ROFLCOPTER

Everybody knows Mario was a furry. He'd wear the raccoon suit and beastfuck the princess.

...WTF Putin?

No, really, I mean that WTF, I have no idea what the hell you're talking about here...

Where was that political, let alone Right-wing, let alone Tea Party-extreme?

Or are the rights of cartoon racoons just too far, we MUST protest Mario's wearing a racoon suit that'll make him fly?



Next you'll want him to stop stomping on those poor Koopas...or doo you NOT care about video-game-turtle rights?

wow, PETA making outrageous statements to seek out press and raise awareness of a marginally related issue. I'm sure that has never occurred

I'ts not political to engage in gratuitous bashing of animal rights groups? Whatever you say, Obi.

F PETA

Traitor

Funny cuz its true

http://www.theonion.com/video/advocacy-group-decries-petas-inhumane-treatment-of,14359/

Anyway, who exactly am I betraying by not toeing PETA's line?

@Sicarius: look at 1:32

and 2:04

The animal rights community. The better question is whose interests are you serving by piling on them? Are tanookis killed for their furs in large numbers in Japan and elsewhere? Yes or no? Are tanooki furs sold in the US by corporations who lie and claim they're not real furs? Yes or no?

Nintendo's claim that Mario is simply appearing in animal form is ridiculous.

http://www.mariowiki.com/Tanooki_Suits_Me

anatomists! first we persecuted those with differences in sexual reproduction, then when we were able to find people with different skin colour to persecute, and now it's differences in species which result in ever increasing distinctions between rights holders and the persecuted.

Any discrimination based on anatomy is wrong and PETA seems to be the only group to truely understand this. (see http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/alice_dreger_is_anatomy_destiny.html )

You guys are right. That's why I'm a cannibal, I think we should treat people and animals the same.

I don't want to detract from any serious debate, but anyone play Super Meat Boy? Its a phenomenal platform game, and they had a funny run in with PETA

http://supermeatboy.com/65/Super_Meat_Boy_vs_Peta_/

Basically PETA made a flash game parody of Super Meat Boy called Super Tofu Boy. In response the creators of Super Meat Boy posted the above article and then made a new character in their game who is called Tofu Boy and is just worse at everything. He can't even beat the first level. It madd me laugh, as I dislike PETA.

The game is actually kind of fun. *shrug*

I think the fact that Tom Bombadil doesn't like PETA is proof that don't have anything vauable to say. I mean who is more in touch with nature and being in harmony with all that is than Tom Bombadil? Tom, could you sing us all a song to make the crazy people go away, please? :-)

I'm all for animal rights. I love them and have lots of pets and feed the backyard furries on our acreage. But PETA was just fucking stupid with this one. It's a digital coat. It's made of pixel positioned on a screen by electrons. The game doesn't show the character killing and skinning the 'coons.

Next they'll be all up about the old Davey Crocket series cause he wore a coonskin cap.

Oh, and don't forget Crocket and Tubbs crocodile shoes on Miami Vice.

They say there is no such thing as bad press in Hollywood, but PETA is political and there *is* bad press in politics. This is gonna backfire and lose them supporters for their fucking stupidity.

Putin, you can agree with a cause but think very lowly of the organizations that represent them. PETA has a long history of extremism so it's not outrageous to be an animal rights activist and disagree with PETA's statements or methods.

Similarly, I'd consider myself an environmentalist but I despise Greenpeace.

Yonni +1! And I agree on both counts. I love animals but think PETA *hurts* the cause. And Greenpeace does the same harm for their cause.

Extremism polarizes and we don't need polarization. We need the world to come *together* to see what we are doing to fuck it up and *agree* to correct the problem, not make it us versus them.

Totally disagree, Draug. Not with the whole liking animals part, but the other part. This is a relatively harmless stunt by PETA which gives out a pretty addictive free flash game, which is pretty much the best kind of marketing. People who thought they were stupid before will continue to think they're stupid. People who were on the fence will play the game a little and it might change their opinion because, really, it's deliberately done to be over the top but in a relatively harmless way. You can't see the game and page for the game and think PETA's being completely serious in their presentation, but there's enough food for thought in it to raise attention and maybe make a fence-straddler consider them.

The people who are in favor of PETA are going to be along for the ride pretty much regardless of what they do. If that wasn't obvious by now, I'm not sure what news you pay attention to.

Oh, and @josh - I snorted pop out my nose when I read that. I loved it. Another Tolkien fan I see. Great to have ya around.

I'm talking about the Mario protest and call to boycott the new Super Mario game. The flash game idea is great.

Calling to boycott a game (and the folks whose future success depends on that game) for *digital* renderings of a fucking coat is, honestly, more than a stunt. If they succeeded, they could take a company down as Mario is a major money maker. It's a threat to the economic well being of an innocent company. They may as well walk up and set the company's HQ on fire. They are attackign someone's means of income for no reason than to make a point that has nothing to do, in reality, with the company. It's fucking stupid.

If you think it has any chance of succeeding to the level of taking Nintendo down you're stupider than you're claiming they are. What they're doing is making sure they manage to get some press alongside the press of a major game coming out. Basically, they pigtail on the press of that game and get their name out there too.

There is absolutely nobody, or a small fraction of people that are insignificant financially, who will not buy the game if they were planning on buying it already. It actually might make the game sell better. Which is why Nintendo isn't commenting. The controversy helps them too.

I'm going to make a game called, "Baby Seal Hunter," in which you will rapidly raise and lower your Wii remote to simulate bashing in a young seal's skull. You'll get bonus points for proper skinning, leaving as much young animal flesh as possible to rot in the arctic sun. +1000000 if you can remove all the skin before the baby seal dies.

Then you take your skins and sell them, using your profits to invest in exploitation the local Inuit population, forcing them to sell their mining/drilling rights for a pittance. Dig up that precious black gold and load it into a cumbersome and unseaworthy tanker, which you will promptly ram headlong into the rocky shore. The millions of lost gallons will coat the majority of the baby seal population, and as it works into the baby seal skin, provides a most luxurious sheen to their baby seal coats.

That's how we do it in Texas son.

I don't know why Baby Seal Hunting is the crown jewel of animal rights movements. If anything, Indigenous people sustainably hunting a native non-captive species should be a example of how good meat production. I'll concede that the baby part does have a bit of a knee jerk reaction but, if you're not advocating vegetarianism, I don't know why the seal hunts are targeted.

Then again, I could be missing something. This is a legitimate question, not a snarky poke at PETA.

It's because it's often seen as an inhumane way to kill them. I don't recall the specifics, but I know that the methods used aren't always lethal and if it isn't lethal, it takes a while for the seal to die.

And the methods used at factory farms are always lethal?
I don't know numbers but I'd hazard a guess that the clubbing ('cause I kill it in da clubs) is at least as effective.