Recently, PETA has released a controversial ad comparing the artificial insemination of livestock in the meat industry to human victims of rape. Like most ads that PETA releases, it was more effective in outraging the public rather than raising awareness for their cause and animal rights.

The ad features a series of women who very somberly explain what their experience of being raped has done to them. At first, the ad was very compelling. It was hard not to feel the women’s pain as they describe how their rape has made them feel worthless and like nothing.

As the ad progresses, there is a sudden shift. Viewers begin to realize that the women and their experiences are meant to be representative of what livestock in the meat industry experience.

I’m not really sure why they thought this ad would go over well. Yes, it was very effective in compelling and drawing in the audience, however it is hard not to be offended by it. I understand the comparison they were trying to make, but it falls short. They basically compared rape victims to cattle, as if rape victims don’t already feel dehumanized enough.

I consider myself to be against animal abuse, however comparing the pain and suffering that rape victims endure to that of cattle being artificially inseminated is extremely insensitive. Animals may feel the pain, but they do not have the consciousness to fully understand what has happened to them as humans do. They do not have to live with the social consequences of being raped as human victims do.

PETA could have had an effective ad. I am sure that there are a lot of people who would be upset by the forced artificial insemination of animals, but when you portray it in an ad that lessens the seriousness of human victims obviously people are going to overlook your intended message. Ads like this one are why people question PETA’s integrity. If they would have actually tried to inform people, instead of offend people, PETA would probably be taken more seriously.