PETA renames "fish."
January 15, 2009 7:49 PM Subscribe
PETA says stop calling them "fish." They shall be known as "sea kittens."
This post was deleted for the following reason: Instead of calling them "doubles", these are henceforth known "web zaphods". -- cortex
I feel the same way about the lice, my little "hair puppies".
posted by leotrotsky at 7:51 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by leotrotsky at 7:51 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
I feel the same way about my cat's fleas, my little "fur baby koalas."
posted by ORthey at 7:52 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by ORthey at 7:52 PM on January 15, 2009
Of course, if you look at it another way, what all this really means is that fish need to fire their PR guy—stat.
rage... towards peta... rising... rising...... RISING
posted by ORthey at 7:53 PM on January 15, 2009
rage... towards peta... rising... rising...... RISING
posted by ORthey at 7:53 PM on January 15, 2009
How is this different from when it was on Gawker?
posted by parmanparman at 7:54 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by parmanparman at 7:54 PM on January 15, 2009
Yum. A lovely accompaniment to seagull beach chicken.
posted by Fiasco da Gama at 7:55 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by Fiasco da Gama at 7:55 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Kittens have more than a brain stem. Fish do not.
PETA, well... the jury is still out.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 7:56 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
PETA, well... the jury is still out.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 7:56 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
The more attention you pay them, the crazier they're gonna act.
Don't encourage the lunatics.
posted by nightchrome at 7:56 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Don't encourage the lunatics.
posted by nightchrome at 7:56 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Damnit Peta, now I have the idea that kitten sushi would be fucking delicious.
posted by empath at 7:58 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by empath at 7:58 PM on January 15, 2009
I don't get it, is this fish, or chicken? It says Chicken of the Sea.
posted by fixedgear at 7:59 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by fixedgear at 7:59 PM on January 15, 2009
Oh PETA, is there any campaign you can do that won't get posted to MeFi?
posted by smackfu at 8:01 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by smackfu at 8:01 PM on January 15, 2009
Ceiling fish is watching you double-post.
posted by ardgedee at 8:03 PM on January 15, 2009 [4 favorites]
posted by ardgedee at 8:03 PM on January 15, 2009 [4 favorites]
PETA *has* to be an enormous put-on. There's no other way. Right? Please?
posted by the dief at 8:05 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by the dief at 8:05 PM on January 15, 2009
oops, double delayed shock to my gills.
posted by wallstreet1929 at 8:06 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by wallstreet1929 at 8:06 PM on January 15, 2009
Stop calling them PETA, start calling them a JOKE.
posted by Stonestock Relentless at 8:07 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by Stonestock Relentless at 8:07 PM on January 15, 2009
It's funny. I'm a person. I'm for the ethical treatment of animals.
I, along with the vast majority of other sentient creatures, detest the divisive, silly and counterproductive organization that is PETA.
There's some kind of lesson here...
posted by leotrotsky at 8:08 PM on January 15, 2009
I, along with the vast majority of other sentient creatures, detest the divisive, silly and counterproductive organization that is PETA.
There's some kind of lesson here...
posted by leotrotsky at 8:08 PM on January 15, 2009
I will try to remember "sea kittens" is what I should call them the next time I am clubbing one over the head and thinking about how delicious they will be.
posted by kamikazegopher at 8:14 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by kamikazegopher at 8:14 PM on January 15, 2009
In a perfect world, this would lead to greater acceptance of eating kittens.
posted by smackfu at 8:17 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by smackfu at 8:17 PM on January 15, 2009
Old news, http://www.metafilter.com/75870/Kittens-of-the-Sea
posted by reptile at 8:20 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by reptile at 8:20 PM on January 15, 2009
I call crabs "my little pants muffins". The king's name is Schnoodles.
posted by turgid dahlia at 8:20 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by turgid dahlia at 8:20 PM on January 15, 2009
OK, from here on out lets all refer to venereal crabs as "pube puppies."
posted by jonmc at 8:23 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by jonmc at 8:23 PM on January 15, 2009
Sometimes I open a can of sardines for my cat.
good kitty. good boy. nom-noms. yes.
posted by longsleeves at 8:24 PM on January 15, 2009
good kitty. good boy. nom-noms. yes.
posted by longsleeves at 8:24 PM on January 15, 2009
I am not a vegetarian but I feel like I probably should be. I think that it's morally better not to eat meat if you don't have to. But PETA man oh man. How is this a charity? Like even if you believe that since fish are sentient creatures they should not be killed by man, does it cross your mind for even a second that people eat fish instead of even more sentient creatures. And that fish live in the ocean like normal before they get killed instead of a much smarter pig living in a prison cell until it dies. Like maybe if people are going to eat animals it's better that they eat fish instead of pigs. PETA is like a charity that gives cummerbunds to the homeless. I guess it does some good maybe. If like a homeless dude's daughter is getting married and he can rent a tux but the tux doesn't come with a cummerbund. Or something. PETA is like that.
posted by I Foody at 8:26 PM on January 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by I Foody at 8:26 PM on January 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
Is this where we get to rename animals?
