Jump to content

PAM ANDERSON GOES AFTER MATHEW MC


RAINRA
 Share

Recommended Posts

If Pam Anderson were actually vegan (or, vegetarian for that matter), it would all make a bit more sense. To me, it's sad how one of the most hypocritical spokespeople for compassion toward animals uses her famous face just to get some media time, despite having plenty of ammo to show she's not the saint that PETA claims she is. Oh well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what is pam doing wrong... just wondering ...

she is not vegan ? I don't really follow how she is contradictory? Im not informed... I am curious.

 

Mathew change penolope cruz from vegetarian to steak eater . Now his dumb ad. He is a much worse influence to this planet than anyone trying to make any difference.

 

Cruz' beau turns her into a carnivore (Go To Top)

 

Washington: Hollywood hunk Matthew McConaughey boasts of cullinery skills which converted his vegetarian girlfriend Penelope Cruz into a carnivore. The Wedding Planner star, who has been romancing Cruz since 2004, persuaded her to ditch the animal-friendly diet by offering her his world-class steak. "Not anymore! I taught her where to get the best tasting steaks in the world. It's off my grill," he was quoted by Contactmusic,as saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My grudge against Pamela is the same that I've stated in other threads here over the past few years -

 

1. Her personal chef went on a radio show (Howard Stern, if I recall correctly) saying that he made fish and chicken for her to eat. Neither of which are vegetables, of course, so telling other people not to eat meat when you still do does not really make much sense.

 

2. She did more to promote the sale of those awful sheepskin and wool Ugg boots than pretty well all other celebrities. She was photographed wearing them over and over again, helping initiate the big stir where every woman in the USA wanted a pair because celebrities were wearing them. When she was eventually called out on this and asked why she was wearing boots made from animal skin and wool, she claimed she "thought they were synthetic" and that she didn't know better. For anyone that's seen the Ugg boots before and their packaging (been to enough footwear tradeshows to be well enough acquainted with their line), there's no mistaking them for being synthetic, so any claims that she didn't know better were pretty well untrue, unless she really is so oblivious to what she does that she doesn't care about checking into what she purchases. Either way, the exposure she gave their product probably sold thousands of pairs to envious women who wanted "that look", so in turn, her lack of care for what she wears (or, complete ignorance...) helped cause a sharp spike in demand for more animal-based goods.

 

3. About 3 years ago, I watched a television show where they were featuring a clinic that specialized in celebrity facial care treatments. Their top treatment, a formula that contained some form of animal placenta, was one they said that Pamela would go in for regularly. Their boast was that the claims of "skin rejuvenation" were due to the placenta extract, which again, I'm sure Pamela knew of but chose to ignore. She apparently loves animals so much that she's willing to smear their insides on her face for the sake of looking younger

 

I just get riled up when articles make her out to be a saint for the well-being of animals when she's been shown to be anything but a friend to them in her choices of what she eats, wears and puts on her body. Using her image to try and spread a message of kindness toward all beings is like putting President Bush out in public as the face of world peace If you can't walk the walk, you don't have any business telling others how to be. If someone doesn't adhere to the ideals themselves, how seriously can you take their words?

 

I don't question that Matthew is rather undesirable for his pro-meat stance, but I don't find Pam to be much better simply because she's a complete hypocrite based on the evidence I've seen, and that kind of thing is damaging to what we're fighting for. If people take her seriously, then it's perfectly fine to assume that being a "flexitarian" is still doing a lot for the animals even if you eat them or wear them from time to time.

 

I just don't see the point in promoting something that one doesn't believe in enough to adhere to. When Pamela eventually goes vegan, stops wearing dead animal parts and can shelve her vanity enough to stop using animal extracts to try and look younger, then I think she's entitled to be a spokesperson for compassion. Until then, she's just another celeb trying to milk her time by popping up here and there for a cause she believes in enough to speak out on, but not enough to follow in her own lifestyle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well that sucks that she follows that lifestyle. I know from podcast many do claim that half or more of PETA are not even vegetarian. They clap when they get chickens to be gassed instead of other torturous means. Some of these organizations are not there for the money donations but there for the animals. I think it is wrong for people to point fingers if they are not making a valuable effort themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hmmm....

 

although you make some good points VeganEssentials, I do believe that people change.

 

Perhaps she has made some mistakes but then gets back on the Vegan wagon again? I think people always deserve a 2nd, 3rd or 4th chance...

 

I like her "Girl On The Loose" show and how committed she is (or at least seems to be) to her animal rights causes.

