I tend to agree that condoning pornography, even in a remote form, fosters hypocrisy. The exploitation of animals as well as the exploitation of humans is unethical. It remains difficult to validate and support a cause if its main argument is just as unethical as the cause it is advocating for. People could potentially find PETA’s website offensive, and then automatically falter from supporting it. PETA’s main objective should not include promoting ‘riskay’ advertisements, no matter how benign the cause behind them may be. Essentially, PETA is just as at fault as the animal wearers they are condemning; PETA promotes unethical choices as well.

Why is it that PETA feels the need to take drastic measures as such to express their stance. A company so prevalent should possess enough intellect to devise a more strategic and less offensive strategy to advocate for their cause.

Something else to consider is the trend PETA is setting. If all supposed ‘ethical’ organizations seek support with the use of unethical practices, the validity of ethical institutions will slowly but surely obliterate.