Is PETA Right To Target Video Games?

PETA has become rather adept at drumming up publicity for its cause. The self-proclaimed 'press sluts' routinely attack video games for encouraging animal cruelty. But do they have a valid point?

Animal cruelty is wrong. Only a morally bankrupt thug would think otherwise. Sadly, the mistreatment of domesticated pets occurs daily. Unsurprisingly, tabloid coverage of such incidences never fails to provoke public outrage. I still remember the horrifying video The Sun posted on its website in 2010 that showed a young woman hurling six whimpering pups into a fast flowing river. Any organisation that helps prevent this kind of abuse can only be a good thing, right?

PETA - People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals – is one such organisation. Its slogan is ‘animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment.’ Those of you who are partial to the occasional Big Mac will likely disagree with the ‘not ours to eat’ sentiment. Nonetheless, the message is admirable: Cruelty to animals is unacceptable.

Thing is, PETA has been criticised for trivializing animal rights with its increasingly audacious media stunts. Co-founder Ingrid Newkirk says the organisation has a duty to be ‘press sluts’ in order to draw attention to the cause. And what better way to grab some easy publicity than attacking video games. Yup, even our beloved Mario has been drawn into the fray.

'Super Mario 3D Land encourages fur wearing'

According to PETA, “Tanooki may be just a ‘suit’ in Mario games, but in real life, tanuki are raccoon dogs who are skinned alive for their fur. By wearing Tanooki, Mario is sending the message that it’s OK to wear fur.”

PETA’s campaign against Mario even includes a rather gruesome 8-bit online game called Super Tanooki Skin 2D that looks like a variation of the Super Mario Bros. game in which you chase Mario to reclaim Tanooki’s fur. More than a quarter of a million people played Mario Kills Tanuki in the first 36 hours.

'Battlefield 3 guilty of cruelty against rats'

The German Branch of Peta released the following statement: ‘The realistic computer game 'Battlefield 3' treats animals in a sadistic manner. The game gives players the option to kill a rat with a combat knife in the back in order to then lift it by its tail, then toss it away. Killing virtual animals can have a brutalizing effect on the young male target audience. There have been repeated cases of animal cruelty in Germany, where young people kill animals. Inspiration behind these acts often came from movies and computer games.’




'Call of Duty trivialises the barbaric treatment of dogs'

An extract from PETA’s blog: ‘Not since we were pitted against Nazi attack dogs when we first escaped from Castle Wolfenstein 17 years ago have we seen such barbaric treatment of dogs in video games as we did in Call of Duty, World at War. During the course of the game, you are forced to shoot attack dogs and you can actually unlock a "reward" that allows you to unleash a pack of attack dogs on enemies. In a post–Michael Vick world, you'd think that Activision Blizzard, which publishes the popular game, would take abusing dogs for entertainment purposes more seriously.'

'Cooking Mama condemned for its overuse of meat dishes'

Mama Kills is an unauthorized flash-based web game that asks the player to cut off a chicken’s head, pluck its feathers and pull out its giblets.

It’s a parody of Taito’s casual DS game Cooking Mamma. PETA has condemned Taito’s game for overusing a large number of animals in its cooking minigames: 'We're having a bit of fun at Mama's expense, but there's nothing funny about the suffering endured by turkeys and other animals who are killed for food. With all the delicious vegan alternatives available, there's no need to make the carcass of a tormented bird the centerpiece of your Thanksgiving table.'