Montreal Bans Pamela Anderson’s Body Parts

In a surprising move, Montreal officials have barred this campaign using Pamela Anderson’s picture marked up like a butcher shop diagram display. The city has denied permits for the display with the caption "All animals have the same parts. Have a heart — Go vegetarian."

The picture shows such comparable cuts as “breast,” “round,” and “rump.” I am not sure I have ever seen “cow breast” at a butcher shop and I will note that PETA does not include “Brain” as a common cow-to-Anderson body part.
The Baywatch star stated “I didn’t think that Canada would be so puritanical.”

Montreal film commissioner Daniel Bissonnette, whose office denied the permit, insisted “[o]n one hand we’re working for an organization where we’re getting reminded on a daily basis that we should work in a sexism-free environment and that equality between men and women and the image of women is very important.”

Really? This is a clearly political advertisement that tries to get people to think about treating animals like people. Yes, it does show a woman in a bikini but does the commission bar all pictures of scantily dressed women?

I have been a critic of PETA’s campaigns in the past that include displays that borders on live soft porn shows or Superbowl skin flicks or McTerror shows for the kids (or in one case a claim of misappropriation of the image of the first lady). However, this decision is grossly unfair and frankly ridiculous. The worst thing about this campaign is the expected increase in people demanding “cow breast” from their butchers.

It does not appear on the standard U.S. butcher diagram:

I say U.S. diagram because, until today, I was not aware that our British cousins have a different beef cut diagram:

Source: CBC.

20 thoughts on “Montreal Bans Pamela Anderson’s Body Parts”

  1. I’m sorry, but I wouldn’t want to dine on any of Pamela’s body parts, not even her choice tenderloin cuts, as all of her meat is contaminated with virulent hepatitis and is thus totally unfit for human consumption.

  2. and all the collagen in her lips.

    like the ad for hotdogs say

    “they plump when you cook’em”

  3. I don’t think most of those parts were factory equipped anyway

  4. Elaine:

    no worries, thanks for the entomolgy lesson. 🙂

    Should I have said Boston A?

  5. Byron–

    I hate to correct you–but that’s the New England “r.”

    New England “r”–as in Bah Hahbah, Maine.


  6. This is less egregious, but it is reminiscent of the PETA campaign comparing farm animals to slaves… that upset some people too.

    I think they forget that when you compare two items, both items are affected by the comparison.

    I undertand they are very concerned about carnivores (and I am a non-proselytizing vegetarian), but our current societal mores just do not equate people with animals or animals with people. Otherwise the Christie Brinkley story in another thread wouldn’t be a story on here, either.

  7. Elaine:

    that was funny.

    You were even able to icncorporate the New England “a” into that one. Good show.

  8. My poetic skills have gotten rusty because I haven’t been penning any light verse for the Turley blawg lately. Here is my feeble attempt to get back in the groove again:

    Veggie eatah.
    Look at Pam
    And take saltpeetah.

  9. Professor Turley–

    We must demand truth in advertising. I doubt most animals that have breasts–have silicone-enhanced breasts.

Comments are closed.