Bears are forest donkeys.
posted by Baby_Balrog at 8:28 PM on January 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
Bears are forest donkeys.
posted by Baby_Balrog at 8:28 PM on January 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
I Foody, no offense, but are you sure that you are a sentient creature at the moment?
I only ask because I'm a little hungry and we're out of Funyuns.
posted by jonmc at 8:29 PM on January 15, 2009
I only ask because I'm a little hungry and we're out of Funyuns.
posted by jonmc at 8:29 PM on January 15, 2009
This has really bothered me ever since I heard about it. I mean, kittens are baby cats; we don't even call lion offspring 'kittens' but 'cubs.' That's pretty specific. And yet fish aren't a species, they're an entire phylum! You can't go replacing a phylum name with a species name! It's taxanomically irresponsible.
posted by Tomorrowful at 8:30 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by Tomorrowful at 8:30 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
...even more sentient creatures...
The correct term is "sentientest".
posted by turgid dahlia at 8:33 PM on January 15, 2009
The correct term is "sentientest".
posted by turgid dahlia at 8:33 PM on January 15, 2009
If there's one animal I like to nuzzle and hug more than a Sea Kitten, it's a Sweater Puppy.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 8:34 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by PeterMcDermott at 8:34 PM on January 15, 2009
PETA *has* to be an enormous put-on. There's no other way. Right? Please?
PETA is possibly the only organization which fully understands "there is no such thing as bad publicity."
Let's consider two organizations. The first has outrageous marketing campaigns, downright offensive to many. Their audacious campaigns get lots of press. Tens of millions of people hear about their organization. Most are offended and/or think the organization is nuts, but a tiny fraction of those who hear about it agree with their positions and don't think they're wacko.
The second uses conventional, non-controversial campaigns. They're lucky if they can get three sentences on page 17 of the Supermarket Shopper, but, hey!—a good fraction of the 30 or 40 people who hear about it are sympathetic to the organization.
Which do you think gets more donations?
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:34 PM on January 15, 2009
PETA is possibly the only organization which fully understands "there is no such thing as bad publicity."
Let's consider two organizations. The first has outrageous marketing campaigns, downright offensive to many. Their audacious campaigns get lots of press. Tens of millions of people hear about their organization. Most are offended and/or think the organization is nuts, but a tiny fraction of those who hear about it agree with their positions and don't think they're wacko.
The second uses conventional, non-controversial campaigns. They're lucky if they can get three sentences on page 17 of the Supermarket Shopper, but, hey!—a good fraction of the 30 or 40 people who hear about it are sympathetic to the organization.
Which do you think gets more donations?
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:34 PM on January 15, 2009
Death to ignorant double-posters. We should kill this guy! Or feed him to the sea kittens!
posted by wallstreet1929 at 8:35 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by wallstreet1929 at 8:35 PM on January 15, 2009
taxanomically
I can totally hear GW Bush using that word in a speech, only he'd betalking about government spending or something.
posted by jonmc at 8:36 PM on January 15, 2009
I can totally hear GW Bush using that word in a speech, only he'd betalking about government spending or something.
posted by jonmc at 8:36 PM on January 15, 2009
One Sea Kitten Two Sea Kitten Red Sea Kitten Blue Sea Kitten
posted by oulipian at 8:37 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by oulipian at 8:37 PM on January 15, 2009
Well they can't be talking about the regular kind.
As I was telling a PETA rep just the other day, I've tossed sack after sack of them into the river, and I've never once seen one grow gills and swim away.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 8:39 PM on January 15, 2009
As I was telling a PETA rep just the other day, I've tossed sack after sack of them into the river, and I've never once seen one grow gills and swim away.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 8:39 PM on January 15, 2009
PETA is like a charity that gives cummerbunds to the homeless.
It bears repeating, and you can even substitue other stuff for PETA. Thanks, I Foody.
posted by fixedgear at 8:39 PM on January 15, 2009
It bears repeating, and you can even substitue other stuff for PETA. Thanks, I Foody.
posted by fixedgear at 8:39 PM on January 15, 2009
This can't be a PETA campaign- there's no objectification of womens' bodies going on.
posted by Pope Guilty at 8:40 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by Pope Guilty at 8:40 PM on January 15, 2009
This massive diversion is keeping the spotlight away from pigs, so I'm OK with it.
posted by jimmythefish at 8:44 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by jimmythefish at 8:44 PM on January 15, 2009
This massive diversion is keeping the spotlight away from pigs, so I'm OK with it.
posted by jimmythefish
I'll bet.
posted by jonmc at 8:49 PM on January 15, 2009
posted by jimmythefish
I'll bet.
posted by jonmc at 8:49 PM on January 15, 2009
« Older A blame game of language and depth-first search. | Australian Soldier in Afghanistan Awarded VC Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by mexican at 7:51 PM on January 15, 2009 [3 favorites]