 

Even if she is the occasional hypocrate, I still think she turns alot of young girls onto the lifestyle by publicly promoting Veganism, PETA and animal rights, and that maybe she's trying to walk the walk, but occasionally falls short...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I usually agree with everything VeganEssentials says, I'm with VeggiePrincess on this one. We cannot always choose who represents veganism but at least they're doing something. I would rather have someone be 90% vegan and promote the lifestyle than someone who is 100% vegan but turns people off to veganism (I've met a few of them; and I'm not saying that Pamela doesn't turn off some people). I have friends who are omnis but have very good things to say about veganism and I'm glad they're promoting it, even if they don't live the life. Hopefully the saying "no publicity is bad publicity" can be applied!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My main worry with Pamela Anderson being a representative of veganism is this -

 

With so many contradictions out there to publicly show that she isn't really too careful about what she eats/wears/uses on her skin, it can unfortunately lead non-vegans to assume that vegans are either cavalier in their choices with little thought to what they're eating/using/wearing, or, that they will make concessions when they want something that they know isn't remotely vegan, simply because it's a luxury they wish to partake in/possess. Either way, it's a bad impression to make on others who may be getting one of their rare exposures to veganism. The examples I've cited are only those that have been brought public - unless we could follow Pamela for a month we won't know if perhaps she's even less concerned with actually being vegan than it already seems from her "indiscretions" that have been brought to light (basically, I don't trust her as far as I can throw her, as the saying goes.)

 

While her intentions may be well-placed, sending out mixed messages about an already heavily misunderstood lifestyle can easily do as much harm as good. While I occasionally (though not often) wish that more people who are known in the public eye would speak out for veganism, I just think that sometimes we let famous faces get too much exposure when they're not really great spokespeople due to their lack of true dedication to really being vegan. If the person in question has done things that we'd get fussy at a non-celebrity for who was speaking for veganism (such as, average man/woman off the street who may say veganism is great right before they stop at McDonalds on the way home), then to me, celebs deserve the same skepticism as to their reasoning for being a "face" of the cause if they aren't really all that committed to it. If they're not willing to adhere to what they're trying to promote, to me it makes them a poor choice, and using their famous not-really-very-vegan faces for promotion simply dives into the PETA-esque tactics of saying that any exposure is good exposure despite the detriments it can bring. Someone such as Pamela who has plenty of non-vegan foibles out there may make it appear to some people that veganism is too difficult to do all the way. So, if people hear about her choices, they may well think that it's acceptable to "take a break" once in a while and buy those leather boots, eat a chicken fillet or buy some nasty animal-based eye creams because, if the celeb thinks it's okay to go off path for something they really want, then that's the way the rest of us go about it. That's not the kind of association I'm looking for. It's quite fine by me if people who aren't completely vegan endorse veganism (my parents aren't vegan, but rave about the wonders of going vegan to anyone who will listen), but to me, it enters a whole new realm when allow questionable celebs to become a public face for the movement as has been tried via Pamela over the years.

 

But, the opinions all rely on whatever camp you side with. Me, I couldn't care less about celebrity exposure and endorsements as veganism made it this far and keeps growing without hot-cause-of-the-week actors/musicians/etc. constantly hammering the media about going vegan. Others think that any exposure is good exposure, but I believe that the wrong choices for who we stand behind can come back to bite us in the ass later, so I prefer to distance myself from that entire situation. If the sh*t hits the fan and people start asking questions later on why we've been allowing someone who isn't vegan to speak up for the cause as if we don't have anyone better suiited, I'll feel better knowing that I never got wrapped up in the whole thing

 

I'm always willing to agree to disagree on this one, but whenever Pamela's name comes up, I have to admit that it gets my blood boiling since she's my absolute least-favorite might-kinda-be-sorta-vegan celeb to get her face plastered anywhere for the cause.

 

 

As much as I usually agree with everything VeganEssentials says, I'm with VeggiePrincess on this one. We cannot always choose who represents veganism but at least they're doing something. I would rather have someone be 90% vegan and promote the lifestyle than someone who is 100% vegan but turns people off to veganism (I've met a few of them; and I'm not saying that Pamela doesn't turn off some people). I have friends who are omnis but have very good things to say about veganism and I'm glad they're promoting it, even if they don't live the life. Hopefully the saying "no publicity is bad publicity" can be applied!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see your point. In a way, if there was a hypocritical celebrity out there promoting veganism I'm glad it's Pam and not a more believable/respectable actor. Many people would only expect that Pam Anderson may have gotten it wrong so it's easy to sort of bash her and explain that she doesn't really understand veganism - if you get that opportunity with someone who is looking at her as a real example of veganism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a way, if there was a hypocritical celebrity out there promoting veganism I'm glad it's Pam and not a more believable/respectable actor.

