People for the Ethical Treatment Children?

Former Baywatch star Pamela Anderson is probably People for the Ethical Treatment of Animal's (PETA) best known celebrity spokesperson.  Her commitment to the cause is total; she refers to PETA as her "ethical adviser". 

Those familiar with Anderson and PETA know they are against testing drugs or chemicals on animals.  They also oppose "exploiting" animals for entertainment.   In a PETA run world there would be no horse racing, no dog shows, no zoos and no circuses - Cirque de Soleil excepted. 

Those less familiar with PETA might be surprised to learn they also oppose any human use of animal flesh or by-products.  Not only is meat verboten, but so is milk and cheese. Everyone knows fur is evil, but fewer know a leather belt or handbag is morally equivalent in PETA's moral lexicon.  According to someone I know who interned for PETA even potato chips fried in animal fats cross the line.

To sum it up:  Exploiting animals is bad.  Wearing animals is bad.  Eating animals is bad.

How does Anderson feel about exploitation, wearing or eating 9 year old humans?  The New York Post gives us a great exemplar:

Pamela Anderson shocked the Hollywood Style Awards over the weekend by recruiting a shy, 9-year-old girl to hold up her risqué dress all night.   The well-upholstered pin-up turned up in a barely-there, pink Vivienne Westwood dress on Sunday -- with the child holding her long train.

The bizarre move drew criticism from child advocacy groups who say little Adelaide Gault is too young to be used as a fashion accessory.

One guest told Page Six, "People were genuinely shocked.

"She didn't even have her own seat and had to sit at Pamela's feet, where people nearly stepped on her to get to the stage. The girl looked uncomfortable and kept tugging on her dress to get her attention, but Pamela waved her away.

"Pamela was telling people it was her daughter," the attendee said. "And, after she presented David LaChapelle with an award onstage, she shouted 'daughter' in front of the whole auditorium, and slapped her leg like she was calling a puppy. The girl rushed up to grab her train."

Adelaide is the daughter of makeup artist to the stars Sharon Gault, who was believed to be at the event. But Adelaide looked nervous as she was forced to carry Anderson's dress up the red carpet, then backstage, and when the star made a dramatic exit two hours later.

By analyzing this episode we can learn a little of what Anderson and her ethical advisors think about the ethical treatment of humans.  Apparently using a 9 year old as a human fashion accessory or treating her pet is OK.  So exploitation and wearing -- at least constructively -- is OK for humans.  Unfortunately, there is not enough data to support a complete analysis; there is no evidence that Anderson intended to eat the young human so the cannibalism question remains open.
Former Baywatch star Pamela Anderson is probably People for the Ethical Treatment of Animal's (PETA) best known celebrity spokesperson.  Her commitment to the cause is total; she refers to PETA as her "ethical adviser". 

Those familiar with Anderson and PETA know they are against testing drugs or chemicals on animals.  They also oppose "exploiting" animals for entertainment.   In a PETA run world there would be no horse racing, no dog shows, no zoos and no circuses - Cirque de Soleil excepted. 

Those less familiar with PETA might be surprised to learn they also oppose any human use of animal flesh or by-products.  Not only is meat verboten, but so is milk and cheese. Everyone knows fur is evil, but fewer know a leather belt or handbag is morally equivalent in PETA's moral lexicon.  According to someone I know who interned for PETA even potato chips fried in animal fats cross the line.

To sum it up:  Exploiting animals is bad.  Wearing animals is bad.  Eating animals is bad.

How does Anderson feel about exploitation, wearing or eating 9 year old humans?  The New York Post gives us a great exemplar:

Pamela Anderson shocked the Hollywood Style Awards over the weekend by recruiting a shy, 9-year-old girl to hold up her risqué dress all night.   The well-upholstered pin-up turned up in a barely-there, pink Vivienne Westwood dress on Sunday -- with the child holding her long train.

The bizarre move drew criticism from child advocacy groups who say little Adelaide Gault is too young to be used as a fashion accessory.

One guest told Page Six, "People were genuinely shocked.

"She didn't even have her own seat and had to sit at Pamela's feet, where people nearly stepped on her to get to the stage. The girl looked uncomfortable and kept tugging on her dress to get her attention, but Pamela waved her away.

"Pamela was telling people it was her daughter," the attendee said. "And, after she presented David LaChapelle with an award onstage, she shouted 'daughter' in front of the whole auditorium, and slapped her leg like she was calling a puppy. The girl rushed up to grab her train."

Adelaide is the daughter of makeup artist to the stars Sharon Gault, who was believed to be at the event. But Adelaide looked nervous as she was forced to carry Anderson's dress up the red carpet, then backstage, and when the star made a dramatic exit two hours later.

By analyzing this episode we can learn a little of what Anderson and her ethical advisors think about the ethical treatment of humans.  Apparently using a 9 year old as a human fashion accessory or treating her pet is OK.  So exploitation and wearing -- at least constructively -- is OK for humans.  Unfortunately, there is not enough data to support a complete analysis; there is no evidence that Anderson intended to eat the young human so the cannibalism question remains open.