Monday, October 29, 2007

PETA claim Union is "nannying" students

Following a recent exhibition in the Student’s Union, Animal Rights group PETA have alleged censorship by the Executive over posters (left) used as part of their ‘Animal Liberation Project’ display. The posters in question were placed at the entrance of the Union to attract the attention of students walking by and encourage interest in the exhibition in a Club Room on the third floor.

Alistair Currie, Senior Research and Campaigns Co-ordinator with PETA said, "While we're genuinely grateful for the opportunity to show the exhibition in the first place, the restrictions placed on us really were excessive". Queen’s is the first UK University to host the exhibition which has already been displayed in 18 Universities across America and features images of both animal and human slavery raising questions over possible similarities between the two. Mr Currie continued, "Surely universities are places for debate and freedom of expression. We know this project is controversial but do Queen's students really need to be nannied?"

The Executive claims, "The Students’ Union Executive Management Committee made every effort to accommodate PETA’s Animal Liberation Display" but decided that "due to the somewhat distressing nature of some of the images it would be best if PETA held the display in a Club Room, so as not to force students to view images (in the foyer) that they may find distressing."

Peta have subsequently questioned the "real inconsistency" of prohibiting their posters while a poster sale on the same day displayed an image of a partially naked woman (above right) at the Union entrance in full view of passing students. Mr Currie asked "Does anyone really think that no one will be offended by the woman - or that the mere sight of a battery shed would offend people?" The Union Executive have stated that they have received no complaints about the poster sale images to date "and will deal with complaints as they arise."

What is your view? Was the Union right to ban the posters from the foyer? Is this, as PETA have claimed "nannying" of adult students? Is the poster of the female offensive/as offensive/not offensive at all? Have your say!


Anonymous annoyed union member said...

There are a couple of points to mention here...

1. These people are not a recognized club or society... and they got the club room for free.

2. if and when they become recognized, they can display whatever the flip they want

3. They broke the agreement they made with the union

and then they complain about it...

They are right about the poster sale however, and i know that this is being dealt with and will not be the case next year.

These people got the space for free (unlike many others) and then bitched and complained when asked not to display images which would put people off their lunch- Not and unreasonable request.

10/29/2007 9:15 pm  
Anonymous Union user said...

I think the Union have been ridiculous on this front. IF I knew this exhibition was on in the Union, I would have made time to be there, but by hiding it away in a club room , the executive have severly hampered PETA's ability to raise people's awareness on the subject.

Also the point made about the posters is valid - who are the executive to tell us what we do or do not find offensive!?

10/29/2007 10:38 pm  
Anonymous John Goodwin said...

"Even if animal research produced a cure for AIDS, we'd be against it.. — Ingrid Newkirk, PETA President".

To read more on why PETA don't deserve your time or money, visit...

Bunch of brainless thugs.

10/30/2007 12:37 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i personally dont want to see dead animals in the foyer of my students' union. if i wanted to, i could have went up to the clubs rooms

peta - catch yourself on

10/30/2007 1:11 pm  
Anonymous pj said...

how can they complain about a naked woman being offensive when they had the whole "i'd rather go naked than wear fur" campaign?

10/30/2007 1:13 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

good point pj

10/30/2007 3:04 pm  
Anonymous "Late-night in the Heaney" said...

The Image shown with the article doesn't seem very offensive. Was this one of the posters that was removed?

Also PJ, PETA aren't against the picture of the naked woman - they're complaining of what double-standards in what should/shouldn't be displayed.

10/30/2007 10:35 pm  
Anonymous pj said...

"Does anyone really think that no one will be offended by the woman"
they are clearly branding it offensive in spite of using the same tactics ("sex sells"). this is nothing new for peta in terms of hypocrisy. they sued "people eating tasty animals" for cybersquatting on the domain name yet then went on to cybersquat themselves on and AFTER succsessfully winning the initial case.

furthermore, to reiterate annoyed union user's comments, if they get the place for free as a gesture of goodwill from the union, is it not reasonable to follow the union terms? it appears that peta are looking the proverbial gift horse in the mouth.

10/31/2007 3:22 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What PETA stands for is so much in opposition to what a large section of the student body stands for i.e. those who eat meat, wear wool or leather, study a course which involves animal research or have benifited from treatment that was developed through animal research that they should never have been allowed in the union in the first place. Not to mention the fact that the offence they caused when comparing the killing of animals to the Holocaust should have already procluded them from the Union.

The fact that our union was the first in the UK to host their conference is something to be ashamed of and after the hypocrisy the organisation showed hopefully they won't be back.

10/31/2007 3:50 pm  
Anonymous rhino said...

Just because a majority believe/practive a certain thing, you should not be open to other viewpoints?

11/01/2007 3:41 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ofcourse you should always be open to other views (funny how some deep thinker always comes up with this point) and freedom of speech etc is very important however that does not mean that extremists who are openly offensive to many people should be allowed to pedal their views in the union.

11/02/2007 12:14 pm  
Anonymous QUB said...

"ofcourse you should always be open to other views (funny how some deep thinker always comes up with this point) and freedom of speech etc is very important however that does not mean that extremists who are openly offensive to many people should be allowed to pedal their views in the union."

The same should apply to Ogra Shinn Fein - sectarian rabble.

11/04/2007 11:56 pm  
Anonymous pj said...

2 points rhino: firstly, i am open to other views (i am against cosmetic testing and killing animals purely for fur) but i object to having views forced on me.
secondly, how open are peta to the views of meat eaters, and more importantly, to those of scientists trying to save lives?

is it case of "be open minded towards our views while we at best ignore, and at worst, attack you for your views"? how much more hypocritical can they get?

11/05/2007 1:49 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@ Rhino

You were awesome in Gladiators m8. How is Cobra, Jet and Lightening these days?

11/07/2007 10:52 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What does Ciarnan Helferty think?

11/08/2007 5:51 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What does it matter what he thinks?

11/09/2007 10:25 am  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home