 

I can definitely agree on that point In retrospect, I guess I'm less ticked about Pam than I am when I hear people speaking about Natalie Portman (who is taken considerably more seriously in her acting) as being vegan when she herself was recently quoted as saying that it is "too difficult, because it's so hard to get enough protein".

 

For a guy who says I don't care much about celebrities and their positions on veganism, I know too much and speak of this far too often

 

Most people look at Pam and think "bimbo" and don't take a lot of what she says seriously.

 

True, true...though I do think that she's probably a lot smarter than she lets on, most likely because it would ruin her image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can definitely agree on that point In retrospect, I guess I'm less ticked about Pam than I am when I hear people speaking about Natalie Portman (who is taken considerably more seriously in her acting) as being vegan when she herself was recently quoted as saying that it is "too difficult, because it's so hard to get enough protein".

 

For a guy who says I don't care much about celebrities and their positions on veganism, I know too much and speak of this far too often

 

The Natalie Portman comment really ticked me off and she's a good example of someone who is taken more seriously.

 

As much as celebrity may be frivolous, it's a huge part of our culture. So don't be afraid to look at those US/In Touch/Star magazines at your doctor's office!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have felt that I had more to say on this thread for weeks (which tells me that I may need to "get a life"... but anyways).

 

I'l start by saying again, Vegan Essentials... that I've agreed with 98% of your posts, but this one I stand firm on the opposite end of the spectrum.

 

I see Pamela Anderson as that lovable uncle in the family who does the most ridiculous things.. but ya still love him because he's "family".

 

Maybe I'm entirely guilty of giving way too much benefit of the doubt... but I see that as a "necessarily evil" if Veganism is ever to become mainstream. And for the future of this Planete man would I love to see that before I die (always the eternal optimist).

 

So I look at things issue by issue, and cut Pamela a little slack for the "bigger picture".

 

I imagine... maybe she "is that stupid" to think that Ugg Boots were made of a natural fiber because she wanted to wear them and thought they were "oh-so-cute"... again... not condoning... not overlooking... but maybe, just maybe she took the "ignorance is bliss approach".

 

And with the chef who claims he/she has cooked her Chicken and Fish. Having a best friend whose a well known actress in Hollywood and having been in the business myself, I do understand that the astromical pressue to "be-thin-or-lose-your-career". I literally had to call 24 top trainers to find one willing to do a Vegan diet for me when I first went Vegan. Or should I say... one that told me I could get a chiseled type "look" that is desirable in the mainstream media. 24 trainers... finally ONE said yes. Perhaps Pamela faced that same kind of pressure and didn't have the time to find one. I still LIKE to believe she eats Vegan more than she eats animals. I LIKE to give her the benefit of the doubt... although she makes it VERY, VERY challenging.

 

But the bottom line is... I will TAKE the fact that for every 10 Vegans she may offend, she probably turns on 19 young impressionable girls to "Go Vegan" simply because she "says so" and they look up to her. I will take those odds.

 

I deeply feel that if Veganism is ever to become "mainstream"... we'll have to one day accept that "hypocritical Uncle" like Pamela Anderson, who "means well" but often falls short.

 

The same way we don't agree with all of PETA's tactics, I think we should UNITE and BACK most Vegan organizations if we are ever to create any real change in the world.

 

Call me an IDEALIST to the bitter end... but this is what I feel is our most marketable road to mainstream...and to perhaps save this dying Planet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same way we don't agree with all of PETA's tactics, I think we should UNITE and BACK most Vegan organizations if we are ever to create any real change in the world.

 

Couldn't agree with you more. I feel that the AR movement is wasting a lot of it's effor arguing within the movement insted of taking on the challenges we face in the real world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have just read this thread, & you guys have raised some great points.

 

Pam Anderson is a hypocrite, of course.She says she cares about animals then eats them etc.

 

No-one likes a hypocrite.

 

I do see also veggie princesses point about Pam causing more good than bad.I feel the same about Jamie Oliver in a way.He talks alot about ethical treatment for animals & yet he eats meat.But atleast these poeple are trying to put across some views which we all do agree with, & their message is reaching more people in a good way than bad, in my opinion.I know meat eaters, who fall into 2 categories: the first eat meat, love meat & dont really have any respect for animals or vegetarians.The second group eat meat, but try to buy free range, who understand vegetarianism & have respect for me that I am a vegan.The second group are possible candidates & catalysts for going veg.I have some respect for them.The first group I actually think are complete wastes of space, & actually dislike as people.

 

I guess what I am saying is that people like Pamela Anderson are the lesser of 2 evils.I would prefer her any day to celebrities who literally dont care about animal welfare like Jennifer Lopez, who proudly wears animal furs.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...