives. He is the one true enemy in the Nintendo Cinematic Universe. And yet I should let him off the hook because he's a Tanuki? Should we let Thanos of the hook for wiping out half the universe because he's the last of his kind? At what point does personal responsibility take precedent over the situation? Who does Tom Nook have to kill in order to be arrested?
In conclusion, I have nothing against Vegans (I do have a little against PETA) and I understand what this article is trying to say and do. Reinforcing behaviours through video games and getting people to think about their relationship with animals is certainly a lot more sensible project than some of the other things that PETA have been responsible for over the years. I just think it's funny how seriously they choose to take things in the polite and sensible world of Animal Crossing, as though any decision you make within the confines of that digital space has an effect on the wider world. Also, you have to laugh at them implying that the hints of Isabelle being Vegan means that she is 'living in the only ethical way.' Disregarding the nauseating pretence in that statement, it does show a lack of awareness for the wider culture surrounding Animal Crossing. (If you'd seen the sorts of stuff that Isabelle gets up to with Doom Guy, you might not think she's all that ethical.)
No comments:
Post a Comment